Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28
Like Tree20Likes

Thread: The Project for a New Global Millennium

  1. #11
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    27
    Thank you for your reply
    Thank you tuber
    Perhaps I'm an idealist, but i'm hoping to apply for a grant to cover the expenses. I don't think this will launch without some serious philanthropy. As for the experts, not everybody is in this for the money, even though we are all foced to use it. I am hoping to attract some "star power" in the early stages. An econmist like Robert Reich, perhaps, someone from the Rodale institute would have a chair on the planning commission. At this time I cannot be concerned with the logistics of actually building the project. I am focussed on getting a non profit together to recieve funds to finance the feasability study.
    Also, unlike the venus project I do not plan on building an entire city at first. It would be better to start with individual buildings in separate cities. The corporation I have in mind to that end would be formed as a social welfare organization with each participant holding one share in the enterprise. Yhe share holders would Build the buildings and operate and maintain them as well. The buildings would be designed for maximum efficieny to reduce operating costs giving them a competeive advantage over other designs. The goal is to realize a profit and reinvest it in the growth of the enterprise.
    As mentioned ealier, there would be two economic strategies necessary. The first I call social capitalism wherein the shareholders practice something quite similar to a Resource Based Economy among themselves and rabid capitalism with the rabid capitalists. It's kind of a corporate akido move, using their ideology to conquer Market share. A corporation would be able to take advatage of all the advantages that the rabid capitalists have lobbied for and all of the toxic econmics tools they have created. Once the communities are built and functioning autonamously, alleviated of the need to seek profits, then they would practice resource based economics.
    Given our dire situation, a well designed plan should attract sufficient backing. When enough people realize that only a plan of this magnitude will get us out of danger and considering our current economic situation, Ithink enough people will put their shoulder to the wheel.
    Mirabile Dictu
    jody
    Ernest likes this.

  2. #12
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    27
    Thank you for your interest. Ive posed a reply to the thread
    Mirabile Dictu
    jody

  3. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    238
    > hoping to apply for a grant to cover the expenses.

    Crowd funding could well be a quicker route, as grants are not always so easy to get.


    > funds to finance the feasability study.

    I'm reminded of a project in my part of the world that spent nearly 20 years doing a feasibility study for a wind farm, and it took less than a month to actually install the wind turbines once they got started. (The borrowed the entire amount of money needed..)

    As such, I would be tempted to skip that part and instead use the funds to start building something.

    As over the years/decades I've seen a lot of projects get stuck at funding the feasibility part and never going any further.

    If only they had used the money raised to spend it on their project, in many cases they would have finished it by now !


    Another area is that people estimate they need X Million to fund said project, and they never get X Million, so it never happens.

    Instead, if you find yourself with only Y Thousands, you then create a budget plan that enables you to build something within your means.

    I'm reminded of three groups:

    Group A, crowd funded $10,000 to build a greenhouse, they raised all the money and built one !

    Group B, got a grant for $60,000 to build a greenhouse, spent all the money, built half a greenhouse, never finished it..

    Group C, tried to crowd fund for $500,000 to build a greenhouse, could only raise $150,000, never went ahead with the project.


    My guess is that Group A did the best strategy. :-)
    Ernest likes this.

  4. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    238
    It might interest folk to know that Group B was mainly a bunch of academics, and Group C might be best described as a bunch of idealists.

    I'm an idealist myself, but I try also to be practical focused and a realist on what is doable within current resource limits.

    Often finding out what those limits are, can be difficult!

    For example, recently a project of mine hit a brick wall, and I couldn't find anyone who knew the answer to a particular problem, so I spent some money to find out the answer myself !

    Of course, afterwards someone showed up who showed me a website with the answer already on it..

    Now, where was that person a year ago when I asked everyone and their dog on the planet !

    But often, you can find yourself being the first one to do things, and there is no one else to ask about the answer, you have to find out the hard way whether what you want to do can work or not.


    A good discussion forum can be invaluable though in the early stages to help spot any glaringly obvious mistakes/etc. and to help brainstorm and wisdom of the crowd solutions to help one improve a plan, and perhaps to even constantly evolve and improve it as time goes on.

    I'm often tinkering with my own plans based on things I read, even here I find a wealth of information that helps me to better focus my efforts to produce something more efficient than my last design/plan.
    Ernest likes this.

  5. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    238
    > I am focussed on getting a non profit together

    I did ponder this myself, but looking more closely at the power structure in most non-profits, they tend to operate on a democratic voting process for decision making, and one thing I've noticed about democracy is when it becomes infected by folk with self serving interests who take over a non-profit and use it for personal gain.

    I'm reminded of a housing charity that existed for hundreds of years, and then a few years ago folk got in charge who sold off the housing to pay themselves huge bonuses !


    As such, you might want to consider a private business start up so you have full control over the decision making process and can avoid the problem of your group getting taken over by others with less than ideals in mind.


    A business is also a great way to teach you how to balance incoming and outgoings so you know how run something sustainable, where as a grant doesn't really teach you that kind of thing, and you are perhaps more likely to spend it and then never figure out a way to generate an income again to keep yourself afloat.

