I can go along with what you say in last post. I think the issue is way larger than ic.org trying to keep afloat by getting wealthy would-be-hip US geeks to pay its staff.
The issue is that not only countries but “economic ecosystems” within them all run at different values of the currencies used. If ic.org would notice that it is actually sitting somewhere near the top of the state-individual-wealth value level, their community-marketing might be a little ugly to the rest of the planet. But let’s also remember that many people in other parts of the world NEED to be community-based to get by while the multi-nationalist capitalists milk them and their resources, so actually have far less need to relearn all this stuff that the individualists in the rich world who have rejected the oppressive state but can still pay rich-world prices.
Hi Asperant64,
I think ic.org needs to pay it’s bills like anyone else, lights, gas, electric, office space, internet bill, phone bill, etc. Also consistency of effort is worth something, and no one can afford to come in to do a job day after day week after week even if it’s just part time without compensation. Having said that, I do find the cost of classes astronomical and I would not be able to do any without the scholarship. I do wish that there were some ongoing study groups that did not have a cost associated with them run by the people who use them and perhaps facilitated or started by ic.org otherwise as you say it runs the risk of becoming another pricey club.
@patriceve Thank you for your response. In reguards to the conversation, I am concerned on how FIC is supposed to be fincially sustainable. I cannot know the details myself, but I must question as to how the classes can be so expensive.
I would also like to bring up the matter of how a community is supposed to gain its own funding. From what little I have observed, many communities depend on a mixture of members, donations, and or non profit methods, but I don’t see this as strictly wise. Have there been other forms of income employed by communities?
Financial cooperatives (credit unions) working together, sharing resources reduced risk and operating cost, enabling them to offer the same services as for-profit banks at a lower cost to their members.
The FIC also could have established itself as a cooperative union of intentional communities with a primary focus on shared knowledge and services that reduce the risk and cost of opportunity for communities to thrive.
My proposed cooperatively structured, sociocratically managed Federated Union of Intentional Communities would be membership supported on a progressive scale.
Many years ago, when I realized that FIC would never grow to become that kind of organization, I set out to build it myself.
It is unfortunate that many people flee to intentional communities to avoid adapting to change because that same bias precludes learning about and embracing a different paradigm of intentional communities as a sustainable cooperative union that demonstrably serves and is accountable to its membership.
Are you saying that my statement wasn’t clear? How so?
To expand further, Credit Unions serve their member-owners, and are accountable to the communities where they are located, while banks, regardless of marketing claims, by law only serve to maximize stockholders profits by any means necessary.
The banking business model is objectively no different from Facebook or any other social media company because bank customers are actually the product being cultivated.
To avoid confusing the distinctly different missions of the two types of organizations, we use distinctly different terms and a different set of laws and policies in governing how credit unions operate, with the first US credit union established in 1901, and the federal laws and policies enacted in 1934.
How they are founded provides insight into what makes them functionally and ethically different from banks.
@Muiren With all due respect, its a lot to process at once. The amount of information makes it confusing to follow.
But as far as I can understand, Credit Unions only answer to its members while Banks serve their stockholders to maximize profit. Upon reading the additional information, they can also be other types of bussinesses yes?
As for the latter, from what I understand from this post, you seem disgruntled, but is it because of how people seem unwilling to learn how to support themselves? Or are you at odds with how people percieve how a intentional community is supposed to function?
I understand how a culture sadly trained to view anything longer than Tweet is a pedantic essay; however the 121 words of my comment were shorter than a Tweet, and objectively not a lot of information.
The point that I clearly made was about “Cooperative Unions” which are not unique, and Credit Unions (which are cooperative unions) were an example that even someone like me, who grew up in a tiny rural Ohio whistle stop can safely be presumed to have knowledge of.
Two links were provided to unimpeachable references, but were not required in making my clearly expressed point
Summary
➤ Short Comment
➤ Clearly expressed
➤ Sources provided
Cooperatives have been a persistent theme of the American culture of liberation since colonial times.
In 1752, Benjamin Franklin along with his fellow firefighters established the Philadelphia Contributionship for the Insurance of Homes from Loss by Fire.
It was the first cooperative business formed in the United States, and has been in continuous operation since its founding.
My remarks about intentional communities sharing resources as a cooperative union don’t logically require additional information to be understood. And you, anonymous person, can drop the façade of civility and this comically transparent attempt at sealioning is over.
@Muiren I don’t know what you mean, it was not attempt to harassess you. I don’t know how I offended you but I no longer feel interested in having this discussion with you.
@Aspirant64, At no time have I mentioned how I feel, so perhaps you are confused or not feeling well?
Like you, I am just asking questions.
Your rhetorical strategy of non-stop irrational questions under the demonstrably false pretense what I’ve said was a lot of complex information does not constitute the substance of honest discourse.
And since you clearly have no use for frank candor, I see no benefit in extending your credit further.
The IC I founded and ran for fifteen years wanted to remove speculative value from real estate.
You’ve got to start somewhere, right? So we said that our Class A co-op shares (our primary equity pool) could appreciate at no more than the rate of inflation.
Boy, you should have heard the wails and moans from those who consider turning their domicile into an ATM machine was some sort of God-given right?
“Why should I buy in to you co-op [at 1/4th the market rate] if I can’t later sell for whatever the market will bear?”