I think this is the beginnings of an economy based on perpetual growth and fossil fuel energy running headlong into geological energy constraints. Basically I see an undulatory downward path for the rest of my life. From here out, I think any rallies in our economic condition are going to be met with spiking commodity prices that knock us right back down.
There was a lot of good information submitted here. I am getting the idea that there are a couple of general impressions going on here. First there seems to be the discussion on nature of the approach. On one hand you have the “take over” contingent which was original subject of this approach. However Pops and CarlinsDarlin posted what I am going to characterize in this thread as the “Small Town Adoption” idea. The gist of this argument more or less instead following the methods advocated by my initial post, people decide on a town to relocate to and move there with the intention of trying to fit in with the current inhabitants. With their relocation to the small town, the newly arrived resident(s) will bring with them skill or skills that they will offer to the towns folk as well as other newcomers. The goal in the Small Town Adoption philosophy is that the newcomers adopt their chosen community and hope that they are in turn, adopted by the community. This is not a stretch by any means of the imagination and I can believe there are any number potential locations around the country where newcomers could relocate to without serious difficulty.
My response to the “Small Town Adoption” argument is that while it is fundamentally sound, it does not permit the widest range of preparatory activities that can or should be conducted. Most, if not all activities would be limited to the personal property level, with little communal or municipal actions being taken. Nor does it appear that a lot of general coordinating activities or communal resource sharing would be likely in this scenario. While relationships with longtime residents would probably be least affected under this arrangement, many necessary tasks could be left undone. Simply getting your property in shape is not enough. Important decisions that need to be made in regards to municipal infrastructure, land use planning, and economic activities. I don’t think adopting a community will be able to accomplish all of the needed work. Plus you are at the mercy of local economic conditions for your livelihood and without some form of cooperative, not all of the remaining private tasks may be accomplished.
More detailed discussion on the nature of the group was also given. I liked many of KPeavy’s and Jack’s suggestions (and I am not always inclined to agree with some of their postings on philosophical or political grounds). Although I am not going to discuss specifics brought up at this point, resource/tool sharing was one task I envisioned for this group due. I didn’t and still don’t have ideas on the nature of incorporation. I do think formal organization is an almost certain requirement, if for no other reason, be a way to formalize planning arrangement among the newcomers, even if the existing townfolk prove to be hesitant or resistant to change. Similar to the debate on Take-Over versus Adoption, I can see the formal group being utilized in either type of situation. Obviously in any setup where full takeover of the towns political structure and government occurs, the planning group’s activities will be quite strong, potentially evolving into a semi permanent advisory body or dissolving if the local government assumes most or all of the tasks. In a non-take over situation, the group could still function as a coordinating actor between the various newcomers and local adoptees of a low-energy paradigm, but at a less visible and overreaching manner. Coordinating activities at either level would include the promotion and creation of local production and trading arrangements, procurement of hard to get supplies and resources as well as financing improvements and new ventures. The organization would be by no means be limited to those functions, but could also include other, as of yet undefined tasks.
Now here is where it gets a little tricky for me: I hold some pretty radical viewpoints on land ownership, wealth creation, and economic development. These views are definitely not mainstream and perhaps even too far left for even the average reader here. I need to be cognescent of that as not to advocate too radical of a rearrangement that will fail due to a lack of followers when a less radical version can still accomplish 80-90% of what I would like and be much more accepted.
The group, organization or planning body advocated by myself and others should do the following things:
• Create, implement and manage a plan of action for the introduction and resettlement of new individuals to the town.
• Creation of a local currency. The existing legal tender is in for some serious hard times do to both peak oil and poor budgetary decisionmaking. A local currency can go along way to taking the sting out of rough economic times by maintaining an alternate medium of commerce without resorting to barter. The group does not need to be responsible for its circulation (a credit union could do that – thanks Jack!) just foster its creation and usage.
• Assist in the development of new cooperative business ventures. Start with the basics, food stuffs, household goods and whatnot. Expand to essential services, then to household goods and services. Encourage as many of these enterprises to accept the local currency.
I use the word cooperative to emphasize the fact that these new businesses will be cooperative in nature. Rather than producing with the goal of maximum profit or unbridled growth, the businesses would keep the focus limited to the community’s needs. The day to day operations would remain in the hands of the shop keeper, tradesman or factory worker. The planning group would determine if an additional tradesman or particular shopkeeper was required and help suggest an ideal form of compensation for work accomplished. The ultimate goal is to further restrain the capitalistic systems penchant for growth, something that peak oil and economic collapse will help accomplish.
