fbpx

Category Archives: Economy

Order By
Filter
Format
standard
video
audio
Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on VkontakteShare on Odnoklassniki

Residents Collaborate for Change

“We are here to change the paradigm, how you think, about public housing residents,” says Lashkela “Nikki” Steele, the Parliamentarian and Service Coordinator for J-Rab (Jurisdiction Resident Advisory Board) Inc. J-Rab advocates for social justice and represents more than 15,000 public housing residents.

Nikki shares how J-Rab’s business and service coordination center is working through the six “p’s” to prosperity. The first task is planning and looking at residents who have capacities and skills that are marketable. They are bringing resident-owned businesses together and supporting them. “There is good every single day that goes on (in public housing),” she says.

A mother of three and grandmother of 11, Nikki is a Sullivan Community College graduate and aspires to receive a Bachelor’s and then Master’s degree. Listen to her talk at the “Sanctuary as Jubilee” Community Forum and Conversation:

Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on VkontakteShare on Odnoklassniki

Changing the Neighborhood Conversation

Part of Jubilee work is to change the narrative away from the predominant culture where people who don’t have wealth are considered broken. Peter Block says reconstructing our language and thinking involves changing how neighborhoods are measured.

He’s working on an economic neighborhood vitality index that measures the economic productivity of citizens and neighborhoods that are traditionally called broken, poor or untrained. Questions such as: What are you good at? What do you make/fix/care for? Where do you get money if you need to borrow it?

“That’s the real Jubilee idea,” says Peter, convener of the Jubilee Circle. “It’s not we’re going to write out a check and forgive the debts. It’s that we’re going to re-construct the narrative of who these neighbors are.”

He also shares about the need to welcome and get connected with people who are strangers. Peter was one of the speakers at The Economics of Compassion Initiative’s “Sanctuary as Jubilee” Community Forum and Conversation. Listen to more:

Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on VkontakteShare on Odnoklassniki

Personal Jubilee Journey

Cincinnati resident Ras TafarI shares about his own path to Jubilee and involvement with his building’s J-Rab (Jurisdiction Resident Advisory Board) – which advocates for social justice and represents more than 15,000 public housing residents. He shares about the impact of getting involved in J-Rab meetings, learning about being a section three resident and making community connections.

Listen to more of his story from The Economics of Compassion Initiative’s “Sanctuary as Jubilee” forum:

Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on VkontakteShare on Odnoklassniki

Faith Communities Form Sanctuary Movement

How does the world we live in give rise to the need for sanctuary as Jubilee? In response to vulnerable community members and undocumented immigrants the Cincinnati faith community is knitting together a sanctuary movement, with roots after the Hebrew scriptures cities of refuge. Places of worship are viewed as a safe place, and 17 congregations are offering sanctuary.

Rev. Troy Jackson, Executive Director at the AMOS Project and former Senior Pastor at the University Christian Church, discusses how Jubilee involves a restoration of property and place and equalizing.

Listen to Rev. Jackson’s message from the Economics of Compassion Initiative’s “Sanctuary as Jubilee” forum:

Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on VkontakteShare on Odnoklassniki

Did You Know There’s a Union Co-op Movement?

What possibilities do worker-owned co-ops hold for an alternative economy? In the Basque region of Spain, Mondragon is the world’s largest group of industrial worker-owned co-operatives transforming the region from poverty to thriving and resilient communities. In Cincinnati, the Cincinnati Union Co-op Initiative (CUCI) is doing the same.

Michael Peck, co-founder of 1worker1vote.org and a North American Delegate for Mondragon, and Kristen Barker, president and co-founder of the CUCI, join Peter Block and John McKnight in a conversation about union co-op possibilities, successes and struggles. Listen to the full conversation:

 

Quotes

“This integrated network of co-ops is one of the exciting things that is now coming to life in a much bigger way in the United States because of this Mondragon union co-op.” Kristen Barker

“Stakeholders are coming together who have decided that it’s time to re-own their own economy. It’s time to take their economic sovereignty back and they look to us as a way forward to do that, not just a pathway out of poverty, but a pathway to actual prosperity.” Michael Peck

More Resources

1worker1vote.org

Mondragon: http://www.mondragon-corporation.com/eng/

Cincinnati Union Co-op Initiative: https://www.cincinnatiunioncoop.org/

Upcoming event: National Union Co-op Symposium

Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on VkontakteShare on Odnoklassniki

Creating an Alternative Economy: BALLE’s Michelle Long

Michelle Long, BALLE (Business Alliance for Local Living Economies) executive director, shares the story of BALLE’s co-founder Judy Wick, who built the socially responsible White Dog Café in Philadelphia through sourcing based on relationships with the land and people in her community.

Founded in 2001, BALLE (pronounced “bahl-ee”) works with local businesses who want to collaborate for the good of their communities, and helps the communities share ideas in various places in North America.

BALLE formed a Community Foundation Circle for foundation leaders who want to see investments used to strengthen community economies. Traditionally, when a donor gives a community foundation gift, the money is placed as a community grant. People are waking up to using money for impact investments.

Listen to her full conversation with Peter Block and John McKnight:

Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on VkontakteShare on Odnoklassniki

Jubilee Forum 2 – Reverend Rob Rhodes

Jubilee Forum 2, September 3, 2015

Reverend Rob Rhodes of Christ Church Cathedral speaks of the Kingdom of God in contrast to the Kingdom of Pharaoh, and the presence of Jubilee in the New Testament.  The idea of Jubilee has existed at times, now is the time of remembering it, living the Gospel, bringing it into our community, embracing an alternative economy, as the center of Christianity.

 

Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on VkontakteShare on Odnoklassniki

Jubilee Forum 1 – Rev. Damon Lynch III

Reverend Damon Lynch III welcomes us to New Prospect Baptist Church as the Village Well. He connects the biblical idea of Jubilee to our modern cultural struggles. He quotes extensively from the Randall Robinson book: The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks and narrates the story of a black male over the generations.  He explores what this means for us today.

Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on VkontakteShare on Odnoklassniki

Jubilee Forum 1 – Walter Brueggemann

Jubilee Forum 1, August 13, 2015

Walter Brueggemann, retired (supposedly) Old Testament Scholar and author, speaks to our relationship with money. He speaks to the exodus story and the wilderness from the Old Testament and the Pharaoh economy. It is about our passion for austerity and the possibility of creating an alternative.

Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on VkontakteShare on Odnoklassniki

The Hometown of Your Dreams

Jeff Yost

Jeff Yost talks to John McKnight and Peter Block about the Nebraska Community Foundation: a way to educate, train and initiate conversation between community members. He discusses how philanthropy can create jobs and help sustain community for generations to come, rather than only for the current generation.


For ten years following the 2010 publication of their book The Abundant Community: Awakening the Power of Families and Neighborhoods, John and Peter hosted conversations with neighborhood activists on their community-building work.  All their ideas are still at work and continue to be influential for anyone engaged in creating the future in the present. The transcript here has been edited for length and clarity.

 

The Hometown of Your Dreams:

Conversation with Jeff Yost

 

January 14, 2015

 

John McKnight: Welcome everybody. We are going to have a real treat today because I want to share with you a discovery I made and some of you may have made it too. A couple of years ago, I found out that in one of our states, and in over 250 small towns, mostly in smaller cities, there had developed organizations of people whose insight was that there was a lot of wealth and that wealth could be identified and invested in ways that would shape the future and define the communities possibilities. It is a movement that has spread so far that I could hardly believe it.

 

So, today we are joined by Jeff Yost who is one of the people at the center of getting this initiative started. So, Jeff, welcome and I wonder if you could let us know a little bit of what the antecedent was to your focusing on local wealth. I know there was a study that got you started. Could you tell us about it?

 

Jeff Yost: Absolutely. First of all, John and Peter, thank you for having me and thank you for inviting the Nebraska Community Foundation to be part of this conversation. We are certainly honored to be here alongside Asset-Based Community Development and all the terrific work that is explored within your book The Abundant Community –– these have been the undergirding principles of our work for the last 20 years or so. It is just an honor to be here. Thanks.

