I think we all know that the taxation system we built the last 100 years is failing from all aspects. The Europeans have introduced the VAT system and that is how there is less understanding / awareness of how failing the system is. The financial model is very complex and its theoretical understanding is par to the LENR situation. The negative is that we tweak the taxation system daily without understanding the consequences. There are some 500 people in DC doing nothing else and nobody understand the implication of different decisions.
I was very skeptical to the even income distribution from the beginning. However, it is hard to find why it would hurt. Paying unemployment salaries does not create any jobs. Creating systems to support people not able to support them selves does not either. Paying health benefits for people without health insurance creates a few jobs. (No, I do not think Obama care has any merits as most of the extra money goes to insurance companies and big hospitals.) Our society cannot just avoid to take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. That would be totally inhuman and the western world do not want to be labeled inhuman. Those in need knows best what they want to spend their dollars on. Anybody who thinks that a bureaucrat in DC can write a policy (law or rule or administrative direction) that does it better with 100% control needs to think again. Another aspect is that there is not enough work for all of us 40 hours per week, if we do not make sure that we improve the important issues. LENR qualifies for several reasons. It will change the energy situation and shake up society and I think that is good as well.. Big infrastructure investment do the same (no, not CA high speed rail). The solution to get more jobs is to reward those who creates the jobs. That does not happen by having the highest corporate taxes in the world. So why would it be better with more jobs available, when everyone already has a base salary? Many of us want more is the simple answer and work is fun. No work and no goals is really boring. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 12:20 AM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Martin Luther King, Jr. recommended Henry George's citizen's dividend. > But that's the last thing he ever did. They killed him and I believe it > was because of that recommendation as it would have eliminated the need for > the welfare bureaucracy and would have replaced the entire civil rights > paradigm founded on "protected groups" with a completely neutral "general > welfare". > > The American Enterprise Institute scholar and prominent libertarian > theoretician Charles Murray pretty much recommended the same thing recently > in his book "In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State". He was > roundly ignored by MLK's supposed supporters, libertarians and > conservatives. > > The interests arrayed against this on all sides of the political divides > are enormous: Basically, anyone that uses the word "populist" with a sneer. > > > The situation is improving. There are an increasing number of voices with diverse political leanings, albeit still in the minority, who express support for some sort of a universal "unearned" basic income. Why you have the right to a $5K dividend from Uncle Sam http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/right-5k-dividend-uncle-sam/ <<Need-based benefits necessarily divide society into two camps, higher-income payers and lower-income receivers. The former resent that money is taken from them, while the latter resent being viewed as welfare recipients. No one is happy with the arrangement. Dividends from common wealth, by contrast, unite society by putting all its members in the same boat. The income everyone receives is a right, not a handout. This changes the story, the psychology and the politics.>> Even the Council on Foreign Relations Is Saying It: Time to Rain Money on Main Street http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/25932-even-the-council-on-foreign-relations-is-saying-it-time-to-rain-money-on-main-street <<The September/October issue of Foreign Affairs features an article by Mark Blyth and Eric Lonergan titled “Print Less But Transfer More: Why Central Banks Should Give Money Directly To The People.” It’s the sort of thing normally heard only from money reformers and Social Credit enthusiasts far from the mainstream. What’s going on?>> Harry
