RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
When Robots Take Our Jobs, Platform Cooperatives Are a Solution Print
Saturday, 21 April 2018 13:35

Rosenblatt writes: "Imagine for a moment that Uber drivers, rather than Uber stockholders, own Uber. That is one way to understand what a platform cooperative is. Uber is a company built on a software platform that connects service providers with customers."

Automation replaces jobs faster than we come up with new work for people to do. (photo: ATS)
Automation replaces jobs faster than we come up with new work for people to do. (photo: ATS)


When Robots Take Our Jobs, Platform Cooperatives Are a Solution

By Gideon Rosenblatt, YES! Magazine

21 April 18

 


This thriving new sector is a critical step toward a fair and vibrant economic future.

magine for a moment that Uber drivers, rather than Uber stockholders, own Uber.

That is one way to understand what a platform cooperative is. Uber is a company built on a software platform that connects service providers with customers. As a platform co-op, it would be owned by the people who provide the service, by its users, or both.

Platform co-ops are the leading edge of the cooperative-ownership movement. They extend the cooperative model into the fast-growing “sharing economy,” where they can help increase income equity in the technology sector. As the technology sector sends us hurtling toward a world of robots and artificial intelligence, “technological unemployment” becomes the threat as automation replaces jobs faster than we come up with new work for people to do. We will be left scrambling to find alternative sources of income for average people.

Those decreases in salaries, wages, and benefits also increase corporate profitability and the investment income that profitability generates for shareholders. Automation thus shrinks employment income while growing investment income. That means that strategies for radically broadening ownership will play an extremely important role in mitigating the threat of wide-scale declines in income from technological unemployment. That’s why extending cooperatives into the technology sector is so critical and where platform co-ops can play a vital role.

People have been thinking about platform cooperatives for a while.

Trebor Scholz, a professor at the New School in New York City, coined the term “platform cooperativism.” For the book Ours to Hack and to Own (2017), he and University of Colorado professor Nathan Schneider compiled 40 short essays by leading thinkers in this field. I’ve compiled a “Platform Co-op” list on Twitter that includes many of the contributors in the book, along with a handful of other experts.

A number of platform co-ops already exist. Uber competitor Green Taxi Cooperative is one example. Another is Loconomics, a cooperative of home cleaners, pet caretakers, and other service professionals who connect with customers via an app. A third example is Stocksy, an online stock photo service that is owned by its contributing photographers and videographers.

How to Slow Down a Flywheel

As we think about scaling up platform co-ops we run into the financing problem that all co-ops face. I think of it as the “flywheel problem.”

Flywheels are rotating discs, like a potter’s wheel. They require an upfront investment of energy, but once they are spinning they are very good at sustaining their own momentum. Think of it as an analogy for starting a company and keeping it going over time. Startup investments represent that initial energy to get the disc whirring. And the company’s flow of income keeps it running.

Research shows co-ops are as good at sustaining themselves as traditional businesses but have a much harder time getting started. Here’s why.

Investors are attracted to a new company because they hope to reap significant profits. These expectations create large spigots that hang off all for-profit corporations, spigots that drain resources from the company into shareholder bank accounts. The flow of cash through these spigots takes the form of dividends as well as stock buyback programs aimed at increasing the company’s share price. According to an analysis of Federal Reserve statistics, in 2014, dividends and stock buyback programs transferred more than $1 trillion of wealth from corporations to shareholders. Since the year 2000, this transfer has averaged 5.5 percent of U.S. GDP—every year.

These massive returns to shareholders have a macro impact of exacerbating income inequality as well as a micro impact on the companies themselves. Between 1999 and the end of 2017, dividends and stock buybacks averaged 88 percent of operating earnings for the S&P 500. The problem is just as serious among non-publicly traded S-corporations and partnerships. These “pass-through” companies account for 95 percent of businesses in the United States. Because of interlocking ownership structures, the exact share of these firms’ profits going to owners is unclear. What is clear is that they contribute significantly to the concentration of wealth in the U.S. Recent research shows that 41 percent of that increased concentration of wealth took the form of profits to owners of pass-through corporations.

What do spigots have to do with flywheels? This ongoing extraction of profits acts as a drag on the flywheel of the enterprise. Funds are drained out of the company rather than being reinvested to sustain the momentum of the enterprise.

