Universal Basic Assets
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Take a look at the Universal Basic Assets whitepaper from the Institute for the Future:
Basics
- A Framework First Proposed by The Institute for the Future
- Despite mentioning Open Source Information and Open Source Software, No explicit mention is made of Open Hardware, in the sense of The Promise of Open Hardware
- As per the following quite, it defines various types of "goods":
- "In the UBA framework and manifesto, we focus on three broad classes of assets: Private assets include money, land, and housing. Public assets refer to infrastructure and services like education, health, and public utilities. Lastly, open assets are a growing category of mostly digital assets that are communally created and open to everyone, from Wikipedia and open education resources to scientific knowledge, artificial intelligence tools, and much more."
- Thus the Universal Basic Assets program proposes entrepreneurial founder-instigated, public-interest enterprises that promote access to universal basic assets of all types. Such enterprises are known as the Open Sector.
In Depth Look
- Quote from the IFTF Page:
- "In the UBA framework and manifesto, we focus on three broad classes of assets: Private assets include money, land, and housing. Public assets refer to infrastructure and services like education, health, and public utilities. Lastly, open assets are a growing category of mostly digital assets that are communally created and open to everyone, from Wikipedia and open education resources to scientific knowledge, artificial intelligence tools, and much more.
IFTF’s Universal Basic Assets framework and manifesto do not advocate collectivizing or seizing and distributing resources. Rather, they are a call to action to collaboratively identify the key assets people will need today and in the future in order to lead sustainable livelihoods as individuals, households, and wider communities. UBA offers actionable tools for designing policies and mechanisms for widening access to such resources."
- The PDF Download is Locked Behind an "Email Wall" of sorts?
- Also it is liscensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 Lisincse, so i'm unsure how that relates to OSE using this, and to an extent even this page?
Criticism
By User: Eric
- First and foremost i need to read up more on this, so don't minsinterpret this as some FINAL unchangable opinion, i am just writing my thoughts here for now
- Anywho:
- Despite noble, i have a bit of a suspicion around all this
- Their infographic mentions " Charter Forests " as a success/good goal
- This seems like to me though Greenwashed selling of Government Owned Old Growth Forests etc to "charter forest boards". I may be misunderstanding, but i don't quite understand 1.) How forests are being poorly managed/"need innovation" and 2.) Why that can't be done in the existing system, and how deregulation would help
- Also even if done originally well, as with the EPA and OSHA with enough defunding, court cases, and ammendments etc the Oversight can quicly loose it's "teeth"
- It also mentions Blockchain quite a bit, which i'm not against too much, but that also has me a bit suspicious
- Another thing, which granted gets into going after it for things unsaid, which as per Hanlon's Razor can get tricky, but regardless is The lack of discussion of faults in the system partially to blame for said issues
- Largely Mass Ownership of Rental Property , Short Term Rentals , and Private Ownership of Public Resources (Think Aquifer Overwithdrawl by Nestle etc)
- It did mention Mutural Aid , Single Payer Healthcare, "Fight for 15", the Alaska Permanent Fund , etc which is good
- It, short of mentioning Instructables , missing out on OSHW is a bit odd, granted the average person may not know all too much about this
- The Infographic is also copyrighted for 2017, so there was less out there then as well, not just less awareness
- Still seems like a bit of a glaring oversight, although again noone is perfect, and scope creep is an issue
- The main reason for me being skeptical is the whole debacle over "Stakeholder Capitalizm"
- It got people in a bit of a tizy, and it was a bit more rough than Peer Review i guess, but the YouTube Channel "Johhny Harris" made a video on the subject, in collaboration with some groups rather biased to preserving the Status Quo and A Video by the YouTube Channel "Tom Nicholas" Titled "Johnny Harris: A Story of YouTube Propaganda" ( ~30 Minute Watch ) was made crituqing this
- That's my thoughts on this for now