Back to the list…
• Provide the necessary expertise to accomplish required skilled and technical tasks such as introduction of better farming technology or the disbursement of advice on home energy efficiency improvements.
• Provide a way for people of differing income levels and skill levels to “buy into” the community. This discussion came up in the regular discussion of intention communities group-what to do when people of vastly different economic means wish to join the community. My argument is that you pool the incomes and investments. Yes, I know that means requesting the wealthier participants put in more money than a less well-to-do individual. But this way disbursements can be more equitably shared with less well off members trying to get settled and potentially could assist non-member local inhabitants with their preparations (good will building). Meanwhile the less well off members could put in more hands-on time in initial preparations, which is another argument for having a local currency. Another way to look at this is the well off joining member can “buy” the equivalent of preparation time while the less well off can “earn” it through work. It is admittedly a hard sell to ask one family to contribute15, 20 or 25 thousand dollars and get them to relocate right next door to another family that only put in $500. But then again, your average person isn’t even aware that peakoil even exists and that limitless economic growth is only an illusion.
I could go on some these economic arrangements, but it is getting late and this message is getting too long.
Keep the ideas coming. I started this idea with only half serious intentions. I am actually beginning to think this may not be a bad idea after all. _________________ UNplanning the future...
http://unplanning.blogspot.com
I figured the entire thing would be bootstrappable starting with a buyers group.
Most everyone needs a few items on a regular basis.
Bread, milk, butter, flour, sugar, coffee, salt, chicken, beef, pork, eggs, light bulbs, laundry detergent, soap, shampoo, toilet paper, seeds, what have you.
The plan is to organize a group of people or families to make a single purchase of goods, at a better price, rather than everyone heading to Wal-Mart when their paycheck arrives.
The larger the group, the higher the volume, the better the prices. Shipping costs must also be considered. I need to research the idea more, but there are buyers groups all over the world. The group gathers the money, orders the product, recieves it, initially at someone's house or business, where the members pick up their share. It is not impossible for one member to purchase more than another member.
The volume of savings is the objective. This may mean buying more than ordered, in which case there would be a surplus, and the members are the ones paying for it. In effect, they are investing in more savings. With sufficient purchasing power and a little more investment, a retail store can be opened, offering the wharehoused product for sale to the general public. , most likely at a markup to pay for the expenses of the store.
The greater the investment, the larger the group, the more items that can be carried in inventory. Store revenue is used for expenses as well as expanding to other product lines such as equipment for rental. As long as you have the store, bring items in on consignment. Lets say Mrs Jones makes warm, durable quilts. Carry a few quilts, if they sell, the store keeps a percentage, pays her the rest. John makes pinic tables. Alice makes beeswax candles. The Smiths grow free range chickens and eggs.
It will be necessary for each producer to get their own licenses according to the laws of the land.
This is a system that can be started up with little investment, expanded as involvement grows, adds commerce to a small town, saves people money which is the incentive for keeping it going.
It may require people to change their purchasing habits. Instead of the 4-pack of toilt tissue, they get the case of 96 rolls. Instead of a pound of salt, they buy 36 pounds. There is nothing stopping people from splitting a case of an item.
The work involved in getting people informed is a grass roots effort to be sure. Lots of coffee, lots of talking, lots of educating people about the buyers group plan. When interest in such an idea reaches a threshold level where actual savings can be achieved, it is time to ask for the money.
There are different ways to get started, but the important thing is to get started.
I think the concept of a small town market offers the ability to generate revenue, save money on purchasing products, boost the local economy, create a few jobs, build inventory, and buy equipment. It is all possible under the current laws of most countries, very simple in the US. In the event the crap hits the fan, the store inventory will be dispersed rapidly among the investors. When things settle down, the store can be reborn to serve as a center of trade as per the surviving or developing economy.
The first business opened in any small community is a store. I don't care if you are talking about the suburbs of LA or an oasis in the Sahara desert. Humans, when they meet or live close together, will eventually develop trade. The next commercial enterprise is almost always food service.
