This is the initial PROTOTYPE.
See for DAVID fund one here:
www.socialism.nl/fund/een
This can be a prototype for your own DAVID fund.
Start it today !!

What it does is put a marker on a company that it should become a democracy once the original starter leaves, in exchange for a non-profit/free/easy loan, while leaving the original starter well and fairly compensated. Effectively it is buying justice, nothing more and nothing less. This type of fund is ultimately not a goal in itself. The ultimate goal is to make this type of investment mandatory throughout the entire Nation, and to outlaw all profit seeking investment, trade in debts, stock markets trading company ownership, and trade in natural resources. Free trade in labor and its products is not to be outlawed, but focused as the single essential mechanism of the Nation its economy. That is the way it should be. This DAVID fund already lives that goal, ahead of the law being set to do Justice where Justice is sorely and urgently needed.




D.A.V.I.D. fonds Één

 Name: DAVID fonds Één (English: DAVID fund One)
 Type: non-profit social business investment fund
 threat-level: 3/5 (medium)
 Assets: list ./assets.html
 Outstanding investments: list ./loan.html
 Number of credited companies: 0 + [hidden]
 Credited companies: list ./creco.html
 Number companies becoming democratic: 0 + [hidden]
 Democratized companies: list ./deco.html
 Investment mechanism: 3% interest after each full year on outstanding sum 
                       (inflation correction), with special conditions:
                       - Invested in businesses will be sold to employees
                         if there are 10 or more employees, who come to own
                         it as an open democracy, where new workers will have
                         equal voting right. The new democratic company is
                         handed to the employees as a majority rule group,
                         on the provision that they will not turn the company
                         into scheme that does not have majority rule for
                         all that work there. The employees are to make a
                         decision out of this pre-determined set of 
                         democratization schemes first: standard business
                         democracy. That scheme has an op-out option,
                         if chosen the employees can make up their own
                         particular majority rule system (discouraged).
                         The method of democracy can be altered later, not
                         the fact that it is to be democratic. The minimum
                         form of democracy is the ability to fire the boss
                         at will through majority vote, and void previous
                         decisions by a boss (scheme B, `Boss Elect').
                       - The company can not be sold without the buyer
                         accepting this permanent agreement for the company,
                         and agreeing that it is a good thing for a company.
                       - The company will not be artificially altered to
                         evade above mentioned democratization mechanism.
                       - The owner will receive adequate & fair compensation
                         for outstanding business debts when the employees
                         take it over, but no excessive debts.
                       - The owner will receive a share of the future profits
                         from the democratized company (an agreement for the
                         hand-over to/with employees) of the company for the
                         same duration has he has worked in the company, at
                         least equal to an average full time income as
                         generated by the company. Years that the company
                         has been dormant/inactive don't count. The employees
                         / owner will have to work something out, but that
                         would be an acceptable deal. The business owner does 
                         not sell the assets of the company to the employees
                         for money, not even if they are registered in his own
                         private name. These assets fall into the hands of
                         the employees for nothing.  For complications with 
                         this, contact the DAVID fund Één to work on a
                         resolution of the problem. The goal is Justice, not
                         to deny either of the parties involved. While 
                         the boss / owner has invested work, the employees 
                         have invested their work, both deserve their 
                         respective rewards for working.
                       - Loans are made preferably on collateral and to
                         already existing companies (because that gives
                         more hope that the company will make it).
                       - Loans that enter each 7th year are terminated
                         and payed back at that moment, unless collateral is
                         available at that time. If they can not be payed
                         back by then they are ended and the debtor is free.
                         (The cost will be for the DAVID fund in that case.)
                         If there is collateral, the loan continues at a
                         maximum of the value of the collateral (roughly).
                       - If at the 7th year the loan is not paid back as
                         agreed, the collateral can be taken and turned
                         into money at the discretion of the DAVID fund.
                         What is left of that money after deducting the loan
                         and sale overhead is returned to the debtor. In
                         reality it might be ideal that the collateral owner
                         sells the collateral himself, reducing overhead.
                         This is an optional procedure, the other option
                         is to continue with the loan despite doubtful
                         performance (which would be even better in case
                         it actually ends up being repayed).
                       - The recipient of the loan will study the DAVID
                         fund scheme sufficiently to understand its aims
                         and mechanism. The recipient can only get a loan
                         if the principles are agreeable. No loans can be
                         made to people who disagree, because of the danger
                         that the terms will then not be met faithfully.
                         The recipient of the loan owns no economic gambling 
                         certificates such as shares or stocks (which would
                         indicate disagreement with the DAVID system.)
                       - Loans are not confidential, but public and published.
                         This is meant to increase popularity of the business
                         with people who like the DAVID system. Loans which
                         collapse are not explicitly listed for punishment,
                         but companies that violate the democratization
                         agreement are.
                       - If the condition of democratization is violated,
                         that will be publicly recorded, hoping this will
                         lead to a boycot to destroy mentioned business, and
                         make room for new businesses. Contra argument, if 
                         any, written by violating business, will be published
                         along with the complaint and implicit or explicit
                         call for boycot. Financial warfare will likely be
                         started on the violating business (that means funding
                         more competitors, giving them additional credit to
                         sell very cheaply for a price war, encourage
                         competitors with free advertizement, until targeted 
                         business is busted - note that these options are
                         legal.) A legal complaint to the Courts may also
                         be attempted to restore meeting the agreed conditions.
                       - If a debtor decides to become a member in this
                         David fund, the membership fees can be converted
                         into already received debt payments if the debtor
                         wants that, pushing up the membership date. This
                         only for fees received while the loan was open, up
                         to a maximum of 1 year into the past, and if the
                         fund capital does not reach zero because of it.
                         (The restrictions to prevent members being able
                         to pull out large amounts of capital after having
                         taken a large loan, which would devastate the fund.)
                       - The loan will not and can not be sold to a third
                         party from either side. The loan is only valid
                         between this David fund Één and the business or
                         person receiving the credit. The only strong arm
                         that will potentially be involved is the official
                         Dutch police and the official Dutch Courts (in
                         other words the loan will not be sold to a loan
                         Mafia or other loan collection business if it is
                         difficult to collect).
                       - Any loan proposal can be rejected without stating
                         a reason. Having not payed down previous debts, if
                         any, does not help with getting another loan. Though
                         profit is not the goal, the DAVID fund needs the
                         money as a tool, it can't do its job if it is empty.
                         Therefore high risk loans are not good for the fund.
                       - Loans are written on a contract paper and signed.
                       - These terms are not open to negotiation, all loans
                         made by this fund follow these same rules, until
                         further notice.
 Members: list ./members.html
 Service costs: none, non-profit volunteer activity (at present.)
 Power structure: currently dormant, 1 person activity. I would propose
                  direct democracy answerable only to the monthly paying
                  members, with the provisions that: 
                  - if the fund is ended that the remaining value is put
                    back in the hands of the oldest members first as to
                    what they donated 1:1;
                  - new members are eligible to vote after one year being
                    paying member;
                  - if there is suspicion the fund is under a "new member
                    majority" hostile attack, new members can be rejected
                    or have voting rights suspended until the matter is
                    resolved;
                  - members agree to the goals of the system and to vote
                    accordingly;
                  - members do not own economic gambling certificates,
                    such as stock, shares.
                  These rules are to make an attack on the fund less
                  easy. Even if there is a forced break-up per majority
                  rule, much value is retained in old members, who can
                  use it to start over quickly but without the attacking
                  members. The waiting period for voting makes attacks
                  time consuming and risky. The agreement to vote according
                  the principles means that "we vote in majority to fund
                  our vacation with all money," can be defeated in principle.
 

