Many of my posts end up making arguments re why knowledge use systems are needed in the first place. This is such an easy mindset to maintain, because a wide range of discussions take place in terms of why something is needed (or not). But sometimes it feels like a passive approach! Autumn can be a good time for new beginnings, and I'm counting on the cooler days for a new "burst" of energy. So this post - at least - will change gears from why to how - if only to get past the seeming impossibility of the task!
When it comes to local context for corporate structure, a clear framework for the initial organization can be the greatest struggle. Granted, a starter organization (for knowledge use systems) may end up as a non profit entity, given the nature of its ongoing tasks which include vetting processes and explaining the legal and monetary circumstance. But everything that follows - with a little luck - will eventually exist as for profit entities, complete with built in "mini banks" to support a lifelong process for human capital. Time value is the untapped wealth of the present, and it is the economic growth needed most.
Organizational capacity holds intrinsic value, which is capable of serving as a source of wealth generation. The hard part is just getting to a point where the advantages of this approach start to become evident! I now recognize that there are people everywhere who would like to contribute in some way, and others would be inspired to take part in the resulting communities. I just haven't found the best means yet, for reaching out and making the necessary connections!
Even though these environments will often be relatively simple and multi purpose, knowledge use systems will still need regular contact with professionals in the fields involved. New community start ups will be able to tap the resources of the "starter" organization, particularly for details re time arbitrage management and material for a services core. Plenty of coordination will be involved, not just between different kinds of skills sets but also in terms of reconciling various approaches into a cohesive whole. I am still a long way from being able to travel and personally communicate with others re these efforts, but continue to hope that I will one day be able to do so. In the meantime I will get as much explanation in print, as possible.
Domestic summits will of course be a part of this process, but they would be needed some years down the road, after the initial legal and monetary hurdles have been overcome. Also, the domestic summit process would be intended for individuals and groups who are actively considering new community start ups, but need to meet others first in order to find out whether they are on the "same page" regarding lifestyle and infrastructure planning.
Further, even though infrastructure is important, provisions for infrastructure design would evolve after other elements of the system have been established. Part of what will help in this regard, is that time arbitrage is always a possibility in already existing communities. The first priority is to create a system of broad knowledge use, which is accessible and workable for either tighter or smaller population densities than is now the case. Each new group would start the process by defining a services core for time arbitrage, and expanding from that point.
Initially, a sponsorship phase is likely to be involved for those who seek to establish knowledge use systems. At a group level, this phase might last a year or more until the services core is established to a degree that most individuals have become comfortable with the working relationships involved. Once a group establishes a reliable organizational structure, they become eligible for internal monetary compensation - i.e. the internal "bank" structure for human capital. All progress in this regard would be recorded both for the records of the starter organization, as well as the governments which are willing to acknowledge these new communities as an active part of their economic structure. The recording process is much simpler than it may sound, in that time arbitrage is recorded by the participants who take part in ongoing transactions.
Two forms of sponsors could assist the start up process for new communities, prior to their formal recognition status. Whereas one would provide financial assistance, the other would be more directly involved in the provision of their own time and skills, as seed capital for new communities. Financial sponsors might select a participant and provide their hourly compensation for matched time, and possibly living expenses if needed.
A basic or minimal "work week" for participants (during prime work years) could be 15 matched hours, which makes for a (minimum) 30 hour week, given the matched time with others. Often these would be 15 different sets of individuals, who would frequently use common services areas in central locations to ease the coordination process. Also, given the fact much of this time also counts as consumption, some will choose a good deal more than 15 matched hours per week. While coordination also extends to living quarters, much of the process will begin in relatively public areas - particularly for those of a young age, and especially for the many groups where trust will need to be gradually rebuilt.
The internal banking structure of knowledge use systems is not one of loan generation, but of compensation for matched time. This process includes an expected base of minimal but ongoing investment patterns, which make it possible to cut back whenever needed for time based obligations. These incremental shares - as a basic form of investment - would exist in the form of local square footage options, as well as for building components. Common working areas - adjacent to public areas - would be a part of local shared investment structures. For instance, in peer to peer educational settings, student entrepreneurs could meet with customers (peers, etc) in their own purchased components of central community areas.
In order for local corporations to maintain the right to monetary origination, they would agree not only to maintain vital service formation for all local citizens, but also to expand and diversify knowledge use options over time, so as not to present a burden on the limited services capacity of present day state and national governments. In the sense these local corporations provide a bank like function, it of course exists in a beta position to the alpha position of the Fed. Also, the Fed would need the timely and accurate records of local and group efforts, in order to faithfully represent them.
Eventually, these local systems would be able to provide accurate measurements not just for services, but also assets and production flows as well. As a part of the measurement process, the differences between local wealth origination and resource flows from other areas would also be observed. Since the non tradable and tradable aspects of these small but open economies would gradually become easier to recognize, they would provide useful information for larger economies as well.