 

The Nebraska Community Foundation got started 20 years ago and we are just celebrating our 20th anniversary with the whole idea that in so many ways communities had changed and really didn’t have the same type of discretion that they had previously. Certainly, within the context of Nebraska we needed to find different ways to have a more positive narrative about the future. We wanted to have a more positive conversation between parents and their kids over the kitchen table and between adults and youth in communities, and also to try and attract that next generation in wanting to be a part of all of this work.

 

So, much of the underpinning for this work started with the tremendous outmigration that we have seen over the decades and through many rural places over Nebraska and throughout the northern Great Plains. How do you help in creating even greater pride in place? How do you help people to craft a narrative where they are talking in positive and opportunistic terms about the future of their place? This has been a work in progress over time, but one of pieces we started with is that in many places around the country, community foundations have gotten started and we are certainly interested in the whole idea of how to use local charitable giving as one more tool within that community development puzzle. I think we have found that it is even more powerful than we thought it might be.

 

To start, I want to talk about how we define the Nebraska Community Foundation. We always talk about the Nebraska Community Foundation as being a community development institution that uses philanthropy as a tool. We are not a charity. We are not in the business of doing things for people. We are in the business of figuring out how we can be a value-added partner to community leaders to help them build the community of their dreams.

 

A few years into this work there was study done at Boston College called “Millionaires and the Millennium” in which Paul Schervish and John Havens explored the whole inter-generational transfer of wealth and the magnitude of that. If you are in a place like Nebraska, a lot of the next generation had in fact migrated to someplace else. Not only was the population of many of these places shrinking, but also the demographics of these places was aging because the people that were leaving were, of course, younger people and people early in their careers. So, it is not a very long walk to figure out if there is this massive transfer of wealth that is happening between generations and if the next generation doesn’t, in fact, inhabit that same place, then not only are you losing all that human resource capacity, if the next generation doesn’t return to that community and live and work there, you also are going to potentially to lose much of the extraordinary financial wealth that has been built up, especially since World War II.

 

So, over the years we have done few of these transfers of wealth studies. We always knew the transfer of wealth was huge. I am an economist by training, and I honestly didn’t have any clue that it was going to be of this magnitude. Nebraska is about 1.8 million people. It is a very large geography. There are actually 532 communities within the state . It is about 500 miles from end to end if you go from northwest to southeast. For those 1.8 million people in that reasonably large geographical area, our estimate, and we think it is reasonably conservative, is that some 600 billion dollars will transfer from one generation to the next in the next 50 years. Those are staggering sums.

 

A longtime colleague of mine, a gentleman who is the co-director of the Center for Rural Entrepreneurship, is Don Mackey. Don and I are the primary authors of the original study. Don has gone on to do this type of analysis in many, many other places around the country. In the context of Nebraska, we have used it not only in understanding the large macro-economic opportunity, but for the 93 counties in Nebraska, we actually figured out a methodology for creating an estimate for each and every one of those counties. We even break it down proportionately to help community leaders to begin to think of endowment building within the context of that transfer of wealth.

 

So, let’s say there is a particular county where the transfer of wealth over the next 50 years is estimated to be one billion dollars. Part of what we will talk with community leaders about –– and help them go through a vision and action planning process and ultimately a goal setting exercise associated with endowment building for their place –– is, what if just 5% of that transfer of wealth were given back to the place where it was made and accumulated? So, 5% of one billion dollars is 50 million dollars. If that is endowed, and you assume that you are going to get a 4 or 4½% rate of return or a payout from that particular endowment, 50 times .045 is over two million dollars annually that would be a perpetual income stream to benefit that place.

 

We all know the money is important, but at the end of the day communities are made up by people and people being in relationship with one another. People really trusting one another and having an opportunistic vision of what they can build together. So, if you can connect those sorts of relationships with that vision and with that capital and especially if that capital is unrestricted in nature, there is a lot you can get done.

 

Suppose you think about that philanthropy within the context of how does that philanthropy really serve as a margin of excellence for the future of our place, and assume that much of what we already do we will continue doing –– that is, to help people in need and to provide government services and these sorts of things. If you think about it that way, that endowment being put into place for the future of that particular geography, and then that endowment payout being used to do something above and beyond what we are already doing, it becomes a pretty exciting thing to be a part of. What could we use that on? How could we use that for youth engagement, business development, entrepreneurship, leadership development, and intergenerational conversations?

 

All these sorts of things we know help to build the social fabric in our place and we are using philanthropy to try to build a whole series of economic opportunities as well. As John mentioned, we are now networking in about 250 communities around the state. The network looks different in every one of those places. It has been a really fun journey so far.

 

John: Take us to one community and give us a little snapshot of what you might have done to trigger the local folks who became engaged in identifying and collecting this wealth. How do you start that?

 

Jeff: The first part I start with is that communities can only be built and sustained by the people who live, work, and sleep there. So, this is a very decentralized system. We are interested in being somebody’s value-added partner. So, one of the premises here is that this has to be community driven and everything has to be on a willing partner platform. So, to start with, we are interested in working with people who are interested in working with us.

 

The first thing that would happen is somebody wanted to create an affiliated fund within the context of the Nebraska Community Foundation. Let’s take my little hometown of Red Cloud. Those of you that are fans of American literature know that it is the home of Willa Cather. So, you have an extraordinary cultural asset in Red Cloud, Nebraska, and Red Cloud has about 1,000 people. It’s about 60 miles off the Interstate. So, it’s a rural agrarian place and a fair way away from the traditional economic corridor that goes across the state.

 

Red Cloudvstarted an affiliated fund and those community leaders decided that they wanted that affiliated fund to just concentrate on Red Cloud and the trade area associated with it. So, in other places community leaders may decide they want a community-based affiliated fund to cover a county or a community-based affiliated fund that is going to cover all of the communities within their school district. Within our system, all of those are locally governed issues and things that can always morph and evolve over time.

 

In the case of Red Cloud they started their affiliated fund. They raised some money for various projects over time. At one point, a resident who had grown up there, and was also serving as a member of the Nebraska Community Foundation statewide board of directors, made a challenge grant to help those community leaders to begin to build an unrestricted endowment for the future for that community. It was a $100,000 challenge grant that the community needed to match one to one. So, that got started.

 

About six years ago we helped them go through a really intensive process of vision, mission, and values identification and to begin to think through what are the strategic opportunities within this particular community. Of course, in this case you have the incredible cultural asset. So, how would you use heritage tourism as one of the primary drivers for that? This action-driving process ultimately led the advisory committee and community leaders to determine they really wanted to concentrate on heritage tourism as an economic development strategy, with early childhood education and childcare as their two primary pieces. Those community leaders have made tremendous progress. There are donors that have stepped up in reasonably significant ways to help some of this come true from a programming standpoint and a facilities standpoint.

 

All the while what we are always interested in is how to engage more and more people within your community. Not only in being engaged in that conversation, but ultimately investing their time, talent, and treasure within the context of that fund in that community to help continue the building of all that future.

 

That’s a quick story and we’ve got dozens of those. It’s really fun to see all the amazing work that is happening.

 

Peter Block: Your discoveries of the existence of this wealth are quite amazing. How is it different from most every city that has a community foundation? What would you say is unique about your thinking or your approach to what you are doing?

 

Jeff: I think it is always important to talk about all of this stuff. None of this is ever a good or bad. It is what we have discerned as making the most sense here, in our place and our circumstance with our people.

 

Peter: What is the essence of that?

 

Jeff: Community foundations are incredible community development tools. I’ve got wonderful colleagues all over the country that are helping to run and build community foundations and they all look different. Within the context of Nebraska, I would say there are three things that are very different about the Nebraska Community Foundation.

 

First, the Nebraska Community Foundation in itself is not a grantmaker. All our grantmaking actually happens in the context of affiliated funds. That is very intentional because, ultimately, we want communities’ leaders to be very honest with us about what the opportunities are, what the needs are, and what all the things we need to work on are as we partner with these communities to help themselves. So, the Nebraska Community Foundation is not a grant maker. We are primarily an educator, a trainer, a facilitator, and in some respect a connecting tissue.