Notice

This is a social investment fund. The aim is to bring up companies that behave humanely to the people that work in them. The idea is that there is no substitute for power, therefore the goal is to bring up democratic companies. Power itself is a right and a necessity.

This fund is currently in its starting phase. The primary aim is to generate enough capital to hopefully one day make a difference. The ultimate aims are to change the Constitution of Holland, so that social investment and company democratization becomes mandatory in the entire economy. See for more details: www.socialism.nl, especially: sound investment.

This fund is is an actual fund. To my knowledge it is legal in Holland to make a loan to another person, even if you are not incorporated as a business. If this fund becomes something significant, it will have to be incorporated properly. That has currently not happened, and therefore any new members will have to hoard money on their own accounts: no actual money at all will be accepted, and all pledges of money from new "members" (in name only) are taken as anecdotal (not legally binding, otherwise that might require incorporation). Currently this fund exists essentially only for the purpose of gathering a capital investment tool.

Be advised that under Dutch law a verbal agreement is as fully legal as a written agreement. Loans are preferably made in the province of Groningen / Holland. This fund does not comprise a livelihood, if it is lost that is not a problem. There is no profit in this fund, the interest rate yields nothing. The only profit is in sound businesses and Justice in the economy. The assets under my control might be donated to a good cause some day (hopefully a running DAVID fund system.)

So far the language is only English here (sorry), the goal is global (ultimately), most people don't speak Dutch. To have an example function it needs to be English (maybe it will be translated it some day, you never know).

Threat levels

There is a significant danger that the credited business will be target of hostile politically motivated actions, such as a finance war by the for profit gambling banks, their bosses and their cronies. For that reason it may be better to hide which businesses have been credited to make it more difficult to attack them. It can even be hidden after they have become democratic that they have in fact become democratic. Not knowing what business is already or to become democratic makes it at least more costly to attack them, since they have to be located first. A new business is a tender plant, any additional pressure may cause it to collapse, even just a negative word in a for profit owned media.

Therefore there are 5 threat levels:
1: All credited and democratized business get listed here.
3: The business will decide for itself if it wants to be known or not publicly through the DAVID fund scheme as a "credited" or already "democratized" business.
5: No businesses get listed here, information is hidden, transactions preferably in cash.

The level will be determined from the amount of hostile activities from the for profit finance sector. Threat levels 2 and 4 are in reserve (level 2 could be "only businesses which really do not want be listed and are in apparent danger, will not be listed"; level 4 could be "only businesses which really want to be known as DAVID businesses, despite apparent dangers, get listed").