Advertisement
I'm planning a 1000 hour entry requirement for my shared income commune, and I thought I'd see what people think of the idea. Shared income only works if people believe in it. There are many people in the world that would like a free ride, so they'd want to join a community as a free place to live, if they could. The 1000 hour requirement is just a way to keep such people out, and get only people who believe in it to join, and also it is a way to get people committed to it before they join.
A parents love their children because they put effort into them. When someone puts a huge amount of work into a project, we say that is that person's "baby". If something is easy, you don't care about it, you don't respect it. You only care about things you have to work at.
So, if people are required to put in 1000 hours of work without pay, and without room and board, they'll have much greater respect for it, and care much more for it. It also will weed out the lazy people. We might also do some sort of thing for people who want to live there, where they work extra hours for a while or something.
For a shared income commune, we need people to love the commune. If they love the commune, they'll work for the good of the commune, without being told to or forced to. They'll work because they love the commune.
There's also going to be activity directors in my communes. People who spend their time finding fun activities to get people to play and have fun, not sit around being couch potatoes.
Obviously, this will make it difficult to get people, and yes I know it is already difficult to get people.
Tony
A parents love their children because they put effort into them. When someone puts a huge amount of work into a project, we say that is that person's "baby". If something is easy, you don't care about it, you don't respect it. You only care about things you have to work at.
So, if people are required to put in 1000 hours of work without pay, and without room and board, they'll have much greater respect for it, and care much more for it. It also will weed out the lazy people. We might also do some sort of thing for people who want to live there, where they work extra hours for a while or something.
For a shared income commune, we need people to love the commune. If they love the commune, they'll work for the good of the commune, without being told to or forced to. They'll work because they love the commune.
There's also going to be activity directors in my communes. People who spend their time finding fun activities to get people to play and have fun, not sit around being couch potatoes.
Obviously, this will make it difficult to get people, and yes I know it is already difficult to get people.
Tony
posted by:
|
Ukraine
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Unsu...
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Mon, January 19, 2009 - 12:40 AMAre you planning to be near any city where they can find room and board since you are not providing it? Most people who live in communal spaces dont travel with huge wads of cash for hotel and food. I also think asking 1000 hours of time out of someone before you even consider them for membership is going to keep a lot more than just the "couch potatoes" out I think it will also keep most sane people out, but thats my opinion.
People who have valuable skills arent going to be willing to donate those skills in exchange for the chance to apply to live somewhere. I can only relate this to my own experience. I've gladly donated tons of time, but at least got a place to sleep and something to eat. -
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Mon, January 19, 2009 - 12:26 PMI think one common thing people think of when they think of shared income, is they think what is going to keep the freeloaders out. This system should answer that question, so seems to me like it may turn some off and turn others on.
Tony -
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Wed, February 4, 2009 - 2:05 PMSounds like a pretty good idea to me although I think there does need to be a place for them to stay. (at least for us, we are 25 mi from the nearst town with a hotel.) My husband and I have been trying to find people to come to our place and help with gardning and goats and chickens and such with no luck for some time. (although not totally shared income) I dont understand why it has been so hard. We have 35 ac w/ 750 feet on a river. (shallow, but year round) Warm climate. We have a very nice trailer we have put a roof over for shade that is hooked up to electricity and everything. I am 58 and my husband just turned 60 and we really could use some help with the physical labor of becomming sustainable. We have the land, water, and have gathered many materials. We are willing to share what we have worked 25 years for but we're not going to give it away. It seems as though everyone that is looking into community is looking for 4 star accomodations right off the bat. -
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Thu, February 5, 2009 - 12:49 AMIt might be good to allow the people a place to stay while they work the 1000 hours, and actually I never said there would not be such a thing. If there is, it would probably have to be something where they can stay and work as regular employees who work 30 hours a week or so. As regular employees, they'd not have voting rights or anything like that. They'd be nothing more than employees, no matter how long they lived there. The 30 hours a week would not count towards that 1000 hours. The 1000 hours would be extra time.
The 1000 hours thing would have to be a purely optional thing, where they'd give that time to the company without being required to. They have to put in extra time, over and above the 30 hours a week, and without being paid for it.
This would allow anyone to join, it would be very easy I think. 1000 hours is nothing to someone who really wants to join. Poor people can afford it as easily as rich people. In fact, one thing I was wondering about with the 1000 hour requirement, is that rich people could technically pay someone to do the work for them. On the other hand, we could make part of that time, say 300 hours or so, be required to be completed at a community. Then rich people would also be required to work.
There would also be a allowance for people who wrote freeware software or otherwise contributed to the gift economy or charity work. Our people decide how many hours to credit for such work, and they could credit up to 700 hours of that entry requirement for such work.
We should talk. I'll PM my contact info.
People need to talk by voice, or better with webcams, or even better in person to get to know each other and trust each other. Text communication is pretty much useless. In text communication, people are all talk and no action, because they don't trust each other. All text communication ends up being seeking excuses to dislike any idea. Especially if you ask someone to move to your land, than they'll find all sorts of excuses not to. People need to get to know each other first.
Tony
-
-
-
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Fri, February 6, 2009 - 10:45 AMWe share the land, but specifically do NOT have any shared income policies in place.
We do, however, have a 6-month waiting period in which the people live on the share without mortgage, but pay into "assessments" (taxes, insurance, electricity, etc). At the end of the 6 months, they have the chance to be (unanimously) voted in by all of the share holders.
The waiting period is mandatory and since, after they are officially here, it is very difficult to "vote people off the island," this is a critical part of our community self-selecting for people that will be living with us for many many many years.