Once the group has control of the store, the next item is a local diner or coffee shop. The 2 business can be combined in the same building. While picking up supplies, have a cup of coffee while you talk to Joe. The diner purchases its supplies from the store. Even if you have to compete with an existing diner in a small town, will the group members go to the competition or to their own place? The new venture starts with a core group of customers already in place. In the event TSHTF, you have a commercial food processing center, complete with equipment already set up.
In a small town, you now have control of the market and the diner. This would give you strong input in the local Chamber of Commerce, if one exists. If not, the members of the group would hear about other members of the group who perform services and sell products. Mary Jane does hair and is a member of the buyers group. Betty Sue also cuts hair and is not a member of the buyers group. If yo are a member of the buyers group, who are you going to go to for a haircut?
Most Chamber of Commerce groups are little more than a mutual patron society. The idea is still sound and effective. In a small community, join the flock or be left out in the cold.
Now you control the market, the diner, and the Chamber of Commerce. I gaurantee you have the attention of the local government. _________________ If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face--for ever."
-George Orwell, 1984
Joined: Sep 25, 2004 Posts: 4681 Location: Boston, MA
Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2005 3:56 pm Post subject:
OK. About the "machines break, disease spreads" thing, I know it doesn't make any sense. Sorry about that.
I wonder. How long do you think it would take to take over a small town? Remember, you need to find members with money. You must find a location and move in. You have to start a credit union and start printing those Liberty Dollars. You need to buy or otherwise get equipment and materials to build up the town you picked. You must also get settled, become accepted into the town and get elected to important positions.
All of that takes time. How long do you think it would take? And perhaps more importantly, how much time do you think we have till we face the full damage of PO?
If you don't leave a 1 year grace period between the two dates, you might be cutting it a little thin. Here's my issue, that plan is too complex to work. It sounds nice on "paper" but in practice the logistics of moving that many people into any town will slow down the project.
My guess for the amount of time it would take to do all this is 1 generation (~20 years). Any faster and the town would figure it out. Housing prices would increase and you couldn't afford to move everyone in. Remember, you don't want everyone living in a communal bunk house.
We don't have time for a gradual change. And the gradual change we are getting is going in the other direction.
I do not think a buyers group is the optimal way to describe this, especially over the long term. I understand the benefits and what you are getting at, but I don’t think in the era of de-globalization and de-industrialization you will be able to achieve the necessary economies of scale. Even now, it you still wouldn’t be competitive against WalMart, which can play this game far better than anyone out there. Your descriptions however, lead me to believe that this buyers group really acts more like a production-consumption network for a lack of a better word. In this set up you patronize local member establishments (read: producers) that are members to guarantee them income for their labors, in exchange for their participation in your venture (your income). Stay within the network and everyone saves and everyone benefits. This seems to be similar to some HMOs whereby you visit in-network doctors, use in-network specialists and hospitals and are supplied bulk drugs or visit in-network pharmacies. Kaiser, I think is the company that follows this route. The patient pays lower costs for visiting in-network services, the physicians are guaranteed a stream of patients and the company has vastly lower paperwork costs. Not to mention the possibility of bulk purchasing.
Health care of course is a poor example to be referring to, but my point is that the group/organization needs to be involved in both the production and consumption decisions. And once you have a group making those decisions, whether it is in the form of an ad-hoc trade committee, local currency program, production-consumption network or outright self regulating co-op you are sliding away from a free market-based, capitalist system. Personally, I do not have any problems with that. I think the market is prone to excesses and is too dependent on continuing growth to survive in the long term and in the short run causes periods of shortages and surpluses with many goods. This feast or famine approach to commerce isn’t really beneficial to consumers, retailers or even producers. All things being equal, most people would rather deal with a constant supply of what they need or want at predictable or stable prices. Producers would prefer to know how many units of whatever to make or grow and know how much they will get for them.
Traditional economic thought would not view a regulated local economy in a particularly good light, especially in the pre-peak period. This is a minor concern, as it would permit a newly established group or co-op for a lack of better description from being very successful at the outset, particularly with the original town residents. As the organization would be voluntary, they of course could ignore it if they so chose. This ceases to be a minor concern if individuals who have hard felt philosophical beliefs that the free market not be impinged, attempt to make life hell (either through instigated governmental obstructions or outright vandalism or violence) for the co-ops operators or participants. Ideally, the small town selected isn’t too prone to extremism. It is this possible outcome (regulatory interference), among others that led me to the conclusion that outright takeover of a town’s political process may be helpful.