 

John: You also manage the money, don’t you?

 

Jeff: We do. When you talk about the Nebraska Community Foundation, there is just one corporation, and there are about 225 affiliated funds within that one corporation. There are probably 850 or 900 sub-funds within those 225 affiliated funds. There is a very substantial financial and investment management infrastructure. So, part of the management is understanding that for a community leader, especially within the context of a small town or neighborhood, how we have all been to those organizing meetings where we want to get something done. The critical question is, who wants to be treasurer? We are trying to help to take some of that burden off local leaders so they can really focus on mission fulfillment and not just all of the administrative machinations associated with having a non-profit organization.

 

John: So, you basically are the investment manager. Then on an annual basis the local group gets its proportionate share of whatever the growth is.

 

Jeff: Yes, sort of like that. It’s all segregated by fund and by donor intent. Then it’s helping those community leaders to really pursue not only having resources, but also connecting those resources with a vision and engaging members of their community. What do they want to do next for the future of that place?

 

Peter: There are some large cities in Nebraska or concentrated populations. Have you seen where an affiliated fund would be actually organized around a neighborhood?

 

Jeff: We have had a few neighborhood associations with affiliated funds over time, but historically most our work is within regional trade centers and small communities around the state, plus we do a fair number of efforts that are either regional or state-wide. So, there is a Lincoln Community Foundation. There is an Omaha Community Foundation. Great people doing great work. They are certainly not organized in the same way as the Nebraska Community Foundation is, but there are lots of opportunities to work together and to support one another in our work.

 

If I might, I want to circle back around to that prior question for just a moment in terms of what’s the other thing that differentiates the Nebraska Community Foundation. John, this is something that you have witnessed a couple of years in a row. We are really invested in peer learning. In helping adults to have experiential learning, but also having those community leaders really be in conversation with one another. I am absolutely of the opinion that people hear something differently from a peer than they do from someone who is professionalized about their approach to it or being paid for doing that work.

 

A tremendous amount of our training and education is actually done within the context of peer learning and peer mentoring. From one affiliated leader from one community helping affiliated leaders from a community down the road to understand their story, but also to help them work on what is next in their community. In Nebraska there is this game called “Six Degrees of Separation of Kevin Bacon.” Have you heard of that before?

 

John/Peter: Yes.

 

Jeff: In the context of Nebraska, we are only separated by two degrees. If you don’t know somebody, you know somebody that knows somebody.

 

A big part of our work is being connected and being in relationship with lots and lots of different people. The interesting thing about using philanthropy as a community development tool is that you can’t make anybody do anything. All we can do is motivate and inspire people, but who ultimately is in the best position to do that are the people who are already in relationship with one another.

 

So, that is much of what we are trying to do: to help community leaders to become comfortable and confident to be able to talk to their friends, neighbors, and people that they have deep trusting relationships with about what a difference that the person they are talking with could make in the future of their place. That conversation obviously ranges all over the place. Sometimes, it is about making a charitable gift. Sometimes, it’s about becoming a leader of that fund. Sometimes, it’s about volunteering their time and talent to help to get something done. John, you have been so articulate over the years about how important invitation is as part of community building. We really try to help community leaders to understand just how important and profound that invitation is within the community building process.

 

John: Give us an example of how the fund is manifested by the activity of how many people ––4, 5, 6, 20, 50? And how are those people identified and coalesced?

 

Jeff: You are absolutely right in that we have affiliated funds that have leadership groups. We call them advisory committees. Those funded advisory committees might range between five community leaders and maybe twenty. In some funds they will have a really active and robust sub-committee structure. So, the membership of those sub-committees might then total up to maybe forty or fifty people, just depending on the context of the place. Then you might have other things happening where literally hundreds of people are part of helping to build and manifest that. Those groups are in fact self-perpetuating groups.

 

Some might say that’s not the way to do it. What I would say to any of that is that within the context of Nebraska, we found that is the structure that works best for community building here. People who are already in relationship with one another and looking around the table and then asking who else they need to connect with or what other opportunities are there. So, in some communities they have entirely local leadership. In some community-based affiliated funds there are alumni and expatriates that participate as a part of that.

 

We are interested in educating, training, and sharing effective practices, but ultimately we are not interested in telling people that they have to do it one way or another. A longtime colleague has a little quip: Community building isn’t like rocket science, we actually know how to put a man on the moon. We are constantly learning and evolving what we are doing here. One of the things we know is that communities that are doing really well in this work are communities that are figuring out how they are engaging dozens and hundreds of their neighbors in conversations about the future of their place and inviting them to be a part of that.

 

So, again, it’s much of what you have written about and theorized about and practiced over the years in terms of how important that active invitation is.

 

John: You also have observed the difference between the kind of present-day function of an elected body like the city council, the village board, and the affiliated fund. Could you say a few words about that distinction?

How you could think about local place and needing people collectively to get things done. The city council is often thought of as a group to get things done, but the affiliated fund is a different group of people getting things done. What’s the difference?

 

Jeff: I think the difference is a couple of things. One is the fact that in using philanthropy as one of the primary community development tools you can’t make anybody do anything. So, that in and of itself fundamentally differentiates government because we are not assessing taxes or fees from anyone. It’s all willing partners and people willing to be engaged. The second one is, and this is a generalization, but I think to a large extent that governments primarily focus on now and the very near term. I would hope that our affiliated funds, especially those that are building endowments for the future of the place, are really more focused on the future. Or more focused on what sort of place do we want to have 10 and 20 years from now as opposed to 3 to 5 years from now.

 

Again, that is a generalization because government does do work that has generational impact, through infrastructure, technology, and other things. Still, I think that one of he key differentiating factors is that government is primarily focused on now and the short-term.

 

The Nebraska Community Foundation is an organization that isn’t really focused on relief. We are an institution that is focused on development. So, sometimes you will have a tragic circumstance happen in a place and the people in that place need relief. We have got lots of incredible partners out there that are really good at that work. So, we’ve decided that is not our work. Our work is to help people focus on the future and what things help to build and ultimately magnetize this community so that people say, That’s where I want to live and work. That’s where I want to raise my family. That’s where I want to have my business.

 

So, the Nebraska Community Foundation and its affiliated funds is not all things to all people. I think we have done a nice job of helping lots of community leaders focus on the future in ways that they hadn’t previously.

 

John:  You also in some of these places find that the local people engage a significant number of the local citizens in discussions that would result in their joint dialogue and thinking together about the future rather than four or five or ten people that are on the affiliated fund itself.

 

Jeff: Absolutely. A big part of what we are trying to do is to help people to not only envision but also to plan for the future, and a big part of that entire process is figuring out how we can have a community-wide conversation about that future and what all of us collectively desire. In many cases we will have a community wide envisioning session. Or we might have several of those. In the community of Norfolk, we helped to facilitate six of those for constituencies like middle school students, high school students, the Chamber of Commerce, non-profit executives, elders, and people that were already investors in that affiliated fund. A variety of different constituencies.

 

We help start the conversation and then figure out how to connect some of those conversations because many times –– and we’ve all seen this many times –– people accidentally end up talking past one another as opposed to talking with one another. Sometimes within these sessions we are just helping people to make those connections to make more competent assumptions than they had previously.

 

Peter: I have one question. There is a lot of conversation about poverty and wealth inequality. I am sure that Nebraska is hit by that. How do you think about that? Have you seen affiliated groups, for example, actually capitalize or start small businesses? I know that there are a lot regional efforts, like you mentioned about your town becoming a heritage tour destination to get more tourists that way. Talk about that.

 

Jeff: There are a couple of pieces. Let’s start with the individual piece, in particular. One of the things we have always tried to look at, within the context of Nebraska and especially the outmigration of young people, is what things can you do to create greater economic opportunity as well as greater opportunism and optimism about the future? A part of that might be helping to build a collective economic development infrastructure. We have helped to do that in some of the communities and counties that we have worked in. For example, amalgamate federal, state, local, and government dollars along with philanthropy dollars to have economic development professionals. Then how do those economic development professionals really focus on the things we can do to not only increase economic opportunity in this place, but also to change the conversation with young people about where they want to live and work as adults.