I would advise you to consider rules in which they will co-habitate in your community, without the financial part of it, or supporting it in some other way, so you really get a vibe for how they are to LIVE with... since that is what you will be doing for a long long long time... -
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Sat, February 7, 2009 - 7:32 AMI'm actually strictly opposed to allowing the other members to vote to allow a new member in. My system is one where judging people is rare. Black or white, we don't care. Not just black or white, but any form of judging, we don't do it.
We will of course have people who'll judge the work output of new members to make sure they put in an actual 1000 hours of work, not 1000 hours of goofin' off. However, those people may never know the people who did the work. They judge the work, not the people.
The design of all humans is good. It is society that makes them bad. Put them in a good society, and they'll become good.
Tony -
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Wed, March 11, 2009 - 11:11 PMEven if you frame it as something besides voting, I highly recommend some kind of consensus building exercise or opportunities for everyone to feel "heard" about a person, situation or plan being implemented. -
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Fri, March 13, 2009 - 4:46 AMIt's not about having people feel heard. It's about making good decisions quickly. If there's a thousand people in a community, there should be millions of decisions being made per day. Do you really want to be heard on every one of those decisions?
When Jill puts on her makeup, do you want to be heard in the decision of what color eyeliner to wear?
When there's a that needs to be drilled to find water, do you want to be heard about what depth to drill? Unless such decisions are left to people who know such things, you'll end up with a well drilled to a depth where there's no water.
Tony -
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Fri, March 13, 2009 - 1:05 PM"Do you really want to be heard on every one of those decisions?"
I think that she's implying that people will want to be heard on issues that directly effect them, such as the inclusion of a new member to the community. That's not a frivolous decision like Jill's make up, nor is it a decision that has a easy set of perameters like the drilling of a well. That's a decision that will both effect the members of the community and is a decision that doesn't have concrete perameters (unless the 1,000 hour work requirement would be the concrete perameter).
Further, I don't know that you need to extrapolate to a thousand person community, perhaps a few dozen but even hundreds seems like a mighty large amount in an intentional community. Especially if you maintain a 1,000 hour work requirement. -
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Sun, March 15, 2009 - 1:54 PMI believe it is very bad for a community to vote on accepting new members. You can hardly have a community based on love, if your first act is one of mistrust, elitism, and prejudice. Entry requirements is not something seen in regular communities, anyone is free to live where ever they choose. Why should an intentional community be any different? Our goal is to find a solution to the worlds problems, not create an elitist hideout.
Conceivia will be a community, which follows the community design specifications given to us by Jesus. Freedom of religion, open to christians and non-christians, and atheists and even satanists and everything else. Non-judgmental. One of Jesus' design specifications is to not judge. That means both freedom of religion, and also no voting on allowing new members in.
One of the other design specifications Jesus provided is shared income. Jesus' Apostles created a community with shared income just after Jesus died, but not following the judge not rule so well.
I really don't think the 1000 hour entry requirement will chase interested people away. Rather, I tend to think it'll attract people more. I'm sure a question can pops into any thinking person's head, is what will prevent people from leaching off the system. I think the 1000 hour entry requirement will lessen their fears in that area.
Tony -
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Fri, March 20, 2009 - 11:06 PMYeah, but if So-And-So is creepy, has gotten sleazy at every holiday party, or secretly has a bad habit of getting drunk every single night... it is nice to have an opportunity to talk about it before the problem person is LIVING with you.
Making choices about boundaries and inclusion isn't inherently a bad thing... and, like any garden, a little weeding can make the whole thing a lot more productive and healthy!
- Alice -
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Sat, March 21, 2009 - 6:04 AMWhite people wanted to keep black people out of their communities. They thought black people were creepy.
In a garden, you are trying to produce what you want to produce. You therefore pull out the things you don't want. It is no more productive after you pulled out the weeds. If anything, it produces less after you pull out the weeds. It only produces more of what you want.
In a community, we are not producing what you want. We interested in the good of all. Therefore, there are no weeds. Sure, there are some that are sick, but we care for the sick.
It may be that alcoholics and drug addicts may need to be removed to a place where they can get better, but that is not weeding. If that is best for them, that is one thing. If we simply remove them because we don't want them around, that is another thing. People are not garbage. We ought not be expelling people, just like we do garbage.
Especially in our modern age where recycling is considered so important. You want to throw out the human trash, but recycle the paper and cans?
It is so easy to like the idea of discrimination, when you are in the majority. When you are the minority though, you'll think differently.
You want communities to get rid of the "creepy people". So what if they get rid of the bisexual people? What if they get rid of pagans?
I'm talking about a new improved system of society. It must work for everyone. If we allow people to keep "creepy people" away, you are one of those "creepy people" they'll be keeping away. Not just you, probably everyone on this forum for one reason or another. If such a society was world wide, you'd not have a place you could go. Either conform to the norms of society, or be an outcast. Is that what you want? Do you want all of us "creepy people" to be outcasts?
Tony -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Tue, March 24, 2009 - 12:53 PMMy thoughts... you can't eat weeds, and, eventually, they will take over your garden... and then there will be no food being grown. The weeds will just take over and the garden will no longer be fulfilling its purpose (creating food).
I'm not advocating judgmental though but I know from direct experience that humans can benefit from structure and opportunities to make group decisions that are supported by consensus and "council" practices when they make decisions that effect the whole tribe.
One sick person can quickly spread their illness to others or add to a critical shift in the community's sickness. How will you attract healers as well? -
-
Re: 1000 hour entry requirement
Tue, March 24, 2009 - 6:50 PMone person's weed is another's butterfly habitat, medicine, food, r beautiful native or naturalized surprise.
someone who works out beautifully in one ciommunitymight just not be a good fit with another.
there's even a funny, sort of bluegrass song abut how "one mans weed is another an's pleasure, one man's work is anther man's leisure."
at age 50 plus with a bunch of varied group living experience, I know that there are all kinds of communities.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