As for the nitty-gritty details on commerce development, I second Kpeavey’s focus on the essentials first. Always start with the essentials, food, water and shelter. Since this is an established community, water at least is available (hopefully in a good enough condition) which is better than the Intentional Community, which must construct that system from scratch. Housing, to a lesser extent is also available. While I agree that many communities—even those fallen on hard times—will not have that much in the way of available housing stock, good options remain for resettling new residents. I will tackle that subject in a later post. The housing demand will create work however, and that work could—and should—be done by newly arriving residents or local inhabitants that buy into the whole concept.
That leaves food. Food is obviously essential to the viability of this project. It also must be derived from local farms as much as possible. That is why I originally suggested farming operations be acquired in conjunction with the initial settlement. Simply stated, the food part of the cooperative MUST be able to (within a few years of its creation) be able to supply 100% of the settlements required caloric intake and nutritional requirements and 80% to 90% of its overall agricultural needs. As it has been made abundantly clear, industrial agriculture is not sustainable in the long term. So the lesson is – DON’T MAKE YOUR PLANS BASED ON ITS AVAILABILITY. Again, I am not going to get into specifics on crop selection or eventual techniques, but the bottom line is, agriculture must return to being a labor intensive (that means NO dependence on mechanization beyond the initial construction), low energy input activity. This will require that a small but significant number of the new residents must take up farming. The farms themselves must change, by becoming smaller in size and more intensive in operation. Successful methods along these lines do exist. You just have to chuck virtually everything you may believe is required for “farming.”
Food production is just the start. Food preparation, processing and storage will also provide employment. Fresh veggies are always appreciated, but unfortunately the growing season does not last 365 days in most places. Furthermore, some foodstuffs require processing before consumption. Other members of the community will take up these roles. They have to be; peak energy is going to affect food processing and shipment as well. And along those lines, these food processors will/should take care of the canning, drying and preservation techniques to ensure year round supplies. Canning can be done at home of course but by using reusable glass containers, the processor could can more food, safer and more reliably than a household could. It takes a certain amount of energy to boil water and boiling slightly more water to can significantly more food is more energy efficient than having 20 households spend their Saturday doing that. Of course in the category of food preparation would include restaurants, bakeries and other producers of ready to eat products.
Once you have food down, repeat the process for household essential goods (think toiletries), essential services (doctors) and move on out to lesser-demanded items such as clothing, furniture and so on. Remember, a lot of today’s mass-produced items can be locally made by hand production in limited batches, as they were throughout history. Other new products might have hand produced replacements that no one has thought to develop to date. Yes somethings may need to be mass produced by factories with advanced techniques. However, if we localize as much as we can – to the town level, enough resources may remain to continue the production of high-value, high-tech long-lived products.
Of course it is speculative to guess what society/civilization outside your community will evolve/devolve to, but by seizing control of YOUR situation, at least you could (hopefully) live long enough to witness it. _________________ UNplanning the future...
http://unplanning.blogspot.com
I wonder. How long do you think it would take to take over a small town? Remember, you need to find members with money. You must find a location and move in. You have to start a credit union and start printing those Liberty Dollars. You need to buy or otherwise get equipment and materials to build up the town you picked. You must also get settled, become accepted into the town and get elected to important positions.
I imagine about four years from initial formation to control. The pre-planning and first wave phase acquires as much of the property as will eventually be required. Some of that will be in the form of vacant land, abandoned land, others will be purchased from existing residents looking to sell. Industrial and agricultural lands will be acquired as well. That may make for a sizable upfront bill, but it may be better than piecemealing it. Get as much as you need before hand and who cares if property rates go up. It will take a couple of waves of new residents to tip the political balance however as the existance of elected terms of office would preclude immediate changes.
You are right, we do not have a lot of time. The Small Town Takeover plan speeds this process up. Significantly. _________________ UNplanning the future...
http://unplanning.blogspot.com
In addition to the historical examples of this happening (Brigham Young founding and being run out of communities in Illinois and Missouri before settling in Utah, and the current Mexican invasion of the southwest US) there are a couple of instances of people trying to do this.
