Jed raised an extremely important point.
"Money is a measure of freedom. It allows people to live however they please.
Someday in the future (and perhaps not in the distant future) robots will do
all physical work. If we are smart enough to make an economy worthy of our
technological genius, then every person on earth will be fabulously wealthy by
present day standards. Every person will be free to do anything he or she
pleases, every day of her life, the way a multimillionaire is today, or the way
Thomas Jefferson was. This should be the birthright of any person born on the
Earth or anywhere else in the solar system. Every baby should be welcomed with
all food, water, education, Internet access and transportation he or she wants,
for a lifetime, just for showing up. Go anywhere, live anywhere, do whatever
you please. In such a society, some people may feel ennui or dissatisfaction,
but that is the best and most fulfilling future we can hope for. On balance I
am confident that most people will contribute more to human happiness and
creativity in those circumstances than they would in today's world where you
have to work to make a living. To achieve that we must have much more
technology and more money. Fewer material resources perhaps, but lots more
computing power. Every person will need something like a hundred Watson-class
supercomputers at his disposal. Every person deserves that."
Here is one way to accomplish the goal he has suggested...
THE CAPITAL HOMESTEAD ACT
Throughout history the rich and powerful owned the things that
produced the wealth.
When land and people were what produced wealth, the rich and powerful owned
land and people.
Today the things that produce most of the wealth are land and technology. In
particular, technologies such as machines, robots, rentable structures and
advanced information systems are replacing people at their workplaces and
threatening their family incomes.
And today, who are the rich and powerful?
The people who own the land and the technology (productive capital).
So what’s the problem?
The problem is that too few own income-producing wealth (capital) and too many
own nothing. Many people owe more than they own.
Why Are So Many Citizens Powerless?
If you feel economically insecure or powerless, you’re not alone. The fact is,
you are economically vulnerable if you don’t own — as your private property —
some of the land and technology that produce most of our wealth.
Economic power is tied closely to political power. It comes from property (the
rights and powers of ownership) and the means to acquire property. In today’s
21st century global economy, the most significant forms of property are in
advanced technologies and corporate equity.
________________________________________
In the USA today, 10% hold 90% of directly owned corporate shares
________________________________________
When ownership is concentrated, power is concentrated. This is why a few people
are very powerful and most people are virtually powerless. The wealth-producing
power of an individual worker has not increased much over the last 1,000 years.
Poor people and most non-property-owning workers can only produce insecure
subsistence incomes from their jobs.
Some people, however, profit from the work that the technology does by owning
shares in the companies that use that technology. These people become rich and
powerful because they own the things (capital) that produce most of our wealth.
In a democratic and just economy everyone should have an equal opportunity and
equal access to the means to own shares in companies that use advanced
technology. The U.S. economy, for example, should have programs that lift
artificial tax and credit barriers to help every American become an owner of
American Industry. Every family could then earn income from jobs and income
from capital that every family member would own.
How Could Every Citizen Gain a Capital Income and Economic Power?
Today many people, even the poor, can buy on credit consumer items such as
cars, TV sets, clothing and homes. However, these purchases are not
income-earning property. They can make the borrower even more economically
vulnerable.
Meanwhile, every year America adds about $2 trillion worth of new productive
assets in both the public sector and private sector, or $7,000 for every man,
woman, and child. The way we finance these new assets creates few new owners
and widens the gap between “haves” and “have-nots.”
There is an alternative that is neither socialism nor capitalism. This “just
third way” would be a free enterprise economy, generating private sector
profits — but with ownership of the new growth systematically flowing to every
individual citizen.
With access to capital credit repayable with the full pre-tax earnings of the
capital itself, everyone could gain ownership in America’s expanding
technological frontier. We wouldn’t have to take away wealth from those who
already own capital.
What is the Capital Homestead Act?
The Capital Homestead Act is a modern version of Lincoln’s Homestead Act of
1862 which offered a piece of the land frontier to many propertyless Americans.
Lincoln’s Homestead Act was one of the most significant economic initiatives in
America’s history. It laid the foundation for America’s rise as the world’s
greatest industrial power. Unfortunately, the land frontier ran out. Most
Americans were never given a chance to share in the ownership and profits of
our high-tech industrial frontier, which unlike land has no known limits.
Capital Homesteading would take nothing away from present owners, but would
link every American (including the poorest of the poor) to the profits from
sustainable economic growth. Every worker and citizen could gain a share in
power over technological progress and the tools and enterprises of modern
society. Through widespread ownership all citizens would participate in a more
democratic economic process, just as they now participate in the democratic
political process through access to the ballot.
________________________________________
Under Capital Homesteading,
every child born today could gain by age 65:
• $460,000 in tax-sheltered assets.
• $46,000 in annual after-tax income.
• $1.6 million in dividends during that period.
