sovereign wealth

[task0778]

But the real purpose of my asking for your opinion on that Alaska article was because it could offer a different way. Alaska did it with oil money but every state has some means of wealth creation. A shared wealth is much different that stealing from producers and giving it to non producers in order to keep them numb and out of revolutionary mode.
It seems that even the poorest in Alaska, for example, understand that if they rob the principle they will lose the dividend. So they restrain themselves (ever seen an 83% vote on *anything* in modern times?) and take less in order not to destroy the future. “Tax the rich” as a means is both morally repugnant and unsustainable. But “put aside for your future”? Who can argue with that?
Federalism has mostly been destroyed but otherwise towns and counties and states could all do this. I think natural resources are the best place to start because (1)so many are exhaustible and (2) the represent “found” wealth.

The household of the Monarchy of England was funded for centuries without public taxes, and to the benefit of the nation by the Duchy of Lancaster while the Crown Prince had access to the Duchy of Cornwall. These aren’t geographic places but rather investments run by government ministers for the Crown. Texas subsidizes universities with the Texas Labd Trust. Universities endow chairs and libraries.
So why not community efforts at a “”permanent fund” like Alaska’s that will (1) provide for all to some extent and (2) give everyone a feeling if shared ownership l and desire to protect it?
Paying people to not revolt is not the answer. The hostage takers demands just grow over time and they have no inclination towards stewardship of the wealth they covet greedily.

Got a question, about this: So why not community efforts at a ”permanent fund” like Alaska’s that will (1) provide for all to some extent and (2) give everyone a feeling if shared ownership l and desire to protect it?

Most communities don't have the oil reserves or any other natural resources that could provide for a permanent fund. Yeah, it's nice to have, but I'm thinking that in a nation as populous as the US is, we just don't have the money to give 320 million people anything like $1600 dollars a year. And the idea of raising taxes on the rich people is ludicrous, they don't have anywhere near that kind of taxable income. Sooo, where's the money going to come from?

Practicalities aside, I have some issues with the moral hazard too. Income should be earned IMHO, if you have the ability to do so. We should assist those who need temporary help to get back on their feet so to speak, and those who lack the capability to work ought to be subsidized. Otherwise, giving a paycheck to someone who has not earned it isn't the smartest idea.

 

[DOTR]

Got a question, about this: So why not community efforts at a ”permanent fund” like Alaska’s that will (1) provide for all to some extent and (2) give everyone a feeling if shared ownership l and desire to protect it?

Most communities don't have the oil reserves or any other natural resources that could provide for a permanent fund. Yeah, it's nice to have, but I'm thinking that in a nation as populous as the US is, we just don't have the money to give 320 million people anything like $1600 dollars a year. And the idea of raising taxes on the rich people is ludicrous, they don't have anywhere near that kind of taxable income. Sooo, where's the money going to come from?

Yeah I know. Im not a zealot on this. Ive just always been impressed with what Alaska did. But to keep the conversation going...no I wasnt thinking of the whole nation. Horrors. The problems we have are because we have federalized everything. And Im not in favor of the cash handouts.
I was thinking of each community up to the state level. And we all have something. Texas places all revenue from state owned land into the Texas Permanent School Fund. That includes oil leases, sales, grazing leases etc. They have 41 billion in it right now of which abut 1 billion a year is distributed equally to school districts across the state every year. Texas Permanent School Fund - Annual Report
Montana taxes coal extraction and puts 50% into the Montana Coal trust. The interest spun off is used for infrastructure in the state.
Paul Merriman has suggested that Bainbridge Island place every traffic ticket into a trust. In fifty years it would pay 100% of the local governments operating expenses.
Some states have fisheries which they constantly worry about depleting. Some have timber. Some have bauxite.
All I am saying is the wealth of society, and individuals, should not be seized for the purposes of vote buying. Moving it to a fund that protects the "general welfare" is acceptable and it takes some of the power of the ruling class away to use my money to buy voters to defeat me. Of course if the wrong people run it then the problem is magnified.

Practicalities aside, I have some issues with the moral hazard too. Income should be earned IMHO, if you have the ability to do so. We should assist those who need temporary help to get back on their feet so to speak, and those who lack the capability to work ought to be subsidized. Otherwise, giving a paycheck to someone who has not earned it isn't the smartest idea.

I agree. Handouts are corrosive even to the people getting them. Its a problem. But its a problem some people can and do use to their own advantage.\And these problems have all been exacerbated by the destruction of the family...the basic unit of society.

 

[DOTR]

Mac1958 whst say you to this? The Marxist writing the article would like to see it brought in line with Marxist theory of course. And she quotes the Silicon Valley billionaires who all want a Marxist handout they call “Basic income”.
But that isn’t what this is. Liberals play with words and it’s why nobody trusts them. If you hand out billions then liberals demand more and also they agitate for taxes on top.
And that is the real goal. Control of individuals via taxes.
Anyhow Alaska tried something really unique and an interesting solution...if they can keep the “Sikicon Valkey billionaires” she speaks so glowingly of out of the picture.
Norway has also done well.

What do you think?

How to hand out free money

IF ANYONE ELSE HERE CAN TRANSLATE FOR ME IT WOULD GREATLY BE APPRECIATED

BECAUSE

I DOUBT ANYONE HAS ANY FUCKING IDEA WHAT THE HEADLINE AND OP ARE ATTEMPTING TO CLAIM/STATE/POSIT


please!!!!!

It’s a little above you and I doubt anyone could dumb it down enough for you.
Hey did the media give their fellow Democrats “equal time” or did Trump have to “demand it” for them?

You don’t know much but you knew better than to take that bet with me didn’t you?

