Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

cyb3rd4ndy wrote

Investment in public infrastructure would come from decisions made by the future users of said infrastructure. This assumes some sort of collective decision-making body with the power to plan for the distribution of resources. In a mutualist society, the decision-making body would be some sort of public bank that lends free credit to those who would propose an acceptable, or the best plan for development. Otherwise, instead of a public bank, the commons would be the source of resources available for investment. The difference between these is the use of credit.

That applies to town planning and the transportation systems that come under those plans.

At least that is what I think anarchists who talk about these questions a lot are saying.

5

subrosa wrote

Not a particularly appetizing presentation of mutualist banking, but that's a whole lot less annoying than "Communism doesn't have money! There, problem solved."

9

tuesday OP wrote

I was making a joke.

But thanks for the thoughts.

6

cyb3rd4ndy wrote

oh yeah I mean heh yeah I knew that heh of course I knew that heh heh

7

lettuceLeafer wrote

Not to many people have a really hopeful Anarcho society planned out. While I disagree with the concept too I do like u the dicotomy as it varies discussions from perspectives. So no worries hah

3