________________________________________
The Capital Homestead Act proposes a number of programs so that every man,
woman and child could get interest-free capital credit from a local bank.
(Future earnings of the capital purchased would pay off the loans, including
bank service fees and premiums to cover capital credit default insurance.) You
and every member of your family could get access to this special credit by
setting up a tax-sheltered Capital Homestead Account (CHA) — like a “Super-IRA”
— at your local bank.
Through your CHA, and with the guidance of your financial advisor, you could
purchase with your capital credit part ownership in: 1) companies for which a
member of your family works; 2) a company where you have a monthly billing
account; or 3) “qualified” companies that are well-managed and highly
profitable, like Microsoft, Exxon-Mobil, Proctor & Gamble, IBM, etc.
Companies could also establish Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs) for their
workers and Consumer Stock Ownership Plans (CSOPs) for their regular customers
to borrow funds repayable with future pre-tax profits, for the issuance of new
shares or for the purchase of existing shares.
Communities that adopt for-profit Citizens Land Banks (CLBs) – also called
for-profit Citizens Land Cooperatives (CLCs) or Community Investment
Corporations (CICs) – could attract interest-free credit to buy land for
development or build new infrastructure. Every citizen could participate as a
shareholder in community land planning and governance decisions. Moreover, each
citizen would share in profits from rents and fees for use of land and
infrastructure.
________________________________________
Access to capital credit
Through the Capital Homestead Act, access to capital credit — which today helps
make the rich richer — would be enshrined in law as a fundamental right of
citizenship, like the right to vote.
Using its powers under Sec. 13 of the Federal Reserve Act, the Federal Reserve
System would supply local banks with the money needed by businesses to grow.
The new money and credit for private sector growth would, however, be
“irrigated” through Capital Homestead Accounts and other credit democratization
vehicles.
Through a well-regulated central banking system and other safeguards (including
capital credit insurance to cover the risk of bad loans), you and all other
citizens could purchase with interest-free capital credit, newly issued shares
representing newly added machines and structures. These purchases would be paid
off with tax-deductible dividends of these companies. Nothing would come out of
your pocket or reduce the income you use to put food on your family’s table.
Within a relatively short period of time, you would become a full owner of your
shares. For the rest of your life, you would receive a decent and regular
income from the earnings of the capital you accumulate over the years. Then you
would have income-producing property to pass on to your children. This is how
Capital Homesteading works.
To learn more about this idea, see the website of the Center for Economic and
Social Justice
www.cesj.org
Mark
Mark Goldes
Co-founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute
301A North Main Street
Sebastopol, CA 95472
www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org
707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax
________________________________________
From: Jed Rothwell [[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 3:03 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Vo]: ECAT 600 C Operations
Guenter Wildgruber wrote:
Decent, humble scientifically oriented minds consider that, and are not
distracted by possible billions.
That is an absurd thing to say. People should be "distracted" by the likelihood
that cold fusion is worth billions of dollars. I consider it grossly
irresponsible to pretend it is not worth huge sums of money. I also dislike
this Mandarin attitude toward money as being "filthy lucre" that should now
sway a pure-minded academic scientist.
I have heard this attitude from time to time, that there is something unseemly
or morally wrong with making money. I strongly disagree, for the following
reasons:
1. Money and wealth earned by legitimate means, without causing much harm or
pollution, are socially beneficial.
2. Money promotes science, technology and exploration. One of the NASA people
at W&M had a slide with a great quote about this: "If God had wanted people to
go to space, she would have given them more money" -- Mark Albert.
3. Money is a measure of social benefit, albeit a crude one. An invention that
makes millions of dollars and causes no harm is good for humanity. An invention
that makes billions of dollars and also causes no harm is even better for
humanity. Cold fusion will earn trillions and save countless trillions more
that would have been spent on fossil fuel.
4. Money is a measure of freedom. It allows people to live however they please.
Someday in the future (and perhaps not in the distant future) robots will do
all physical work. If we are smart enough to make an economy worthy of our
technological genius, then every person on earth will be fabulously wealthy by
present day standards. Every person will be free to do anything he or she
pleases, every day of her life, the way a multimillionaire is today, or the way
Thomas Jefferson was. This should be the birthright of any person born on the
Earth or anywhere else in the solar system. Every baby should be welcomed with
all food, water, education, Internet access and transportation he or she wants,
for a lifetime, just for showing up. Go anywhere, live anywhere, do whatever
you please. In such a society, some people may feel ennui or dissatisfaction,
but that is the best and most fulfilling future we can hope for. On balance I
am confident that most people will contribute more to human happiness and
creativity in those circumstances than they would in today's world where you
have to work to make a living. To achieve that we must have much more
technology and more money. Fewer material resources perhaps, but lots more
computing power. Every person will need something like a hundred Watson-class
supercomputers at his disposal. Every person deserves that.
- Jed