In 1971, followers of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi bought out a dead college in Fairfield, Iowa and founded Maharishi International University, an alternative college, teaching such things as TM, levitation, and unlocking the power of the inner mind etc. Needless to say, this was stressful on the conservative locals for the first few years, but the website suggests that it has pumped life into the community, and also, the college has gone more mainstream as well. There is at least one MIU person on the city council and it appears that the town has a cultural life, a young, active population, and the situation may have worked for the better for both newcomers and old timers. There are about 1300 full and part-time students.
In the early 90's the United Nuwaubian Nation of Moors founded an intentional community in Putnam County, Georgia. The community became a bit of a local tourist attraction, featuring a pyramid, a sphynx, and other archetectural oddities. They were constantly at odds with the local county commission due to code and health issues, etc. also, because most of the members were of African descent, and they chose to build their community in a redneck area of GA. At one point, the community numbered 500 members, and threatened to have enough electoral power to place a member on the county commission, before there was some backing down by both parties. Eventually, the founder, Dwight "Malachi" York was sentenced to 135 years in prison for child abuse, and the compound is currently nearly deserted, the website and the organization lives on.
This was something I thought about. People don't normally move from a place with more opportunities to a place with less. Not normally anyway. They WILL move if they are independently wealthy or otherwise able to support themselves or if there is a pre-established support system to get started on their own. This support system could be in the form of a stipend and/or free residence. In the current world this latter scenario happens all the time when a person moves from area A to area B and bunks with a friend or family member until they get established on their own. So the precedence already exists.
For this project, upfront investment and participation in the planning group or organization is crucial. Since bunking with one of the original townsfolk will be out of the question, moving and establishment costs need to be borne upfront, unfortunately. People can't and shouldn't move without a home and livelihood to go to. The planning group has to be responsible for the creation of that work.
Here is a way that could get underway:
1 - Members/future town residents contribute/buy into the planning group organization. This group funds the required land acquisition, permitting (if necessary) and lays the groundwork for future commercial activities. Funds for these activities will come from a startup account, which will initially get quite large. The group may use individual members for land acquisition as not to arouse suspicion.
2 - The planning group funds the startup ventures. As previously identified commercial activities revolve around primary production (of food and necessities) with the addition of added products and services as the inhabitation progresses.
3 – Initially, efforts will drawdown on the groups funds as capital is outlayed prior to any returns. As the project progresses, primary production activities become self-sustaining allowing those engaged in these activities to become self-sufficient. Payment for labor will likely be in a mix of dollars and local currency equivalent. Those participating on a sweat equity basis only, will be paid/credited in local currency only. Those that invested money may also see some cash. Still need to work that out.
4 – As more people relocate to the town, less funds are available in the groups account, mainly from those late-comers as well as those remaining at high paying jobs that are contributing a part of their income to the ongoing community funds in return for a guaranteed spot when they wish to move in. While overall funds are dwindling, they should be enough to relocate and help start up later waves of new residents. Unlike the earlier waves, these newcomers will require less hard funds to get started and will be able to get underway by labor and local currency equivalents from within the town.
5 – When the group has settled the last wave, the startup fund should be pretty much empty. An ongoing hard currency fund should exist to fund the purchases of outside equipment or labor, which can be paid for by contributions from those with outside incomes that participate in the group as well as profits from outside (non-local currency) sales. Any excess funds (cash) can be redistributed to contributors by the percentage they paid into the fund originally. IMPORTANT: The prospective residents MUST be aware that funds they pay into the planning group or organization ARE NOT investments in the classic sense. They will, in all likelihood not see a dime, or atleast pennies on the dollar invested in the efforts. What they will get is relocation to a sustainable lifestyle in a small town, ideally away from the ill effects of peak oil, natural gas and other problems lurking in the wings.
6 – After the group has entered the maintenance phase, remaining internal activities will largely need to be transacted in local currency units for the most part. At this point, the dollar may be itself in a crisis, so this could prove to be an easy sell, even to the locals.
To sum it up, the planning group MUST ensure that employment opportunities exist for the incoming residents and to do that a startup fund has to be created. With the planning group in place and well funded, start-up should be successful. Now we just have to sell people on the concept. _________________ UNplanning the future...
http://unplanning.blogspot.com
This plan is too complicated, requiring too much organisation and too many people.