 

Much of our work is around supporting both an entrepreneurship curriculum as well as entrepreneurs. Connecting that with leadership development and skills associated with group dynamics. Having that conversation in as many ways possible with young people about where they want to be and what they want to be a part of. Then ultimately the philanthropy ends up being the glue that helps hold all that together over time in comparison to grantmaking. We have all been through the process where you apply for a state or federal grant, you start doing some of that work, but the grant period is three years. Well, what happens in the fourth? Many times, those people end up spending their time just trying to sustain the small institution they started as opposed to really getting to concentrate on their mission.

 

The other one that I will list is what we refer to as non-traditional scholarships. In some of our community-based affiliated funds they have identified one of the most effective ways of helping people that are currently working part-time service sector jobs is to help them return to school and maybe get an associate degree or an additional certificate or whatever the case may be. So, these scholarships are for things like helping an LPN return to school and become a registered nurse. Helping a high school educated mechanic to become a certified diesel mechanic. Helping a paraprofessional within the school system become a certified teacher. All this transforms part-time service sector working people into people who are clearly members of the middle-class.

 

We have seen a lot of terrific work happen with that approach and I think it has also changed the conversation around scholarships in general. If you are going to invest these community resources, then how do you invest them so the community and the individual both benefit?

 

John: Because a lot of scholarships invested in getting people to go to the university are really an investment in their leaving town.

 

Jeff: Yes, and we are certainly not in the business of saying we shouldn’t be sending people off to college. We know that in this economy we need everybody to have more than a high school degree. That doesn’t mean you have to cut off your nose to spite your face. Certainly, we can set up scholarships and we have done dozens of these, whereby preference is given to students who say they are interested in returning to that community or their region after they complete school.

 

Most important, it is not about holding somebody to some rules around this; it is the opportunity to have a conversation about what they want and how what they want, in fact, coincides with what is best for the community and that it isn’t different from that. How do you begin and sustain that conversation with people: that you are a member of our community and we want you to continue to be a member of our community?

 

Peter: Some people are writing in the chat. I don’t know if you can see it.

 

Jeff, are you able to see the chat happening?

 

Jeff: Yes, I’m looking through them now.

 

Maggie Rogers: Okay, great. It sounds like you have already answered one of the questions or even a couple of the questions. We also have a caller.

 

Debbie (caller): I’m from Austin, Texas, and a lot of people in Austin have been talking about the Nebraska effort, which prompted me to dial in. I thank Jeff for giving us more context, information, and background about your study and what it has meant to you because here we have a new head to our community foundation who is trying some new and innovative things. So, potentially we will be following in your footsteps.

 

Peter: Thanks, Debbie. Anyone else in line, Maggie?

 

Michelle Strutzenberger (caller): I am calling in from Peterborough, Ontario. Thanks, Peter and John, for hosting this conversation with Jeff. I‘ve seen that the Democracy Collaborative in Ohio recently released a report on Innovative Community Foundations. They shared the stories of 29 United States and 1 Canadian foundation. One element they mentioned is a growing exploration of something called impact investing by these foundations. So, you mentioned that the Nebraska Community Foundation in itself is not a grantmaker, but its 225 affiliated funds are. What possibilities do you see for these funds engaging in this sort of impact investing or social finance type work?

 

Jeff: By impact investing are you connecting it to things like mission related investment and program related investments?

 

Michelle: There is an expectation of both a financial and a social return. So, there is that sort of blended idea.

 

Jeff: Well, certainly the point of having any of these resources is to be able to help people create community impact in their place. I am a big believer that when you have seen one community then you have seen one community. Making generalizations around what is a good investment and what is not can be a really dicey proposition. That’s part of why we try to focus on how you connect the grantmaking with the process of engaging lots and lots of people in building that collective vision through a planning process. Creating priorities because we know we are not going to have enough resources or enough leadership or enough time to be able to do all these things at once.

 

Part of what I think you are working on within that process of engaging people and continuing to funnel down toward moving from lots and lots of things being important to a few things being priorities is the opportunity to see something change. The connecting piece to that –– and I am hopeful that many of you are familiar with it –– is the concept of self-fulfilling prophecy. Over time I have become a big believer that a community has a self-fulfilling prophecy just like an individual does. All these process things that we are discussing today are about how you help that community to identify where they are at as it relates to their self-concept and their self-fulfilling prophecy. How do you help them to continue to discern how to make that better and how to make that more optimistic? Grantmaking can certainly be a key tool within the context of that.

 

The final thing I will say on this question is that sometimes within the concept of when we have an intersection between community and philanthropy, we end up putting too much emphasis on philanthropy and not enough emphasis on community. I’ve become very comfortable saying over time that money is an important tool, but it is only one of many tools required to do good community building.

 

At the end of the day, and the transfer of wealth studies were all intended to help make this point, the limiting resource here isn’t money. We are an extraordinarily wealthy country. We’re an extraordinarily wealthy society. We can pretty much choose to do what we choose to do. So, the question is, how do you choose to focus on community building, creating opportunities, and creating more just outcomes for more people? To me this is more a function of leadership and more a function of vision and more a function of engagement than it is a function of capital. They are all important, but within the context of community building I’m convinced that money is not the limiting resource to getting things done. It’s going to be lots of other pieces. The vision and the leadership and the engagement are in place. I’ve now got years and years of evidence that we can figure out how to access the money to help get that done.

 

Peter: I think the question is whether you feel that a lot of people like venture capitalists and people like that were turning things upside down in alignment with what you are talking about. Saying we are going to invest, but the question of return is secondary or third. Where we want to invest is in new ventures that have a social justice component or social impact. The impact investment in something called SoCal. It’s just not the community foundations’ philanthropy, it’s also local people with all the same goals that you have of keeping it here and building a place and changing the criteria of what constitutes a good investment. Your thinking about that is in aligned with that very much.

 

Jeff: There are a couple of notes here on the questions that people have asked that I think might be interesting to connect to. Is that okay?

 

Peter: Sure, we’ve got about five minutes.

 

Jeff: There is  one saying that a good related resource for trust oriented grassroots relational organizing is The Network Weaver Handbook. I think that is absolutely correct. A woman named June Holley from Athens, Ohio, created Network Weaving, and I find it to be extraordinarily useful work. She has been working on this for a couple of decades and doing a terrific job. I’m actually having a series of conversations with John, Tom Mosgaller, and others around how to connect network weaving and asset mapping within the context of a particular place, helping them not only to fully articulate their vision and move that from plan to opportunity, but also how to use this to be an even greater connection with all of these people that care and are willing to step up and lead and support. So, that’s  another piece of building up this ecosystem.

 

John: Any other questions in the chat that you want to respond to?

 

Jeff: I like the last one and I would be interested in the two of you talking about this a little bit: Local people are being witnessed by you as they assumed dominion over their inner and external resources. It’s a huge discovery of personal power.

 

That’s a really important statement within the context of this work over time. It’s never about the money and it’s always about the people. Helping people to have confidence and knowing that their work is important and honorable and that they are difference makers.

 

Peter: I think that part of the work that you are doing, Jeff, is helping people come to terms with wealth. You could call it the right use of wealth in this consumerist society, surplus society, and accumulation society. Most of us are out of relationship with one another, whether you are poor or whether you are rich. I think that you are trying to bring us into a right relationship with wealth and recognizing it as useful, but that it is not the point. Most people say that, especially at the end of their lives, but I think that you really embody that with the work that you are doing and thinking. What you bring is quite amazing.

 

Jeff: That is really gracious of you to say that and thank you very much. All that credit goes to all of these amazing people in Nebraska. Eighteen hundred volunteers serving as affiliated fund leaders for these various community-based efforts. It has become a very sizeable movement in terms of the number of people and the number of moving parts.