    Crowd funding is a bit like that, but often involves some kind of product folk are buying, rather than just gifting you some start up capital.


    I'm very keen to see us, anyone succeed in moving us forward, and hope that my years of study about many aspects might help others.

  6. #16
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    27
    Thanks for the advice. Once I have incorporated I will look into crowd funding although i fear $20'000 will just get things started. I don't know yet how much architects charge to design buildings or how much the software costs to do it myself. I do have some experience with architectural software but the unique design of my buildings may not be accommodated by existing software. This is going to be a hugely expensive project, on the order of trillions for global implementation. In a resource based economy it would be a matter of determining the necessity of the project and allocating the resources. In this economy it's a matter of proving that it would provide a return on investment, that it is monetarily viable.
    YouTuber likes this.

  7. #17
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by YouTuber View Post
    It might interest folk to know that Group B was mainly a bunch of academics, and Group C might be best described as a bunch of idealists.

    I'm an idealist myself, but I try also to be practical focused and a realist on what is doable within current resource limits.

    Often finding out what those limits are, can be difficult!

    For example, recently a project of mine hit a brick wall, and I couldn't find anyone who knew the answer to a particular problem, so I spent some money to find out the answer myself !

    Of course, afterwards someone showed up who showed me a website with the answer already on it..

    Now, where was that person a year ago when I asked everyone and their dog on the planet !

    But often, you can find yourself being the first one to do things, and there is no one else to ask about the answer, you have to find out the hard way whether what you want to do can work or not.


    A good discussion forum can be invaluable though in the early stages to help spot any glaringly obvious mistakes/etc. and to help brainstorm and wisdom of the crowd solutions to help one improve a plan, and perhaps to even constantly evolve and improve it as time goes on.

    I'm often tinkering with my own plans based on things I read, even here I find a wealth of information that helps me to better focus my efforts to produce something more efficient than my last design/plan.
    Academics and idealists usually get hung up in committees. If this plan had been wrought by a committee of idealists it would look much different than it does now and may not even be buildable.
    YouTuber likes this.

  8. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    238
    > In this economy it's a matter of proving that it would provide a return on investment

    Some crowd funded items only exist to produce a product, not necessarily to provide a return on investment.

    I think this point is somewhat a game changer in allowing businesses which normally would be considered too low profit a venture into to start up.


    One example that springs to mind is, to crowd fund building a solar farm for a town, which once built would provide a ration of free power to all of the inhabitants, and selling some of the power to local businesses to help cover operating costs.

    It wouldn't necessarily have to make a profit, only to break even.

    If there was some way to cover operating costs, then it could even give free electricity to business users. :-)

    Free electricity would be but one of many goods and services that could be provided for free, once the initial capital investment part has been secured.

    Whilst your typical crowd funding example might only raise $20,000 there are other examples that have raised a fair bit more:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...nding_projects

    Over a hundred million !

    So not an impossible idea that the future could be built this way, in steps.

    My hope is that we can help build some of those first steps that others can then build upon.

    Even TVP has been successful with crowd funding. :-)

    Now, if they would just finish that movie.. ;-)
    Last edited by YouTuber; 2 Weeks Ago at 12:13 PM. Reason: Tidy
    Ernest and jody like this.

  9. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    238
    > When enough people realize that only a plan of this magnitude will get us out of danger and
    > considering our current economic situation, Ithink enough people will put their shoulder to the wheel.

    I've seen good plans before, but few people was really into the hard work of making them happen.

    But.. crowd funding has changed that, because it is now quite easy to just throw a little bit of money at something and let someone else do all the work !

    Then the problem becomes one of finding enough skilled people to pay to work building said plan !


    I would think if one could start with the smallest example possible within your current budget, that this would help prove you are worth investing in for a bigger step.

    I'm reminded of this example, started by two people in a caravan, and has since grown:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Findhorn_Foundation

    Interestingly they manage a low carbon rating of about half the UK average, and if they could halve it again, could reach sustainable levels. (I hear the only reason it isn't lower, is because so many folk there like to fly..)

    But as we are developing electric planes, this should be in time more carbon friendly. :-)

    Assuming we aren't travelling by vacuum tubes everywhere thanks to E Musk..


    As such it would interest me to do my best to see plans stand the best chance of being actioned, and look in particular at the earliest stage of development and that first step or steps to getting the ball rolling and something built to encourage further investment and development.

    TZM for example has shown it can maintain a forum, where as many other organisations who had forums, no longer have one.

    So I wonder what their next stage is. :-)

  10. #20
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    27

    Regardless of how I get funding I still must obtain 501c3 status. Otherwise our tax laws require the payment of taxes even if the money is donated for a good cause. Obtaining that status also allows donors to deduct their contributions from their tax returns as well and gives them the confidence that their money is actually going to the cause for which it was donated. The IRS keeps a close watch on new startups to insure that they stay true to their stated purpose. At any rate the enterprise would need to establish itself as a legal entity at some time so it would be best to play by the rules from the beginning.

    Mirabile Dictu
    Jody

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
web statistics
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1