Tuesday, December 30, 2008


Relocalization is an important part of a strategy towards equitable/sustainable quality of life communities. It will take a long time to realize such especially with respect to production. The one area that people seem to be focusing on is food production.

In an area like the Eugene-Springfiled, OR/Willamette River Valley such a strategy of "towards self-sufficiency" in food production is more feasible than let's say New York City, in which they would have to define their region/hinterlands much more extensively. (the imperialistic fingers of NYC stretch much more widely than the do fo a place like, let's say Des Moines, IA.

Every region has what Economists call a "Comparative" Advantage. The Central Valley in California is the best agricultural land on the planet. Saudi Arabia and the surrounds has oil. New York City has the knowledge and structural base to dominate the financial system., etc. The Comparative Region plays into how resources are used and/or exploited in an area. I can not an envision an economy where this completely goes away. What we have to do when planning inter-community development is recognize the comparative advantage (or disadvantage) of our neighborhood, and the comparative advantage of our larger bio-region (carving up the world into bio-regions will be problematic, but it makes more sense than the totally arbitrary State). We also have to recognize the comparative advantage of other regions, particularly those closest to us and come up with mutually trading schemes that will optimize both the comparative advantage and relocalization paradigms in an equitable and sustainabe manner . It will need to be a slow, methodical, planned transition. It will take much understanding, much communication, a committment to fair trade, and a committment to cooperation.

Perhaps the biggest obstacle for such beneficial change lies in what Economists call "Competitive" Advantage. Simply put, it's "I own the resources and you don't!" There are international, regional, and local financial elites, large business holders and investors, lnadlords, etc. The Plan of an Equity Union is to pull all ownership equity into one large resource and re-allocate it to communities based on needs of sustainable living, equity concerns (especialy for the poor) and to transition to a quality of life paradigm as opposed to one that emphasizes "standard of living" (he with the most and most expensive toys, wins).

Inter-community and inter-regional equity is a major goal.


  1. In your article on relocalization you say:

    The Plan of an Equity Union is to pull all ownership equity into one large resource and re-allocate it to communities based on needs of sustainable living, equity concerns (especially for the poor) and to transition to a quality of life paradigm as opposed to one that emphasizes "standard of living" (he with the most and most expensive toys, wins).

    In a Community Investment Enterprise,


    residents of a locality agree to cooperate in the acquisition of the land, facilities and tools to produce the food, clothing, shelter, education and health care needed by those resident in that locality.

    I think we agree that "wealth" is the ownership of the capacity to produce value - and that "money" is merely a measure of relative value. I am wondering what process you envision to "pull all ownership equity into one large resource". Is the process described in the CIE inconsistent with what you propose? And then, how do we attract people to an understanding of the nature of wealth and to take action to create the kinds of wealth that heal nature and end poverty?

    We disagree on settlements in the desert. I see it as a way to address the several systemic problems we face.


  2. What you quoted drom CIE appears to be very consistent with what I am proposing with my Peoples' Equity Union (PEU) work.

    With respect to your question about the "nature of wealth", I think that the "quality of life" paradigm in lieu of the "standard of living" paradigm needs to be stressed.

    "Quality of life" includes personal happiness for self, neighbors, and all others. It includes ownership opportunities for all and everybuddy having the things they need, including health, healthy and loving relations with family, friends, neighbors, and all the people of the world. It includes peace on earth, and it includes a future for all the children of the world.

    "Standard of living" implies maximizing the consumption of things.

    You asked how do we attract people?

    I work by walking around my neighborhood, downtown, and beyond and talking to people about matters of concern and interest to them and how what we are trying to do relates, then giving them contact information, including my web log. I also, as you know, try to maximize outreach on the inter-net.

    From a structural point of view, I am considering forming a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation, (the PEU), to start receiving funds for neighborhood equity unions (NEUs). One of my plans is to work with local and hopefully national and world musicians, for them to form a not-for-profit corporation to present revenue producing musical productions that will optimize meeting the needs of talented local musicians/lyricists and any of the great old and not-so-old national and world musicians who may have fallen upon hard times. Negotiated amounts of the profits will be donated to the NEUs. Of course, donations will also be accepted by the NEUs. Money dedicated or donated to the NEUs will be held in trust in local credit unions.

    The NEUs will work together in a common mission based on shared principles and strategies. Once a NEU has enough funds to begin work, they will become not-for-profit community worker hybrid cooperatives.

    On the regional and global scale, I envision transitioning all current Capitalist financial systems to a World-wide Peoples' Equity Union (WPEU), which would have regional and neighborhood Planning Boards with mission and strategies consistent with what I have laid out heretofore.

    With regards to settlements on the desert, if there are alrady people in need of improved living conditions living inthe area, then current environments need to be improved. But, no more sprawl... No more developments on "greenfields" anywhere including what would be considered "greenfield" if they weren't in the desert (let's call them light brown and various other hues fields). Again, water must seriously be considered as a limiting factor in development activities.