Not quite the same questions as in the thread "Can discussion of state/market economics …" so opening up some to-and-fro between Dave and I which was not public as it was on Google Docs (boo! :-) ) Anyway, here goes…

Simon Grant 10:36 Today

Short-term comment: just to note that I still disagree with this [one quote was, "Markets can allocate goods and services without planning. "] as it stands. We can have more debate on this later. I totally disagree with price being an effective and moral signalling mechanism, and the normal idea of "markets" is competition on price.

Dave Darby 11:04 Today

yeah, this one would be good to debate in public. I see it slightly differently in a mutual credit market, because people are in effect paying with their work. small businesses can set the credits they want for what they produce, and other members can accept it or go to another provider. but ultimately they're paying with what they produce, not with money (with all the shenanigans, fees, interest and extraction associated with it). and there are no monopolies to undercut everyone. Also, competition on quality is important too. imagine only having one baker in town, but you didn't like their bread.
I've had this debate with Diana Finch, who favours a gift economy, but has no roadmap to get there. we ended up agreeing that mutual credit could be a stepping stone to some kind of gift economy in the (distant) future. (I'm quite happy with mutual credit though - don't see how a gift economy could work (free riders etc.)

Simon Grant 11:08 Today

Yes, let's open up the debate somewhere more public. What I'm saying is that any market-like structures need more transparency and information than price, and that's a very big change from traditional markets.

Dave Darby 11:08 Today

'markets not capitalism' by charles johnson is good on this. read it a long time ago tho- have to read it again.

Dave Darby 11:12 Today

agreed. so stroud farmers' market - can chat with them, ask about how the produce their stuff, and most of them invite you to their place to have a look. that's an extreme example now, but it doesn't have to be in a commons / mutual credit world (but this is utopian fantasy from where we are now. i see it all as seeds / stepping stones).

Simon Grant 11:18 Today

Johnson, I see, page 60 and following … seems very confusing for the ordinary reader!

Dave Darby 11:26 Today

yes, I remember it's a collection of essays by different people I think - some of them need a lot of background reading. my mission is to simplify a lot of this stuff. I'm not wedded to markets btw, but mutual credit seems v central to commons to me, and that's all about a market. what else can allocate consumables and personal possessions. I can think of 1. self-sufficiency - too hard. 2. planning (Michael Albert's Parecon - too many boring meetings, and impossible anyway. 3. gift economy - never seen a convincing roadmap. 4. commitment pooling? I think that's market-ish in the same way mutual credit is - ie you 'pay' with your own work. You do useful stuff, other people do useful stuff. like medieval villages - no prices, and people kept 'score' in their heads. we just do it with apps now.

Simon Grant 11:28 Today

e.g. "Market anarchists must be clear, when we speak about the growth of “markets” and their role in social life, whether we are referring to markets as free exchange, or markets as a cash nexus. Both have a valuable role to play, but the kind of value they offer, and the conditions and context within which they have that value, depends on which we mean." page numbered 63, 76 in the PDF

Simon Grant 11:29 Today

Good backing for my cautionary comment, then! If you can rephrase, that would be good.

Dave Darby 11:31 Today

I added 'via mutual credit in a commons society'

Simon Grant 11:31 Today

The point, at risk of repetition, is that ethical exchange needs a whole lot more information – reputation, provenance, etc. etc. – than is normally given by markets

Simon Grant 11:34 Today

The thing, to me, is that the problems with markets aren't only caused by "the monopoly players and captured states of capitalism", but also, perhaps mainly, by the lack of information that would enable people to make choices in alignment with their values, commons or not.

Simon Grant 11:47 Today

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_(economics) is instructive, particularly the section on Definition

Dave Darby 11:52 Today

yes, on forum would be good. I've changed the whole of no. 18. I think you're right, it's crazy to scare off people who are natural allies, by saying things bluntly that might scare them off.