 

John: Jeff, if people want to follow up on this discussion how could they connect with you?

 

Jeff: You can just Google Nebraska Community Foundation and that will take you to our homepage. I am certainly happy to have offline conversations with those of you that are interested in following up on some of this, whether it be on how to use the transfer of wealth or how we have tried to figure out this varied decentralized system. It is a work in progress. The fun is that every day we are building something and helping to be a partner in creating an opportunity or solving a problem or whatever the case might be. It feels good to have the opportunity to wake up to this every morning.

 

Peter: Also, you call them volunteers, but what you are really doing is creating citizens. You are co-producing something because most volunteers are for someone else’s stake. It’s a co-production and co-creation in the way you talk about it. It’s what citizenship is about. So, thank you for that. We are pretty near the end oof our time today. Any final words that you have?

 

John: It makes me think over and over again that when you think about money as wealth what we are learning here is that if you are really concerned about community, it isn’t about grants: Money is the bait, not the fish. What’s going on here is a wonderful recognition that always keeping the relational aspect of community at the forefront is critical. How do we use money in such a way that it is a precipitant of wisdom and more intentional community life? We all know that there are places, often low-income places, that have become grant economies. There, in the philanthropy and government world, you can lead people to think you can’t do anything without a grant. So, grants go two ways. They can either be wonderfully concipient or they can be disabling in the long run. What we are hearing here is the way to think about wealth as a real community builder. It’s a wonderful thing that you have done, Jeff.

 

Jeff: Like I said, it’s hundreds and hundreds of people focusing on this and it’s an honor to be a part of it. So, thank you, John. John has been a wonderful inspiration and an additional content provider for us here in Nebraska for the last couple of years. I just want to thank you for doing all that.

 

John: It’s great to learn from you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on VkontakteShare on Odnoklassniki

The Meaning of Genuine Wealth

This is a discussion of a real alternative economy. Mark is an economist who has figured out how to measure genuine wealth on any scale. From neighborhood to provinces and countries. Shifting what we measure transforms how we think, how we speak, and what we value. He offers the tools and the strategies for transformation on a serious scale.


For ten years following the 2010 publication of their book The Abundant Community: Awakening the Power of Families and Neighborhoods, John and Peter hosted conversations with neighborhood activists on their community-building work.  All their ideas are still at work and continue to be influential for anyone engaged in creating the future in the present. The transcript here has been edited for length and clarity.

 

The Meaning of Genuine Wealth:

Conversation with Mark Anielski

 

December 10, 2014

 

Peter Block:  Welcome John and Mark and all those joining in.

 

To begin, Mark has changed my mind and that is the only way I can introduce him. He is a traditional economist who studied economics and has opened the world to me. It is one thing to complain about the economy and to see what is wrong with it; it is pretty easy to read about what you see on the headlines every day. Mark has really inverted our thinking about that and says the measures that we are using are wrong. That happiness is a possibility in the world and you see that idea becoming popular.

 

Mark once invited me to a conference of economists and for two days I was just dazzled. People were telling me things that I just didn’t know. I didn’t know that there was a state bank in North Dakota. It was public institution shielded from the highs and lows of the economic mainstream. I didn’t know that the national debt is mostly interest that we pay to the private sector. It was just amazing generosity, Mark, and thank you for inviting me there. Mark is a teacher of mine and we have become friends. Mark, I welcome you and thank you for being here and what you are doing.

 

We hear a lot about the new economy. So, I thought, as an opening,  you might just give us a headline and why now you think this is becoming such a subject of public conversation.

 

Mark Anielski: Well, I think the so-called new economy is, I believe, so important today because we are on the verge of many significant shifts in the world system. We have climate change. We are on the verge of a significant debt crisis that I believe we will soon be a part of and it will be worse than 2008. The questions are, Why do we continue to measure progress using things like Gross Domestic Product since World War II? Why do we continue to have a debt finance system or even more pressing issues today?

 

We have an obligation, I believe, today to re-establish a deeper understanding of the word economy, which means helpful and stewardship, and to find new solutions to our intractable debt crisis. I call it a form of debt slavery and to free us from that would mean to orient our economy to what I am calling an economy of well-being.

 

That economy of well-being can be properly and effectively navigated if we re-establish the foundations that capitalism should be built on, which is the notion of what I call Genuine Wealth. I believe we can re-establish a new economy based on these new fundamental principles that well-being becomes the ultimate bottom line and an objective and best interest of all society.

 

Peter: I think if you could just say a little more about when you say the word well-being what goes through your mind? Can you make that more concrete for us?

 

Mark: Well-being in the work that I am doing with First Nations People constitutes spiritual, mental, physical, and emotional well-being. We have had others, of course, from Aristotle and onwards. Maslow.

 

One of the foundational contributions to a happy life and well-being begins with sufficient material needs, which is what Thomas Aquinas wrote about a long time ago. Building on Aristotle, that is followed by good health and physical and emotional health. Relationships are the fundamental building block of a happy community, which is something that we can impact. Finally, there is self-actualization or happiness. These are what I would call the building blocks of well-being. All bounded by a healthy and natural environment. Healthy ecosystems are fundamental to a thriving and flourishing community.

 

Peter:  What seems stunning to me is that you are taking questions of happiness, spiritual and physical well-being, and including them in the domain of economics. Like you said that the original meaning of economics was household management, but you are saying that the economy ought to deal with spiritual questions or health questions or life-style questions. Who is interested in this? Who is your audience for this kind of thinking?

 

Mark: Well, I seem to have a very broad audience. Last week I met with the Minister of Health Policy and Chief Medical Officer here in Alberta. The whole theme of Alberta health today is wellness. So, they asked me how are you measuring wellness?

 

I said that we are doing exciting things with people like Peter Block and John McKnight and Carol Lawrence and going into communities and neighborhoods and talking to our neighbors about what brings their life meaning. What are their gifts and skills? Asking them their subjective opinions about their expectations of their well-being for themselves, for their work and for their children. Then marrying that with objective metrics that we collect regularly anyway. We collect all kinds of social economics statistics and health statistics. We need to marry the experiential information of the self-ratings of well-being and the objective data.

 

Then we begin to understand at the household level, but also the neighborhood level, the community level, and the civic and municipal level. What does well-being look like? How is it distributed? Is there inequity in the condition of well-being? What do we do about it with respect to policies and budgets and capital operating budgets? I am getting residents and people like city managers to understand that this is a new time and that well-being–based budgeting is a new frontier. It’s not going to be easy, but I think it’s an opportunity worth exploring in a serious way.

 

John McKnight: I’m wondering if you could help us by being as specific as possible and give us a couple of examples. If you are interested in objective metrics and you’re focusing on the question of happiness and well-being broadly, can you describe what you actually are measuring and quantifying within that framework?

 

Mark: Within the Genuine Wealth framework that I have developed there are five asset classes or domains. I have an accounting background so forgive me for bringing a balance sheet into the conversation.

 

The whole basis for accounting is measuring what matters. So, what are the assets of a community? In tangible terms on the human assets side, what are our skills, aspirations, and even our spiritual well-being? We can measure those and develop survey tools to do so. On the social capital front, we talk about belonging and measuring subjective perception and trust of each other, businesses, and government because trust is the most precious of all assets in my opinion. They go undervalued in conventional balance sheets. We call it goodwill, but we undervalue goodwill. On the natural capital side, we measure the quality of lands, water, wetlands, and ecological services, and we put monetary values on those and then we don’t count infrastructure financial costs, money, and debts. Then there’s my favorite word, equity, which is the distribution of well-being.

 

Once we establish these accounts we have basically established a well-being assessment and checkup inventory and then we can generate indicators such as the many different ones in Canada: The Canadian index of well-being we developed in the last ten years, or the Genuine Progress Indicator, which is an adjustment to GDP, where the full cost of social and environmental degradation is taken into account. So, we begin to formalize this accounting system by re-establishing a community balance sheet, which shows the assets, the liabilities, the equity, a proper income statement, which shows not just GDP, but what is actually driving GDP and what is actually degrading it and what is the depreciation on human and social capital.

