While the issue of PPPs is an important one, my concern is related 
specifically to incorporation, that an increasing amount of human 
practice is being (forced to be) subsumed under the corporate model.

The funding culture is one example. Whereas it used to be that 
individuals and groups of individuals were considered "accountable" and 
could receive funding, it's now the case that funders require their 
grantees to be corporations. There is the unquestioned assumption that 
individuals cannot be accountable/responsible for the carrying out of a 
specified mission, while corporations can.

If I'm right that the corporation was modeled on the concept of 
citizenship (?), then the logic of this assumption is wacky and should 
be challenged.

Ocean


Carlos Quinonez wrote:
> I have no literature to point you towards, unless you're willing to 
> include the role of employment-based insurance in the financing of 
> dental services as a form of corporatisation.
>
> Anyhow, as I said before, I think that private roles are legitimate, 
> in the sense that, all things being equal (and that in itself 
> represents a damning portion of the argument), things can be done in a 
> way that does not marginalise and that is inclusionary.
>
> In this exact way, I think that the argument is one based on morality 
> (and I don't mean private or public morality, as there is no such 
> thing), not whether incorporation (of one kind or another) is positive 
> or negative (as some corporations, of whatever size, can prove 
> positive, negative, and/or even both).
>
> I hope that made sense.
>
> And by saying that it is moral, I mean this philosophically and 
> practically.
>
> This idea is fundamental as a way forward in my view, and can best be 
> summed up as this:
>
> What is the current economic market if not a moral failure?
>
> But at the same time, again, all things being equal (ahem), we still 
> very much need routes of exchange, otherwise economies, whether there 
> are arguments for them locally, regionally, nationally, and/or 
> internationally, and whether they are based on some form of social 
> organisational unit or corporation.
>
> Thanks for hearing me out.
>
> CQ
>
>
> On 8-Mar-07, at 4:33 PM, Ocean - WISE wrote:
>
>> The incorporation of the non-profit sector in tandem with funders' 
>> insistence that grantees be corporations further marginalizes 
>> populations that are already marginalized. The cynic in me has to 
>> wonder if this isn't deliberate.
>>
>> At any rate, in trying to find sources on the history of 
>> incorporation (I've a dim recollection it was modelled on the concept 
>> of citizenship), I came across this reference from an online bookseller:
>>
>>    The Incorporation of America: Culture and Society in the Gilded Age
>>    by Alan Trachtenberg (1984).
>>
>> see http://tinyurl.com/2kwk86
>>
>> Has anyone read this book or know of more recent and, ideally from my 
>> perspective, sources specifically addressing the incorporation of 
>> Canadian life?
>>
>> Ocean
>>
>> Chrystal Ocean, Coordinator
>> Wellbeing through Inclusion Socially & Economically
>> http://www.wise-bc.org/

-------------------
Problems/Questions? Send it to Listserv owner: [log in to unmask]


To unsubscribe, send the following message in the text section -- NOT the subject header --  to [log in to unmask]

SIGNOFF SDOH

DO NOT SEND IT BY HITTING THE REPLY BUTTON. THIS SENDS THE MESSAGE TO THE ENTIRE LISTSERV AND STILL DOES NOT REMOVE YOU.

To subscribe to the SDOH list, send the following message to [log in to unmask] in the text section, NOT in the subject header.

SUBSCRIBE SDOH yourfirstname yourlastname

To post a message to all 1200+ subscribers, send it to [log in to unmask]
Include in the Subject, its content, and location and date, if relevant.

For a list of SDOH members, send a request to [log in to unmask]

To receive messages only once a day, send the following message to [log in to unmask]
SET SDOH DIGEST

To view the SDOH archives, go to: https://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/sdoh.html