I'm not sure what hurt the Dims worse. Was it Trump's speech or seeing Pelosi and Schumer up there trying to refute it.

My God that is a creepy pair. Like the Adams Family or something.

 

[DOTR]

We can definitely tell you all about the latest video game or who the Karsashian sisters are banging, though.
.

I agree

You know, the brilliant Fahrenheit 451 was NOT about censorship. Not at all. Ray Bradbury once left a Berkeley classroom in a huff because the students insisted on telling him he had written of the dangers of censorship. The censorship was only a plot device.

Fahrenheit 451 was about *distraction*. Before the invention of airpods Bradbury called them "shells" if I remember right. But they served the same purpose. Numbness. Everyone saved until they could cover every wall with view screens and watch silly people doing silly things.

 

[DOTR]

And the idea of raising taxes on the rich people is ludicrous, they don't have anywhere near that kind of taxable income. Sooo, where's the money going to come from?
.

Taxing the rich, coming from the rich, always means one thing. Income taxes. Every consider why that is? The phrase "tax the rich" isnt even defined past that. And the rich are the ones going around singing about "tax the rich".
Its because they dont have any any income so to speak...at least relative to their worth and lifestyle.. Nancy Pelosi is worth 120 million dollars. She doesn't live on a paycheck like you and me. When she shouts "tax the rich" she means "find anybody who works for a living and tax his sustenance". Since she and her media allies set the conversion it will never move past income.
But if you changed that to a net worth tax, or a wealth tax, she would crawl back in her gilded hole quick along with Sergey Brin, Bill Gates, Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Clinton, Warren Buffet and all the other rich kindergarten socialists. All their grandstanding and bellyaching about "the rich" and NOT ONE TIME have they ever presented a wealth tax.
Im not pro-wealth tax. And I know the constitution forbids it for the most most part (but our founders also forbade the present income tax..which wisdom was overruled with the 16th amendment) I am saying they lie knowing they can avoid income taxes disguised as taxes on "the rich". I cant though. I live on my income. (In fact lots of people live on my income in exchange for voting)

 

[anotherlife]

Mac1958 whst say you to this? The Marxist writing the article would like to see it brought in line with Marxist theory of course. And she quotes the Silicon Valley billionaires who all want a Marxist handout they call “Basic income”.
But that isn’t what this is. Liberals play with words and it’s why nobody trusts them. If you hand out billions then liberals demand more and also they agitate for taxes on top.
And that is the real goal. Control of individuals via taxes.
Anyhow Alaska tried something really unique and an interesting solution...if they can keep the “Sikicon Valkey billionaires” she speaks so glowingly of out of the picture.
Norway has also done well.

What do you think?

How to hand out free money

Very interesting article! The idea of universal income also demands that the government is honest plus the people police each other. Government is never honest and people are evil. A church that provides food and shelter from tithe, that is collected from businesses, would come as close to universal basic income as possible.

 

[DOTR]

Mac1958 whst say you to this? The Marxist writing the article would like to see it brought in line with Marxist theory of course. And she quotes the Silicon Valley billionaires who all want a Marxist handout they call “Basic income”.
But that isn’t what this is. Liberals play with words and it’s why nobody trusts them. If you hand out billions then liberals demand more and also they agitate for taxes on top.
And that is the real goal. Control of individuals via taxes.
Anyhow Alaska tried something really unique and an interesting solution...if they can keep the “Sikicon Valkey billionaires” she speaks so glowingly of out of the picture.
Norway has also done well.

What do you think?

How to hand out free money

Very interesting article! The idea of universal income also demands that the government is honest plus the people police each other. Government is never honest and people are evil. A church that provides food and shelter from tithe, that is collected from businesses, would come as close to universal basic income as possible.

Yes. We ered when we turned charity over to the government...by which we always mean the Federal government. A nation could do it. A state or community or religious organization. But the Federal government is ill suited to do what people should do for each other.

But I still like what Alaska did. Their fund is owned by the people and like i said i find it incredible that 83% voted to resist the impulse to consume.

 

[anotherlife]

Mac1958 whst say you to this? The Marxist writing the article would like to see it brought in line with Marxist theory of course. And she quotes the Silicon Valley billionaires who all want a Marxist handout they call “Basic income”.
But that isn’t what this is. Liberals play with words and it’s why nobody trusts them. If you hand out billions then liberals demand more and also they agitate for taxes on top.
And that is the real goal. Control of individuals via taxes.
Anyhow Alaska tried something really unique and an interesting solution...if they can keep the “Sikicon Valkey billionaires” she speaks so glowingly of out of the picture.
Norway has also done well.

What do you think?

How to hand out free money

Very interesting article! The idea of universal income also demands that the government is honest plus the people police each other. Government is never honest and people are evil. A church that provides food and shelter from tithe, that is collected from businesses, would come as close to universal basic income as possible.

Yes. We ered when we turned charity over to the government...by which we always mean the Federal government. A nation could do it. A state or community or religious organization. But the Federal government is ill suited to do what people should do for each other.

But I still like what Alaska did. Their fund is owned by the people and like i said i find it incredible that 83% voted to resist the impulse to consume.

Yes a religious organization could do it, but I think a nation couldn't because it would spend it to fight its national minorities. It is amazing indeed that 83 % resisted the urge to spend it, but it is only temporary because the next generation can be programmed otherwise. This is what usually happens when the funds are not ideologically linked to a higher power.

 

[JBvM]

My God that is a creepy pair. Like the Adams Family or something.

really?

creepy

 

[JBvM]

My God that is a creepy pair. Like the Adams Family or something.

really?

creepy

somebody pissed in the gene pool long ago