Contrast that to how things are designed to work within a cooperative company.

Reinvestment: Keeping the Wheel Spinning

REI is a consumer cooperative, which means that it is owned by and run for the benefit of its customers. A few years ago, I was talking with an REI employee who mentioned how good the company is about investing in technology—and more generally how it plows much of its profits back into the business and back into its stakeholders. REI does pay dividends to its owners ($138 million in 2016), but those owners are also its customers, and the dividends are in the form of discounts on store purchases. This creates a feedback loop that spurs the company’s growth while rewarding customers and reinforcing their loyalty.

The U.S. Bureau of Labor and Statistics reports that 20 percent of businesses fail within their first year, with the rate increasing to 50 percent by year five, and 70 percent by the tenth year. Comparable statistics specific to cooperative failure rates do not yet exist in the United States, but analysis in other countries suggests that cooperatives tend to sustain themselves as well or better than standard businesses.

Startup Funding: Getting the Wheel Turning

There are some 40,000 co-ops in the United States, less than two-tenths of 1 percent of our total 26 million businesses. Since co-ops sustain themselves as well as standard businesses, the real challenge has less to do with keeping the wheel spinning and more to do with getting new cooperatives up and running.

Whether a cooperative or traditional company, all startups are risky; their lack of assets and existing revenue streams mean that traditional banks are generally not interested in financing them. Cooperatives face an added hurdle because of their focus on benefiting members rather than outside investors. Why would a traditional venture capital firm be attracted to a company that would take their money without giving them a sizable return and a controlling stake? The short answer is, they don’t.

So for financing, cooperatives have generally turned to cooperative banks and credit unions. But these financial institutions are not currently growing at the rate required to provide startup funding for the dramatic increase in cooperatives that we need.

For platform co-ops to play a vital role in addressing the technological unemployment of the emerging economy, we need new funding sources for them. This is particularly true given the upfront investments in technology development needed to build software platforms that stand a chance of competing with an Uber, Taskrabbit, or Airbnb. Three new developments may address this need.

The first is the development of the impact investing field and the growing awareness of the power of Program Related Investments among philanthropic foundations. Cooperatives are an attractive investment because they meet the justice criteria of many foundations and impact investors. Innovative impact funders like RSF Social Finance are investigating how to better support the cooperative space in general. Laurie Lane-Zucker’s concept of Integrated Impact Finance Vehicle envisions a chain of financial support starting with philanthropic contributions, moving to loans, and finally into an impact investment equity stake.

The second development is the growing popularity of crowdfunding strategies, turbocharged in recent years by the rise of sharing on social media.

The third opportunity for new cooperative funding is in the “Initial Coin Offerings,” or ICOs, of cryptocurrencies. The lands of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies swarm with scams and get-rich-quick schemes. But the underlying technologies for decentralized computing on platforms like Ethereum can also be used to build new types of organizations and services built around the premise of democratizing ownership. The Holochain project is one example. Another is a startup called Colony, whose technology aims to change the nature of ownership.

A Platform for the Future

The argument for platform cooperatives is essentially the argument for cooperatives more generally—with the added twist that platform co-ops carry the cooperative promise into important new technology markets. As automation and artificial intelligence cost jobs in one economic sector after another, employment-related income shrinks and investment income expands, exacerbating wealth disparity.

Platform co-ops alter that equation by broadening the ownership of the companies that build and operate these technologies. A platform co-op alternative to Airbnb, for example, might use artificial intelligence and might need few employees. But it would be owned by, and share dividends with, its property-listing members—perhaps even renters—much as REI does with its members today.

We are in a race that pits the explosion of artificial intelligence and automation against our ability to rapidly expand ownership of the engines that drive this technological revolution. Growing platform cooperatives from their nascent form today into a thriving new sector is a critical step toward a fair and vibrant economic future.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Puerto Rico Goes Back Door to Solartopia and the Corporate Media Blacks It Out Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=6004"><span class="small">Harvey Wasserman, Reader Supported News</span></a>   
Saturday, 21 April 2018 11:06

Wasserman writes: "Puerto Rico has made history by becoming - briefly - the largest US territory or state to be powered almost entirely by renewable energy."

