Structural Fairness: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
It is Nobel-grade to show that [[Distributive]] production + open design + training can generate capital faster than centralized accumulation. | It is Nobel-grade to show that [[Distributive]] production + open design + training can generate capital faster than centralized accumulation. | ||
Distributed ≠ non-extractive. | Distributed ≠ non-extractive. | ||
Distributive systems have anti-concentration mechanisms | |||
—not just initial distribution. | |||
=What capital structures allow return without extraction?= | =What capital structures allow return without extraction?= | ||
And to back up - redefine return for the distributive economy. Clearly, if we were redefining the economy, we must first redefine what we return means | And to back up - redefine return for the distributive economy. Clearly, if we were redefining the economy, we must first redefine what we return means | ||
Revision as of 07:07, 29 March 2026
- What is a good vehicle for non-parasitic capital and what is the most effective way to obtain it? Begin discussion - [1]
3 forms of capital growth
- Extractive capital
- PRI and legacy re-distribution
- Distributive capital - Capability Capital of Productive Capacity Capital
Significance
It is Nobel-grade to show that Distributive production + open design + training can generate capital faster than centralized accumulation.
Distributed ≠ non-extractive.
Distributive systems have anti-concentration mechanisms —not just initial distribution.
What capital structures allow return without extraction?
And to back up - redefine return for the distributive economy. Clearly, if we were redefining the economy, we must first redefine what we return means