The whole point for this exercise is to look at what is needed in terms of planning to deal with the inevitable impacts of peak oil. Prior to this, planning was focused in two generic tracks:
1: Planning for a governmental solution. What would or should the government do to deal with peak oil. Many suggestions have been made prior to this and directed at all levels of government. Most have fallen on deaf ears.
2: Planning for an intentional community. For those out there that became convinced (rightly so) that government won’t plan or adapt until it is too late, believe the intentional community is the way to go. “Why deal with society? Let’s chuck it all and start anew on X number of acres well away from the city” are typical opinions voiced in favor of the PO intentional community.
Theoretically both tracks could have amenable results. However the government solution get bogged down in politics, special interest and other crap like that. Unless you are like Fidel Castro and are a dictator, government planning will not cut the mustard until it is too late. The intentional community solution might work, but the level of work and complexity probably will doom most communities to subsistence level farming among a collection of households. The community may have started with great plans, but somewhere along the way most windup on the wayside.
That’s why I offered the third option, the take over of a small town.
* Less work than an intentional community (infrastructure is in place)
* Less isolating than an intentional community (the town already exists)
* Simpler planning required on part of the group when compared to a new community
* Fewer demands on government. _________________ UNplanning the future...
http://unplanning.blogspot.com
Joined: May 24, 2004 Posts: 3429 Location: California, USA
Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 7:05 am Post subject:
"Hostile takeover" is the moral equivalent of aggressive warfare conducted via other means. Wrong, bad, and a high probability you'll end up dead when the crap hits and all those people who resent you have a chance to do something about it.
There was a paradigm case of this in Oregon, when the Rajneesh cult took over the town of Antelope. As a DIRECT result of the hostility and nastiness and truly shitty goings-on, the state of Oregon passed a set of laws that basically make it impossible to establish an intentional community in that state. You can believe this makes me so mad I could just yell! And the wave of "hippie communes" where drugs, sex, and rock-n-roll were the order of the day, made for their own share of anti-commune ordinances across the country.
How about this instead:
Ask, don't take.
"Adopt a town." Using voluntary means all'round, with no concealment or coersion.
Form your corporation or incorporated cooperative (note, in California an S-corp is limited to 35 members, probably not a good way to go about this). Accumulate financial capital (money) from member investments. Make some serious, financially sound business plans that involve revitalizing the local economy of the town you eventually settle in, and make sure you have the $$$ to fund those business plans properly.
When you have a truly decent sum, by which I mean at least a couple million dollars, make a public offer to the existing residents and government of a number of small towns you find interesting. Then negotiate terms, in much the same way as any corporation that is considering setting up a factory or other operation in a given area.
In essence you are saying, "We, the XYZ Corporation, are looking for an area to locate in, and we are interested in your town. If you accept our offer, we will establish N number of businesses doing X, Y, and Z. We will bring in Q number of employees and their families, and we will hire R number of local residents. In exchange for that, we are asking for the following: changes in zoning (describe), city government to initiate a comprehensive sustainability plan which we will fund, other changes in local ordinances (describe, for example a comprehensive equal-rights ordinance that includes sexual orientation and gender identity), and a vote of confidence in our plans by a minimum of 2/3 majority of registered voters, conducted as a legal election with the proper formalities."
Note, you are not asking for tax breaks or other financial bribes of the type that large corporations typically demand from cities and states (which I personally find highly offensive on principle: they carve out particularized exceptions to general rules, which are not equally available to all citizens).
You can let each town's citizens and government know that you are simultaneously negotiating similarly with a number of other towns (keep the list confidential).
You can call for public debate in public forums, for example if there is a meeting hall in town, book the hall and publicize the discussion. Give everyone a chance to air their views in detail, and answer their questions honestly and in good faith.
When the proposal comes up for a vote of city government, and then the subsequent vote of the citizens to confirm the arrangement, you can expect a decent amount of controversy. However, it will be controversy among the established residents. If the 2/3 majority of established residents votes you in, you can be sure you have their support when you go there. And the 1/3 who doesn't like it will have to deal with it same as when anyone loses an election, but their arguement will be with their neighbors who voted to let you in.
If you can't get a 2/3 majority, try another town. Eventually you will find one that has the right combination of economic needs and cultural open-mindedness, to let you in. And then when your group moves in, live up to your word, and you'll have a decent chance of being accepted as a good corporate citizen, and acceptable neighbors.
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