Puerto Rico's Solartopian moments are big news. (photo: EnergySage)
Puerto Rico's Solartopian moments are big news. (photo: EnergySage)


Puerto Rico Goes Back Door to Solartopia and the Corporate Media Blacks It Out

By Harvey Wasserman, Reader Supported News

21 April 18

 

uerto Rico has made history by becoming — briefly — the largest US territory or state to be powered almost entirely by renewable energy.

The corporate media has done all it can to black the story out.

The rising grassroots movement to totally rebuild Puerto Rico’s electric supply system with renewable energy and locally owned micro-grids poses a serious threat to the centralized, fossil-based corporate elite.

But two hurricanes and two human-error blackouts have opened the door to systemic change.

Here’s how:

Last September, Hurricane Irma blew through the Caribbean, passing over enough of Puerto Rico to plunge tens of thousands of people into darkness. Many of them are still without power.

Then Hurricane Maria shredded the island’s electric grid and blacked out its 3.4 million residents virtually in toto.

The island had two large wind farms, one of which was severely damaged. The other survived, but had no grid through which to distribute its electricity.

Some solar arrays on the island were also severely damaged.

But at a farm in Barranquitas owned by Hector Santiago, 244 solar panels kept some 2,500 light bulbs alight to maximize greenhouse plant growth. Much to the derision of his neighbors, Santiago had invested some $300,000 in the solar array. Small gas and kerosene-fired generators kicked back up around the island. But Santiago’s solar array may well have been its biggest operating power station.

Over the following months, the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority tried to restore its rickety poles and wires, plus its network of obsolete gas and oil plants … and the ancient coal plant that burns ore from Colombia.

Along the way, PREPA’s director was fired, and Governor Ricardo Antonio “Ricky” Rosselló Nevares has campaigned to privatize the utility, a move strongly opposed by democracy activists.

On April 8, as PREPA was bringing the island back up to near-total power, restoration workers felled a tree onto live transmission wires, knocking out power to some 850,000 customers.

Ten days later, PREPA proudly announced that it had restored power to 95.8 percent of the island’s population. Some 62,000 customers were still in the dark. But PREPA was proud that each the territory’s 78 municipalities had at least some power.

Literally within hours, Puerto Rico was again plunged into darkness. The same contractor that on April 8 had dropped a tree into the grid now ran an excavator that shorted out the entire system. Once again, Puerto Rico was without central-generated electric power.

But now there was much more solar. In the wake of Irma and Maria, Solartopian activists have poured thousands of photovoltaic panels into the island. Strongly advocating that they become the centerpiece of a rebuilt energy supply system, many collectors now power locally owned micro-grids.

According to Elon Musk, Tesla has helped make 662 locations energy self-sufficient. Key has been San Juan’s Hospital del Nino, which in just two weeks was made energy self-sufficient with panels and batteries.

Nearly all the island’s hospitals were knocked out by Maria. Dialysis machines, operating rooms, air conditioning and other key services went dead. Many still are.

Ironically, according to activist Joel Segal, much of the nation’s supply of pain-killing morphine and Dilaudid also went away, as they are mostly (for tax purposes) manufactured in Puerto Rico.

While referring uniformly to this latest centrally-generated fiasco as a “total” blackout, the corporate media have almost totally ignored this steady, fast-growing stream of power being generated on Puerto Rico, virtually all of it solar.

CNN did cover a local named “Frank,” who after Maria took his home solar with $7500 in system components. Wired has reported on a Brooklyn architect, Andrew Marvel (a grand-nephew of the famed futurist Buckminster Fuller), who plans to use grants of $625,000 for his Resilient Power Puerto Rico to build 25 small arrays with Tesla battery backups. Another 75 or more may follow.

During my California Solartopia show on KPFK-Pacifica in Los Angeles, a listener pledged $20,000 for a neighborhood micro-grid linked with solar panels and batteries.

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) and Rep. Stacey Plackett (D-Virgin Islands) have asked FEMA to take the island solar. So has San Juan’s progressive mayor, Carmen Yulin Cruz.

But it’s all too hot for the corporate media.

In December PREPA and the New York governor’s office estimated that $17.6 billion was needed to revamp Puerto Rico’s old grid, funds that could instead help take the island totally solar.

