Capitalist pain hits a village commune

CNN ^

[Sensei Ern]

I meant $1,100,000.00 not $1,000,000.00.


And, that is down from 2 Million.

[Tulane]

The Amish have no prblem taking responsibility for themselves...these people obviously do....

[Tulane]

lol!

[Sir Gawain]

How is this different from a beijing sweatshop??

These people are here out of choice, not out of necessity. It's a free country. Let them organize their community however they choose.

[Triggerhippie]

Of course they do! I've seen similar efforts elsewhere, and if you get into the legalities every single one of those vests all real controlling interest in a very few persons. I'd bet the same is true here.

Every proletariat needs its dictatorship...

[No.6]

"Makes perfect sense. Socialism is in part predicated on the idea that 'others' cannot manage their lives and affairs as well as the leadership can, and hence the leadership must control, in their wise and benevolent hands, the assets of the group."

Let's be clear here, though. Let's assume that someone wanted to open up a tofu-and-hammocks arrangement under a capitalist model rather than this communist one.

They'd still buy some land, set up a shop, get people to show up and work. The owners are in control either way.

The capitalist model assumes the workers would also like a nice life for themselves and pays them accordingly, and produces a product that can survive competitively. As a result the workers and the owners share and enjoy.

The difference is that in the communist model the owners lie to their work force about who's really in charge, pay them next to nothing, and work them in miserable conditions. Only the owners gain any wealth out of this; the workers get nothing and if they leave, leave with nothing.

Just a case example to keep in mind next time some lib starts playing the class envy card; under the communist model ONLY the already-rich benefit.

[ctdonath2]

$1.1M revenues.
100 residents.
$11,000 revenue per person per year.
$2 stipend per person per day.
Assume: $5/day food, $2/day room per person per day (ballpark estimate minimum derived from my food/housing costs extrapolated to comfy hippie setting).
$3285 income per person per year.

A couple questions:
- At $9/day, they're better off than half the world's population (median income $2/day) ... so what's the problem?
- Meager incomes aside, where's the remaining $0.77M/year going?

[TomSmedley]

Generally, when I've dealt with people who would find this place attractive, are one thing: LAZY. They don't want to deal with the real world. BUT, they want to enjoy the perks of the real world, and use electricity, computers, cd players, cars, tvs, movies, healthcare, whatever, but they simply cannot handle the responsibility of fending for themselves and taking any risks, so they create this smug, cucooned community where they can indulge themselves day and night.

This same dynamic makes various Christian communes/cults attractive. I served my time in one back in the early 70s -- the sense of "belonging," of community, is wonderful. But the glad relinquishing of personal responsibility bites at the end, when push comes to shove, and it's time to take charge of yourself again. Susan Berg, daughter of "Moses" David Berg, said men coming out of such groups often need extra hand-holding, since they have a gap of several years in their resume, and an impaired work ethic. The flip side of living in "voluntary poverty" is the feeling of spiritual elitism, the feeling that the world owes you a living for being so special.

[posterchild]

Good clarification. BTW I don't begrudge the original founders maintaining control of thier original idea and land purchase. I presume that in the case of this commune this is made clear to prospective members. It is in essence a 'lifestyle themepark' experience the leadership provide to their members.

[posterchild]

where's the remaining $0.77M/year going? State, Federal and FICA taxes I presume....

[No.6]

"I presume that in the case of this commune this is made clear to prospective members."

Oh no ... read their FAQ and such. It's all about the sharing and the caring.

If someone got uppity and actually tracked down the paperwork and asked one of the 7 why they owned everything, first they'd be harangued by the fellow-travellers, then if they persisted the 7 might explain that the big bad outside world required it, then if they still persisted they'd be thrown out.

[posterchild]

I do however not want to presume too much about this particular group, especially since all I know is from their webpage. Though such an organization is very ripe for corrupt leadership, there is no evidence from the publicly available information that this particular group has succumbed.
The sharing and caring could in theory pertain merely to social activities and to *income* derived from businesses in this 'theme park.' If a friend and I routinely went fishing on a third friend's lake, and we agreed to share our fish equally among all three people, I wouldn't presume I had acquired ownership of the lake, nor would it naturally follow that I could be talked into surrendering my fishing rod to the lake owner.
Viewed from afar it doesn't come across as a cult with an unquestionable leader, and it does say in its FAQ that:
Members keep all assets they come with (they are frozen during membership), but all income from our community businesses goes to the collective; no one earns individual "wages" or a "salary".
(I am though suspicious as to why assets must be 'frozen' rather than kept merely kept in a normal individual account at a bank or brokerage house.)

Disclaimer: I am neither a member, prospective member, nor spokesperson of Twin Oaks:)

[jla]

The Photo Gallery is interesting, to say the least.

Blessing Way gathering.

Description: Large gathering of women for a ritual preparation for Gwen's birth to Thea (on right with colorfully braided hair). Group includes friends and exmembers. Photo by Joan Mazza.

[jla]

Kenric the Queen's birthday.
Description : Sky, Thea, Kenric, and Hawina pictured celebrating Kenrique's birthday.

I don't get it. Kenric/Kenrique is a guy. How could he be the "queen"?

[Larry Lucido]

[ArrogantBustard]

Gimme my TWO DOLLARS!!!

[xpertskir]

"forming a self-sustaining rural community"

Self sustaining means that you aren't selling things to the outside world.

I HATE HIPPIES.

4 years of college in Boulder will do it to you.

On another note up yours Ward Churchill

[A CA Guy]

Were those hammocks made of hemp?

[Gone GF]

"The Amish have no prblem taking responsibility for themselves...these people obviously do...."

From what I see they've sustained themselves for 40 years and even expanded their property. Adults work at least 40 hours per week in the commune businesses and as far as I can tell they don't take government welfare. I know their hammocks are a good, solid product. Some of them don't want to work more hours in the tofu place, but from the sound of it, I wouldn't want to, either.

It's not a lifestyle I'd want, but exactly how are they hurting anybody?

[tgslTakoma]

This is absolutely hilarious!

Read the whole article, but be forewarned... you will laugh 'til your sides hurt!

"We work for a lifestyle, not a wage," says Thea, 35, a mother with dreadlocks who follows the Twin Oaks custom of not using a last name.

Twin Oaks is a collective: Although volunteer managers are responsible for making the business decisions, all members have a say. Most don't aspire to join the managerial ranks. "You don't get more money or a bigger room being a manager, just more of a headache," says Apple, 32, who joined the commune in 2003 and works in the tofu hut, among other places.

This gal, Apple, sums up the main failure of communism - nobody gets any extra pay or benefits for being a manager, so who wants to work harder for no perks?!

There is so much more in this article that is hilarious. Really. It's worth the read.