 

All of these things are as tangible as apples, and you can find on my corporate website work that I have been doing over the years with the city of Edmonton. Trying to teach economists how to budget based on a well-being index and to connect changes in taxes to the well-being index of Edmonton.  That is one of the things that we are pursuing and now narrowing down to the neighborhood level, to the really granular level of living.

 

John: You say one thing that you are interested in measuring is social capital. A lot of the work in the ABCD world is focused there. There you can focus on belonging and trust. Can you describe how you measure that? What is it that you are trying to quantify as an indicator of increased social capital, belonging, and trust? Give us some examples.

 

Mark: At the municipal level we have developed a survey tool that is again grounded in Maslow’s model of health, relationship, and happiness. We ask people to rate their own expectations of belonging or their sense of alienation perhaps because of race, gender, and sex. We ask them to rate their levels of trust of neighbors, family, businesses, workplace, and we get some really interesting results because we are not just asking opinions, but we are also asking, What are your own expectations and do you feel you are meeting those expectations?

 

What we get is a really robust breakdown of levels of expectations and even thresholds of where we think people are living below their expectations and below what we think people should be living at. We can show that across zip codes, postal codes, age, and sex –– whatever. That is pretty exciting.

 

That is what I mean by the community level. In the corporate setting we are helping companies to understand that for most corporations today their most important assets are relational aspects, intangibles, trust, and even workplace happiness. Can we quantify that? Absolutely. We can go and ask clients about their relationship is with a firm. With Coca-Cola or whoever it is. What is the level of trust? That subjective rating translates into your financials. Can you book trust as an asset? I think so. Coca-Cola says their brand is 28% of their balance sheet. So, that is why Warren Buffet likes Coca-Cola.  He knows that whether you like Coke or not, it is counting its intangibles in a wise way.

 

John: Mark, if you were thinking about your measures then in social capital, do you have a way of keeping and doing that through time? That is, what it would tell us the most –– not where we are now, but what kinds of changes are taking place? Then what ability is there to try to see what are the determinants of those changes? I’m just wondering whether you have got that structures like that at Edmonton or someplace.

 

Mark: I would have to say I think we haven’t got the traction that we would like yet. So, we are just planting seeds at this stage, and thank you for your work and Howard Lawrence’s pioneering work in Edmonton.

 

Our proposal, for example, to the city of Edmonton is taking what Howard is doing on measuring the assets in a community and marrying it to an ongoing well-being survey, which would be live all the time. People would be continually self-rating their well-being. Gallup is measuring the happiness of Americans every day. Thousands of Americans get polled every day. So, what is stopping us from thinking about it? It might be an app that says, Have you filled out your well-being rating? How happy are you in your neighborhood? That would be a fun way. Even city councils would be enlivened, I can tell you, if they were comparing their wards based on real input. Dynamic, longitudinal input. That’s one proposal.

 

The second is to introduce a well-being census instrument. So, when the population census is done you get some of those households that participate with Howard voluntarily to go further, say, to fill out a longer well-being census form to give some objective statistics so we can now compare your subjective ratings with your household income. Your age. We can even track you through time. We can customize and give them a gift certificate at their local restaurant or whatever.

 

I think cities need to and can get into this game of well-being census-taking and finance, probably, for less than a Starbucks latte per capita to keep this whole thing working. That’s what we are proposing.

 

 

John: I am also wondering now as you are setting up this method of measurement –– and it’s very creative; it is telling us mostly about the experience and sense of well-being, plus some more specific things –– I am wondering if you had this information, what are the policy possibilities that would grow from that? That is, if I am in Edmonton and it’s four years out and I’ve had two censuses and I can see some shifts in these measures, the question then might be  –– if I’m the mayor, city manager in terms of local government, even at the provincial level –– What do you see as the policy options that might grow from what you have learned?

 

Mark: I will speak from my experience in the area of performance measurement in the Alberta government and the Finance Ministry.

 

We oversaw the whole performance measurement system for Alberta in the mid 1990’s. A lot of these ideas come from that experience. If we were to use this information, first of all, the theme is measuring what matters to well-being, so the question is, Are we measuring what matters? Are chief economists measuring what matters? Does the CFO have a balance sheet for the city? I could tell you that all public accounts do not have a formal balance sheet, and it is unbelievable to think that Warren Buffet would not be upset if Coca-Cola did not have a balance sheet.

 

What we want to do here is establish a genuine balance sheet for the community’s assets. That should guide budgeting, capital, and operating decisions. It can guide community services in terms of which neighborhoods are flourishing objectively and effectively and why. We got curious about whether we could begin to invest in improving well-being conditions and ensuring the distribution of well-being more evenly across the neighborhoods. Can we demonstrate a well-being impact on policies and programs? Absolutely.  In fact, it is incumbent on us as public officials to do so.

 

Now, politicians would love to know and demonstrate to citizens that their taxes are going up 3%, but the Edmonton well-being index went up 2% last year. I have shown this to the city and council and said that their well-being index is going up and, yes, taxes are going up, too. I am not saying there is a direct correlation there, but this is good news for any politician. So, we look at the practical applications of the work.

 

I would go as far as saying that at the neighborhood design level, we know that the most vibrant neighborhood in Edmonton is my community of Strathcona and why? Because people say it is walkable. Ironically, it is part of Edmonton that stopped growing in 1913 because it was amalgamated with the City of Edmonton. The buildings now are still in history and have become an asset, and it is a walkable and desirable place to live.

 

So, then I am curious, as an architect, whether we can think about well-being by design. What makes for the highest walk-score community? Can we attach well-being to walk-score, subjective well-being? And now, wow, the real message is you should live in this neighborhood because they have the best walk-score and the best subjective self-rated well-being index.

 

Peter: You are also measuring neighborliness. The new urbanism talk is about mixed use and walkability. You are going deeper than that. You are talking about people’s relationship with each other. Their trust in each other. It may be that in some of the most beautiful and physical neighborhoods people might be surprised at what happiness is really like.

 

Mark: That’s right. I come at this from a very nerdy accountability. I love accountability and I know that sounds weird. We are stewards of God’s grace. So, we have a responsibility to be accountable for the funds we expend and the effort we put into life. I think that we can do this and I don’t think this is beyond the realm of this new economy.

 

Peter: What about as an individual? You mentioned the term debt slavery. Could you describe what you mean by that? How your thinking of this economy might come to terms and shift that in some way?

 

Mark: Well, this is happening in England right now: Not since 1844 has there been a conversation in the British Parliament about the nature of money. These members of Parliament have realized, like I did many years ago, that the government creates the money on behalf of the people. The banks just serve as a financial intermediary.

 

The truth is that 98% of our money supply is created in the form of debt when banks issue loans. The United States right now [in 2014] has 60 trillion dollars in debt. Since World War II debt has doubled every seven years. Isn’t that amazing? The Jews said to forgive debt every seven years. In seven years’ time the United States debt will probably hit 120 trillion. It is now consuming 60 trillion; it is now taking about 35 cents of every dollar an American earns or spends because there is debt embedded in everything.

 

Most of us have no idea. We are debt slaves, and that is true globally. Now, the challenge is, what do you do about it? I don’t know. It may collapse because right now the interest payment in the national debt in the United States exceeds the military budget. That is not an official number because they use funny words like net interest.

 

So, think about it. A third of our lives, our working lives, will be spent paying for interest on debt which would be completely unnecessary if we actually adopted Ben Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, and Andrew Jackson’s ideas, which is for the government to create money for the people without cost, without usury, without mortgages, which is a debt pledge.

 

That is my tough-love message. Now, can we move toward the debt free system? Absolutely, that is why I was in London, England, and the House of Lords. I said, We can do this. It would take an act of courage, but the problem is that there is just systemic ignorance. If Parliament in London is only beginning to understand this and has never debated this since 1844, imagine if that debate happened in Washington.

 

John: Can you weave the idea of savings into this question of debt? Do you look at savings positively? The whole notion of decreasing your consumption and increasing your savings is something that fits in this framework?

 

Mark: It’s part of a circular problem. Although I would say to anyone listening, Get out of debt if you can. Do not incur more debt. We are debt slaves. Savings is just a game for the investor. Our after-tax, usury money is in accounts, which generate interest. The richer we are, of course, and the more financial assets we have, we are actually getting 2% or 3%, whatever, from our neighbor. So, the whole system is a systemic system of usury.

 

Yes, savings is great if it is teaching you something about good financial management, like not incurring ridiculous levels of debt, which are unsustainable anyway. Of course, I would love just to reboot the whole computer and start again. Unfortunately, I think it’s only going to come upon us by catastrophe. Not by courageous acts of government to restructure the world financial system, which actually needs to happen desperately, but I’m not convinced that is going to happen.

 

So, savings is great, but understand it’s all a part of system of interest-based money. I know that there is one caller who is asking about a guaranteed income. What would I do under the Genuine Wealth model? Which is like what Abraham Lincoln said: if the creation of money can be done by governments without cost why wouldn’t we institute a living wage ordinance, which would ensure that nobody goes to sleep at night feeling anxious about tomorrow because they would least know that they have $15.00 an hour to live off?

 

I don’t want to be accused of being a Communist here, whatever that means. We can create enough money to finance our economy. To be the best and most flourishing economy possible. You can adjust the cash flow on a daily basis and leave enough for innovation and entrepreneurship. Make sure that no American community goes to sleep at night anxious about tomorrow. Most of our conflicts are about money anyway. That my vision and that’s possible. I know it’s possible.

 

Peter: What would this mean? And say more about the individual. How might I change? First thing you said is get out of debt. I assume then you think I should not have a house mortgage.

 

Mark: It’s impossible not to have education or housing debt. That’s the reality. So, on the individual level, first of all we need better financial literacy. I mean the fact that very few people even know about the money system. I mean younger people. You and I know that you can talk to young people in their 20’s and they have watched movies so they know a little bit about the money situation today ––how it’s like a big scam or a big Ponzi scheme –– but what to do about it?

 

I’ve been exploring things like what Howard is saying: Okay, given the situation, we are debt slaves and who is going to call us out of slavery? As Walter Brueggemann said, an we leave Egypt successfully? I best we can do is create awareness among ourselves. Maybe become each other’s best bankers by actually lending money to ourselves. Maybe through church communities.

 

I said that to Howard’s Baptist church years ago. Today we can create our own bank. Right now. We could lend money to each other without interest. I call it “interest expectations.” We give without expectations of return because we give to our neighbor who has financial need now. We forgo the expectation of interest that would accumulate in our savings account, but we have helped our neighbor. We are rich in cash. We have so much liquidity and most of it is tied up in speculative finances and stock. Stocks themselves are a joke and not a genuine investment. So, let’s think about becoming each other’s bankers. Starting with more pure lending programs that work locally.

 

Those are some of the things I’m working on. There are too many things to get done. Again, all of these ideas and practical solutions are right there.

 

Peter:  What do you think of the cooperative movement, the co-ops, in terms of credit unions? That was a strong movement for a time. A lot of them in Cincinnati are for companies’ savings. When you said I could create my own bank somebody asked on the chat, How can we help support your work? So, one of the answers is, why can’t we create our own bank? That sounds like a pretty exciting idea. I didn’t know I could do that. I thought that I had to be rich to do that.

 

Mark: No, you don’t. In fact, I tell people that creating a credit union takes almost nothing in terms of cost and maybe paperwork. To create a charter bank costs about 5 million in Canada, and that’s to get the paperwork done. The interesting thing is, once you pay the bank you can start issuing loans at one hundred to one for every dollar deposit and then you can issue a $100 credit. That is the mystery of banking.

 

Peter: I can start a bank with $1,000?

 

Mark: Yes.

 

Peter: I put it in the bank, and I can start loaning out $10,000 to people?

 

Mark: Yes. It’s a legitimate charter bank license to create money out of nothing. In fact, they use the word nihilo, which means to create out of nothing. So, look at the credit unions, I would say, or the public banks that North Dakota has. If we are going to play in this game at least support local credit unions.

 

I have argued that local credit unions are unfortunately playing the same game as the banks. They are also practicing usury by charging interest on loans and paying interest on deposits. Now there is only one bank that I know of in the world that is non-Islamic –– under Islam you are not allowed to charge interest and that makes it very difficult for Muslims to live in our western banking world –– that does not charge or pay interest. In Sweden there is a bank called the JAK Bank, which is the only bank approved by Islam; it’s a western bank and charges no interest on loans and pays no interest on deposits. I have studied that bank and I have compared with the biggest credit union in Canada, where they say, I don’t get it, Mark. How do we make money? I say, You don’t get it, because this bank doesn’t need to make money; the benefits are to all the members who won’t work for interest. You are operating it just like any business. You are recovering your costs by other means. Again, I have had conversations about starting one of these in Edmonton, but a lot of bankers still say, I don’t get it.

 

Peter: How do I get paid if I am working in the bank?

 

Mark: The payment to the people who work in the JAK Bank is through what is called a loan fee, which is roughly 2% of the value of any loan over a 40-year history of this bank. So, they are recovering their operating costs and it is no different from a lawyer’s fee. You are paying for the services of a financial institution. You are saving in trust on the loan. Your kids are going to school without interest on the loan. It is a fascinating system, and it was not designed by economists. It was designed by engineers who understand “glow.” It has to glow. I cannot stagnate; that it is when it becomes putrid. We fight about it.

 

Peter: Very exciting. Tell me again the name of the Muslim bank where this is working?

 

Mark: It’s not a Muslim bank. It’s a Swedish bank. It’s called JAK Members Bank. It’s on my website. It stands for Land, Labor, and Capital. That’s what JAK stands for.

 

Peter: That’s amazing. So, the future really is here, isn’t it?

 

Mark: We are just stuck in a mind-set.

 

Peter: Mark, you talk about the accounting instincts that you have. Talk a little bit about the faith community and the spiritual dimension of this. What does this mean for the faith community? How might they, if they got serious about it, get interested? The ministry is what you are engaged in. Can you talk a little bit about the faith side and the way it occurs to you?

 

Mark: I was raised Roman Catholic. To tell you a little story: I was about to get on a plane to Rome to see the Pope and then head to the Vatican Bank to declare international Jubilee and re-resurrect the teachings against of the use of usury. I would invite Muslim and Jewish brothers to join us, and probably Buddhists would understand, because this is very much part of our Abrahamic teaching. Moses received the teaching from Mount Sinai that you should not charge interest on debt. You should have Jubilee. You should honor the Sabbath. Every seven years debts should be forgiven.

 

These were the teachings that the Jews had before they went into exile in Babylon. The question is, did they ever live those teachings after their release from captivity? Every 49 years wealth was supposed to be redistributed to the Twelve Tribes. We are now 49 plus 49 years after the 1917 Balfour Declaration. If you look over time, you see patterns of seven. In 2008 was the last seven period and we [came up] up on the next seven in 2015. So, I’m calling on church leaders to say, Okay, so what do we do? What happened if the Jews forgot the Sabbath for seven years? It is what they call a shmita. Something would happen. Something would befall Israel.

 

So, we have a responsibility to ask about the tradition of the Creator giving us everything with abundance, like Moses in the desert. How do we live in that reality that everything actually is that truth of abundance? We have made money our god and how do we come out of the Egypt that Walter has been writing about? That is the challenge. I’ve been advising in New York, and I’ve said, Where are your rabbis? Are they teaching Deuteronomy? Are they going back to the ancient economic laws that the Jews had written down, and that the Catholic Church taught until 1850 , about usury and then went silent? So, I’m kind of a tough-love guy. I’m not going to mess around.

 

Peter: You are amazing. Your mind goes where it wants to go.

 

Mark: You have to have a sense of humor. This is a bad movie. This is a B-movie script we are living in and it is completely unnecessary. God must look upon on us and go, You bozos; I give you all of that and you really mess it up.

 

Peter: As you know, Mark, I’ve written a kind of Kairios document about Jubilee. I think there is something very important about debt and the relationship that we have with it, in the fact that the Jubilee idea has such a long and amazing history and how that story has lasted so long. For me the Old Testament is stories that have endured the test of time. That fact alone means you have to pay attention to it.

 

Maggie Rogers: We have a caller from Southwest Ohio, David Rosenberg.

 

David Rosenberg (caller): You are talking about a program to help people out in the debt-ridden economy. I had a conversation with a friend of mine, Allen Bierhorst, the other day. We came up with a less ambitious program, but it seemed like it was really doable. We would encourage people who had capital to relieve those who are in debt, especially credit card debt. In many cases, just by doing that and still charging interest, this type of investor could maybe do almost as well as they would on the market plus they would be really making a systemic change. Also, some of the margin between the credit card interest rate and the loan or gift rate if someone is willing to do that could go to non-profit organizations to help fund them.

 

Peter: That’s great.

 

Mark: David, that’s exactly what I am talking about. In the interim, I’m talking idealistically in some ways, but what you are talking about is very pragmatic. I’m thinking that if my neighbor is paying 24% on their Master Card and we within our community say, Whoa, why don’t we restructure some of that debt? I will buy it off at 7%. I think there is a win-win there. I’m better off and I’m doing much better than my guaranteed investments and you’re better off. You are not paying the 24%. That is a step change in the right direction. So, now we are becoming each other’s bankers, though. I absolutely agree.

 

David: I think Peter should help us start a bank.

 

Peter: I’m up for it. I may start a bank as soon as possible.

 

DavidI got my nickel to put in.

 

John: We are getting here towards the end. I think for lay people this is still a fairly complex topic. I am wondering if you could suggest two books that would for a layperson clarify the kinds of issues and alternatives and possibilities that you see. To help us after we leave you to know what we might read. Your book might be the one.

 

Mark: It might sound self-serving, but there are my earlier book The Economics of Happiness: Building Genuine Wealth [2007] and another called An Economy of Well-Being: Common-Sense Tools for Building Genuine Wealth and Happiness [2018].

 

The first book contains enough that it is still relevant and describes a road map of this economy. Then, people said, Now Mark, what are the practical steps? Can you write a handbook on what to do next? I think the truth is even if my book lays out a framework or a road map and has some examples, you know, the reality is everything beyond that is just practice. So, what you are doing and what we all are doing is action. I think the best we can do is pay attention to, not necessarily read a book, but pay attention to where there are positive innovations happening in our community. They are happening everywhere and you know that. How do we learn from those communities? Can we share experiences? Can we go to those communities and learn best practices and bring them back to our community?

 

That’s what this new economy is about. It’s about sharing those stories. I was told you write a book for yourself because it’s your voice. It doesn’t even matter if it just sells just one copy. You have written what you think. I wrote what I thought and what I think is possible. The next book is a bit of a social fiction. What’s possible? I want to provoke people. It’s a little prophetic. Using Jesus’ parables, maybe. Then within a few pages go into the question of what’s practical. What can we do on Monday? That’s my challenge. What are we going to do on Monday? We don’t have to reinvent. The stuff we talk about now is big and there’s no question that people say, Wow, that’s overwhelming, but if I can do one little thing on Monday.

 

Peter: Mark, one more thing and then we will wind down. There is another call. The movement is underway. So, what you just said is examples of if we are serious about looking for models of an alternative way –– whether about banking or retail or food or debt forgiveness –– we can find them. What is the spark? Do we need a famous person to get out there and start the fire? What does it take for this movement to get covered? It seems like an unreported movement. What are your thoughts about what would light the spark or to make this catch fire?  There is all kinds of energy around questions like that.

 

Any positive way you think that something can catch fire on this. Do we need an ad campaign?

 

You there Mark? If we can’t get him back on the call, how about asking Cormac Russell, a friend of John and mine,  for any thoughts.

 

Cormac Russell: The question that I am left with is, are we talking about systems reform or are we talking about community alternatives?

 

I was just thinking about that question of how we focus our minds. Sometimes the distraction of talking about changing systems –– whether it’s about how they account, whether it’s about how they put value on things or just how they behave –– draws us away from what I think is powerful and what Mark is saying, which is there are actually much more valuable and much more valid community alternatives to how we connect and how we put value and exchange on what matters to us.

 

I was wondering about that piece. Is there a way of really de-emphasizing systems reform, which gets people pretty cluttered and confused and helps people to understand that before we have an alternative bank we need to create an alternative community culture? Because I think even if we change the accounting system, if we still have a culture of competition it almost inevitably means that whatever system we replace, the existing competitive system will default back.

 

So, it feels to me that a big piece of work exists around changing from a culture of competitiveness to a culture of cooperation. I just love what I am hearing Mark say: Our ecology belongs to nobody and its fruits belong to everybody. I think the best place to make sense of that is in our communities. So, thank you, Mark.

 

Mark: I remind my business students that the word competition means to strive together, from the Latin. So, you are absolutely right. We absolutely need to address our relationship with money. It’s the default and people go, Well, what am I going to do? How am I going to pay the bills? So, how are we going to build a new relationship with each other with our neighbors? Deal with the money issues with the education and knowledge that I’m sharing. Then truly figure out a way of striving together.

 

Peter: We lost you for a minute, Mark. I was asking about where the spark will come from to make this part of a larger and national conversation. Like when a disaster happens it immediately becomes part of the national narrative. The larger narrative. What will it take for this movement? I know it’s under way, but it’s under–reported and under-acknowledged. Any thoughts about what would spark something other than a financial meltdown?

 

Mark: I think Hazel Henderson said it best: that the fast track to sustainability is collapse. Is anyone wise in Washington that has the courage to do what we are talking about? Change is happening. It’s maybe not happening at those levels, but we’ve got Kabuki Theater politics or worse. So, sadly I would have to say the wake-up call may come about because of the result of collapse. What I’m arguing is, do we really have to wait for this crisis to be upon us again? I mean, 2008 was a wake-up call and we did nothing. It’s just gotten worse with the debt situation.

 

I don’t know if there is soft path. I think maybe it’s the mysteries of our own redemption that we are facing here. The point is, I was sitting with the Onondaga and Chief Oren Lyons in the spring with the Onondaga people in upstate New York, the Iroquois. They are the ones that signed the Two Row Wampum Belt Treaty with George Washington.  He said, You know the Two Wampum Treaty is a significant symbol of our relationship with the settlers. What we are in right now –– and I said this to Oren, and he is one of few men who understand the money system is to create literally a parallel offering –– is a system knowing that this Titanic that we are on right now is about to hit the iceberg. So, can we build a more compelling operating system by actually going back to the traditions of the First Nations?

 

That is what I am working on now with the First Nations people. They are the ones that may actually lead us out of this wilderness because they still remember and they still say, Thank you, Creator, for everything. Everything was created in abundance and that is why we have the potlatch. That is why they use seashells for money and not paper or coins. They sewed wampum belts. (You know George Washington used to make his own wampum belts for fun at night with Martha.) Wampum belts represent a pile of gold and they are sitting right there in the longhouse in Onondaga, New York.

 

We have an incredible opportunity to work with First Nations to help us to understand how to get through this. I still think about that other wampum. I have a vision and it’s not the parallel wampum belt, it’s the circle wampum belt. So, we need to think about the circle. Money is not GDP or all exponential-right curves. Every curve we are looking at is going exponential and we need to think about a circle.

 

Peter: That’s wonderful. Any final thoughts about being in the experience of this conversation with us?

 

Mark: It brings me great joy and I feel so blessed to be friends with both of you and you are my mentors and inspiration. I just feel blessed and joyful. Thank you.

 

John: And we are bound together by friendship, not contract.

 

Mark: By the way, we have to have a sense of humor that the First Nations people teach me. We really have to have a good sense of humor because I’m sure God does.

 

Peter: Anyway, thank you so much, Mark. If John and I are your mentors, then we have done a hell of a good job.