To put that in perspective: Governor Andrew Cuomo wants New York ratepayers to fork over $8 billion to keep four decrepit upstate reactors on line, despite their owners’ attempts to close them. Ohio’s FirstEnergy just asked Trump to force ratepayers to fork over $8 billion PER YEAR in “emergency funding” to prop up four more dying nukes and scores of obsolete coal burners.

Ironically, the blacked-out story of Puerto Rico having already inadvertently gone almost entirely solar has opened the brightest window onto a sustainable future.

A Solartopian Puerto Rico would enjoy permanent, reliable service, free of fuel costs and protected from the ravages of the inevitable next storm while avoiding the emissions that would help cause and intensify it.

But a Solartopian Puerto Rico would threaten the Trumpian corporatists who want to “restore” the island’s central, fossil-fired, utterly corrupted grid, which is sure to go down in the next global-warmed hurricane. Or by the next felled tree and errant excavator.

Puerto Rico’s Solartopian moments are big news. So are the solar panels and micro-grids that could help the island survive the next hurricanes (season starts June 1) and corporate wrecking crews.

Let’s keep those panels coming!

To learn more contact me at solartopia.org.



Harvey Wasserman hosts the California Solartopia Show on KPFK-Pacifica Los Angeles 90.7FM and the Green Power & Wellness Show on prn.fm. His America at the Brink of Rebirth: The Life & Death Spiral of US History, from Deganawidah to The Donald is at www.solartopia.org, along with Solartopia! Our Green-Powered Earth..

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Can Trump Fire Mueller? Print
Saturday, 21 April 2018 10:54

Reich writes: "Yes, but at a huge cost to our system, and to Trump's presidency. Begin with the law: Justice Department regulations issued in 1999, in the wake of Kenneth Starr's investigation of Bill Clinton, say that only an Attorney General can remove a special counsel, and not just for any reason."

Robert Mueller. (photo: NBC)
Robert Mueller. (photo: NBC)


Can Trump Fire Mueller?

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog

21 April 18

 

es, but at a huge cost to our system, and to Trump’s presidency.

Begin with the law: Justice Department regulations issued in 1999, in the wake of Kenneth Starr’s investigation of Bill Clinton, say that only an Attorney General can remove a special counsel, and not just for any reason. Such a removal must be based on a finding that the special counsel was guilty of “misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies.”

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has recused himself from overseeing the Mueller investigation, so the Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein, is in charge. If Trump directed Rosenstein to fire Mueller, Rosenstein would have to find “good cause” to remove Mueller, or repeal the Department’s regulation requiring such a finding, and then fire Mueller.

If Rosenstein refused, Trump could fire Rosenstein, and direct the next official in line to fire Mueller. And he could keep firing people down the chain of command until he got someone who would fire Mueller.

Richard Nixon did something like this in what came to be known as the “Saturday Night Massacre,“ ordering Attorney General Elliott Richardson to fire the Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox. When Richardson refused and resigned in protest, Nixon then ordered Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus to fire Cox. Ruckelshaus also refused, and resigned. Nixon then ordered the Solicitor General, Robert Bork, who was then acting head of the Department, to fire Cox. Bork did the deed.

There’s an alternative open to Trump. He could simply order Attorney General Sessions to repeal the special counsel regulations, and then Trump could fire Mueller himself.

But, as the Nixon saga showed, these routes would be perilous – both for Trump’s presidency and for our system of government, because they would undermine public trust in the impartiality of our system of justice and in the office of the presidency.

They would also further divide the country between Trump supporters who believe the Mueller investigation to be part of a conspiracy to undermine the Trump presidency, and the vast majority of Americans who are more likely to believe, as a result of these actions, that Trump has done something that he wants to hide at all costs.

The question is whether Trump is willing to risk it, nonetheless


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
A Third Party? How Not to Settle for the Lesser of Two Evils Print
Saturday, 21 April 2018 08:50

Reich writes: "Are you happy with the electoral choices provided you by the two major parties? If not, should you vote for a third party candidate?"

Former Clinton labor secretary Robert Reich. (photo: Steve Russell/Toronto Star)
Former Clinton labor secretary Robert Reich. (photo: Steve Russell/Toronto Star)


A Third Party? How Not to Settle for the Lesser of Two Evils

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog

21 April 18

 

re you happy with the electoral choices provided you by the two major parties? If not, should you vote for a third party candidate?

Not so fast. Remember what happened in 2016, when Libertarian Gary Johnson got 3.2 percent of the popular vote and Green Party candidate Jill Stein got 1.06 percent. Enough votes that, had they gone to Hillary Clinton, she’d have won the Electoral College, and Donald Trump wouldn’t be in the White House.

Oh, and anyone remember what happened in 2000, when the votes that went to Ralph Nader all but sealed the fate of Al Gore, and gave us George W. Bush.

You see the problem? In a winner-take-all system like ours, votes for third party candidates siphon away votes from the major party candidate whose views are closest to that third-party candidate. So by not voting for the lesser of two evils, if that’s what you want to call them, you end up with the worse of two evils.

But here’s the good news. You’ve got at least 2 ways to avoid the lesser of two evils other than voting for a third party candidate.

First, you could build support for your favorite primary candidate inside one of the major parties – like some of you did for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primaries.

But, you might say, look what happened to Bernie! The Democratic Party establishment rigged the game against him.

I don’t want to open up this particular can of worms, but if a party establishment has a chokehold on the primaries – the answer isn’t to go with a third party and end up with the worse of two evils, but to organize and mobilize inside the party to break that choke hold, as some would say the Tea Party has done in the GOP.

Never underestimate the power of grassroots activism focused like a laser on taking over a major political party that has ossified.

Another way to avoid the lesser of two evils: Get your state to institute ranked-choice voting, also known as instant-runoff voting, which allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference.

The process is simple: In the first round, only voters’ first choices are counted. If a candidate gets a majority, that’s the end of it: That candidate wins. If no candidate gets a majority, the candidate who received the fewest votes is eliminated, and then the second choices of voters who preferred that candidate are counted.

If that gives a majority to one candidate, that candidate wins. If there’s still no one with a majority, the process continues, until one candidate gets a majority.

Ranked-choice voting isn’t perfect, but it enables you to vote your conscience –even for a third-party candidate – without the worry that you’re giving ground to the candidate you like least.

The idea is gaining popularity. Last year, some form of ranked-choice voting was proposed in 19 states. In 2016, citizens in Maine initiated a referendum for ranked-choice voting and won. It’s already being used in statewide special elections in North Carolina, and in 10 major cities.

You don’t have to settle for the lesser of two evils. But in order to get the candidates you want elected you need to get involved, now. In the primaries. And in changing your state to ranked-choice voting.

It’s our democracy. Whether it works, is up to us.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Mueller Says That Until Yesterday He Had Almost Forgotten to Investigate Giuliani Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=9160"><span class="small">Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker</span></a>   
Friday, 20 April 2018 13:47

Borowitz writes: "The independent counsel, Robert Mueller, told reporters that, prior to news reports on Thursday, he had 'almost forgotten' to investigate the former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani."

Special Counsel Robert Mueller. (photo: Getty)
Special Counsel Robert Mueller. (photo: Getty)


Mueller Says That Until Yesterday He Had Almost Forgotten to Investigate Giuliani

By Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker

20 April 18

 

The article below is satire. Andy Borowitz is an American comedian and New York Times-bestselling author who satirizes the news for his column, "The Borowitz Report."


he independent counsel, Robert Mueller, told reporters that, prior to news reports on Thursday, he had “almost forgotten” to investigate the former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani.

“Like most Americans, I had totally forgotten about Rudy Giuliani’s existence,” he said. “But then when he popped up on the news I was, like, ‘Hold on—shouldn’t we be investigating him?’ ”

Mueller was at a loss to explain why he had failed to investigate Giuliani earlier. “I have no idea how it could have slipped my mind,” he said. “His role in Trump’s campaign was as fishy as all get-out.”

He said that other members of his team were “poking fun” at him for not deciding to investigate Giuliani before Thursday. “I mean, think about it: how do you do a criminal investigation of the Trump campaign and leave Rudy out of it?” he said. “I’ve got to say, I’m pretty darn embarrassed about the whole thing.”

When asked for an estimate of when the Russia inquiry might wrap up, Mueller responded, “I honestly can’t say. I was hoping to bring it to a close in the next month or two, but now that we’re also investigating Rudy Giuliani, God only knows how long it’ll take.”


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 Next > End >>

Page 1276 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN