Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- It’s Official: A Democratic President Proposes to Cut Social Security
- An Outpouring of Love and Support for Bradley Manning to Receive the Nobel Peace Prize
- Exxon Tar Sands Spill Continues to Devastate Arkansas Community
- In Arkansas, Exxon Is Threatening to Arrest Reporters But Otherwise Telling Nobody Nothing
- Exxon's Unfriendly Skies: Why Does Exxon Control the No-Fly Zone Over Arkansas Tar Sands Spill?
- Exxon Tar Sands Spill Continues to Devastate Arkansas Community
- Fukushima Meltdown Driving Increased Abnormalities Among US Infants
- The Treason of Intellectuals
- Exxon's Unfriendly Skies: Why Does Exxon Control the No-Fly Zone Over Arkansas Tar Sands Spill?
- The Growing Campaign to Revoke Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize
Popular content
Today's Top News
How to Restore the Middle Class
Let everyone earn dividends from our common wealth-- the commons
A cushion of reliable income is a wonderful thing. It can help pay for basic necessities. It can be saved for rainy days or used to pursue happiness on sunny days. It can encourage people to take entrepreneurial risks, care for friends, or volunteer for community service.
(Credit: Rifqi Dahlgren under a Creative Commons license from flickr.com)
Conversely, the absence of reliable income is a terrible thing. It heightens anxiety and fear. It diminishes our ability to cope with crises and transitions. It traps many families on the knife’s edge of poverty, and makes it harder for poor people to rise.
There’s been much discussion of late about how to save America’s declining middle class. The answer politicians of both parties give is always the same: jobs, jobs, jobs. The parties differ on how the jobs will be created — Republicans say the market will do it if we cut taxes and regulation. Democrats say government can help by investing in infra¬structure and education. Either way, it still comes down to jobs with decent wages and benefits.
It’s understandable that politicians say this: it was America’s experience in the past. In the years following World War II, we built a solid middle class on the foundation of high-paying, mostly unionized jobs in the manufacturing sector. But those days are history. Today, automation and computers have eliminated millions of jobs, and private-sector unions have been crushed. On top of that, in a globalized economy where capital can hire the cheapest labor anywhere, it’s no longer credible to believe that America’s middle class can prosper from labor income alone.
So why don’t we pay everyone some non-labor income — you know, the kind of money that flows disproportionally to the rich? I’m not talking about redistribution here, I’m talking about paying dividends to equity owners in good old capitalist fashion. Except that the equity owners in question aren’t owners of private wealth, they’re owners of common wealth. Which is to say, all of us.
One state—Alaska—already does this. The Alaska Permanent Fund uses revenue from state oil leases to invest in stocks, bonds and similar assets, and from those investments pays equal dividends to every resident. Since 1980, these dividends have ranged from $1,000 to $2,000 per year per person, including children (meaning that they’ve reached up to $8,000 per year for households of four). It’s therefore no accident that, compared to other states, Alaska has the third highest median income and the second highest income equality.
Alaska’s model can be extended to any state or nation, whether or not they have oil. Imagine an American Permanent Fund that pays dividends to all Americans, one person, one share. A major source of revenue could be clean air, nature’s gift to us all. Polluters have been freely dumping ever-increasing amounts of gunk into our air, contributing to ill-health, acid rain and climate change. But what if we required polluters to bid for and pay for permits to pollute our air, and decreased the number of permits every year? Pollution would decrease, and as it did, pollution prices would rise. Less pollution would yield more revenue. Over time, trillions of dollars would be available for dividends.
There’s been much discussion of late about how to save America’s declining middle class. So why don’t we pay everyone some non-labor income? I’m talking about paying dividends to equity owners in good old capitalist fashion. Except that the equity owners in question aren’t owners of private wealth, they’re owners of common wealth. Which is to say, all of us.
And that’s not the only common resource an American Permanent Fund could tap. Consider the substantial contribution society makes to publicly traded stock values. When a company like Facebook or Google goes public, its value rises dramatically. The extra value derives from the vastly enlarged market of investors who can trust a public company’s financial statements (filed quarterly with the Securities and Exchange Commission) and buy or sell its shares with the click of a mouse. Experts call this a ‘liquidity premium,’ and it’s generated not by the company but by society.
This socially created wealth now flows mostly to a small number of Americans. But if we wanted to, we could spread it around. We could do that by charging corporations for the extra liquidity that society provides. Let’s say we required public companies to deposit 1 percent of their shares in the American Permanent Fund for ten years, up to a total of 10 percent. This would be a modest price not just for public liquidity but for other privileges (limited liability, perpetual life, constitutional protections) we currently grant to corporations for free. In due time, the American Permanent Fund would have a diversified portfolio worth trillions of dollars. As the stock market rose and fell, so would everyone’s dividends. A rising tide would truly lift all boats.
There are other potential revenue sources for common wealth dividends. For example, we give free airwaves to media companies and nearly perpetual (and nearly global) copyright protection to entertainment and software companies. These free gifts are worth big bucks. If their recipients were required to pay us for them, we’d all be a little richer.
Banks are another large recipient of our collective largesse. I’m not talking about bail-out funds; I’m talking about the hugely valuable right we give banks to create money out of nothing. Banks do this (with our generous permission) by lending roughly seven times the money customers deposit (this is called ‘fractional reserve banking’); they then charge interest on these magically minted dollars. This gift to banks is justified on the grounds that it injects needed cash into the economy, but a comparable boost could be achieved by giving people new government-issued dollars — for example, by wiring money to their bank accounts — and limiting bank lending to money actually on deposit. Fresh money would then trickle up through households rather than down through banks.
Regardless of its revenue sources, the mechanics of an American Permanent Fund would be simple. Every U.S. resident with a valid Social Security number would be eligible to open a Shared Wealth Account at a bank or brokerage firm; dividends would then be wired to their accounts monthly. There’d be no means test — and no shame — attached to these earnings, as there are to welfare. Nor would there be any hint of class warfare — Bill Gates would get his dividends along with everyone else. And since the revenue would come from common wealth, there’d be no need to raise taxes or cut government spending. All we’d have to do is charge for private use of common wealth and feed the resulting revenue into an electronic distribution system.
How large should dividends be? The amounts paid would vary from year to year just as corporate dividends do. But the system should be designed so that dividends supplement rather than replace labor income. One good guide is Warren Buffet’s rule for bequeathing money to children: give them “enough to do anything, but not enough to do nothing.” We could also bear in mind that the higher the dividends, the stronger the middle class and the smaller the gap between the richest 1 percent and everyone else.
The United States isn’t broke, as some Republican say; we’re a very wealthy and productive country. The problem is that our wealth and productivity gains flow disproportionately to the rich in the form of dividends, capital gains, rent and interest. If we want to remain a middle class nation, that needs to change. Jobs alone won’t suffice. We need to complement wages with non-labor income from the wealth we all own. That would truly make us an ownership society.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


68 Comments so far
Show AllWhy should any of us be interested in maintaining a "class" based system? Dividends? Revenue from oil leases? Playing a new derivatives game? This is your alternative? You've been pushing this for a while as a regular commentor, cudos to finally being granted column space. But I am still not "buying" it.
EXACTLY ... !!
However, there is the seed of an idea here -- we should be NATIONALIZING our natural resources and CHARGING those private companies who have "owned" them and pounded them down and who have destroyed the environment for 100
and more years of this monopoly they have held over our commonwealth.
Let's also come to understand that the yardstick of a dollar bill is a futile way to
judge the life of a child, or a community, or clean air and water, oceans -- !!
There is no dollar bill worth mentioning when we come to discuss Global
Warming and the destruction of the planet and our ability to survive on it.
The Native American told us this more than 500 years ago --
They told us that a dollar bill is worthless -- you can't eat it, you can't plant it,
You can't drink it -- you can't see a sunset in it.
The world well knows at this point that we need to dump capitalism which is
now merely only organized crime.
People create economies -- not banks, not financial institutions. They merely manipulate economies. Time to bury capitalism which is no different from fascism.
WAKE UP, AMERICA!!
Yes time to end this capitalism/communism police state crap. The Indians knew how to make a society, they shared everything ! So the plan should be, "Everyone one, or every worker share in the GDP", everything put back into society instead of one side takes all.
Then no more poor, no more hunger or joblessness or homelessness, no more uneducated, no more WARS, no more corporations, no more billionaires or millionaires, dictators, kings/queens stealing everything, NO MORE SLAVERY !!!!!
to be honest i can't believe what i am reading in this column
i think progressives have been brain so stunned and disappointed by the obummer deception and the destruction of their hope they are now are reduced to crazy and monomaniacal plans - each one wackier than the one before
costa rica here i come
first off - alaska is one of the most indebted states in the union - their dividend notwithstanding
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/268.html
i think its sad to see the level of thinking and imagination at work here
or the lack of it
there is no country left for starters and folks would do well to get their minds around it
there is no democracy and there is no legal system
as bernie madoff stated - wall street is a ponzy scheme run for the benefit of insiders. madoff said the whole american economy is a ponzy scheme and he oughta know
the gop presidential reality show oughta be opening a lot of eyes to the new reality of life in fascist amerika
gingrich is in the race thanks to one man - sheldon adelson
"US election 2012: Sheldon Adelson, the man keeping Newt Gingrich's bid afloat
If Newt Gingrich were to win the Republican nomination he would owe around ten million favours to Sheldon Adelson – one for each of the dollars the flamboyant billionaire has pumped into his presidential bid."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9044854/US-election-2012-Sheldon-Adelson-the-man-keeping-Newt-Gingrichs-bid-afloat.html
santorum is kissing the ass of foster freiss
"Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum responded on Thursday night to comments made by one of his biggest supporters, Foster Friess, about women holding their legs together as a means of contraception. "
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57379895-503544/santorum-defends-backer-after-contraception-remarks/
santorum defended this remark - kiss the ass that feeds ya boy!
romney belongs to wall street as does obummer
so we have two contenders who have essentially one backer each and two front runners who owe their asses to the same banks on wall street
if romney and obummer face off we have two wall street boys - wall street wins either way
then the wars of empire are ratcheting up as an iraq redux - fear fear fear
tsa are doing finger art in soiled adult diapers and frying "cute" women with their xrays over and over
dental xrays btw are the leading cause of breast cancer
In 1963 a study by Dr. E. B. Lewis found a significant excess of deaths from leukemia, multiple myeloma, and aplastic anemia among radiologists, and two years later two Johns Hopkins researchers discovered a 70 percent excess of cardiovascular disease and certain cancers among radiologists as opposed to the general population, and a 730 percent rise in leukemia deaths.
http://www.helladelicious.com/diy/2011/11/the-nuclear-industry-x-rays-and-breast-cancer/
thyroid and other cancers as well
so midst all the death and destruction and joblessness, homelessness, toxins in the food and water, corrupt financial system, dysfunctional political system and impending armegeddon this guy wants a dividend
yet another handout
based on his strange notion of value....
you can't make this stuff up - i dare you to even try....
No you can't make it up. We live in a world not even Orwell could have predicted. Instead of restoring the middle class, let's destroy the 1%.
I'll second that suggestion!!
Wonder what Santorum would do if his wife held her legs together when he was demanding "his god-given rights?"
further to my post above we get this today from cbs
"Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's faltering campaign is about to get another shot in the arm, CBS News has learned.
Billionaire casino magnate Sheldon Adelson plans to give another $10 million to the outside group backing the former Georgia lawmaker who is running behind former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum in the race for the Republican presidential nomination, a source close to Adelson told CBS News.
Adleson and his family have already given $11 million to "Winning our Future," the super PAC backing Gingrich. The group, which bombarded the airwaves in South Carolina last month ahead of the primary there, is largely credited with helping Gingrich win in the Palmetto state.
The latest $10 million cash injection would raise the Adelson family's contribution to $21 million, and a different source close to Adelson said he is prepared to drop another $4 million for a total of $25 million"
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57380147-503544/gingrich-to-get-another-$10-million-from-casino-backer-sources/?tag=contentMain;contentBody
like i said - you can't make this stuff up...
Why is Adelson pouring all this money into the Gingrich campaign?
This pete guy is stupid, just stupid. One, he obviously is a 1%er himself so is really clueless. He goes from 'how to restore the middle class' to doling out a pittance of a few bucks like it means something. What the hell planet is he on? And ya, I think I just lost my interest in WA/aka Credo.
DID HE EVER mention the loss of these middle class jobs to the NAFTA debacle? No. Did he mention the extreme rise of corporate greed ? Not really.
Here's how we restore the middle class.
1. Bring the jobs HOME
2. Lower all interest rates across the board for all credit debts to 5-8%
3. Take ALL money out of campaigns
4. Give the money that Congress thinks should go to the banks, to the people who owe the money who can then give it to the bank for their mortgage payment or cc payment.
5. Flat tax everyone who makes over 30,000$ individually.
6. Flat tax all corporations on their profits, regardless of location of their home office.
7. End the union busting attempts of the whorporates.
8. Find some new leaders amongst the very young. These old farts are just screwing the pooch.
from michael snyder today:
#1 If you are working three jobs and you still don’t have enough money at the end of the month, you might be a typical American worker.
#2 If your job involves asking the question “Would you like fries with that?”, you might be a typical American worker.
#3 If you shop at the dollar store because Wal-Mart is too expensive, you might be a typical American worker.
#4 If your job requires you to wear a smock, a brightly colored polo shirt orlots of “flair”, you might be a typical American worker.
#5 If people are constantly asking you where the restroom is while you are at work, you might be a typical American worker.
#6 If your employer hires extra part-time workers in order to avoid giving anyone full-time hours, you might be a typical American worker.
#7 If you are required to watch a mindless “training video” after being hired, you might be a typical American worker.
#8 If the company you work for is owned by someone on the other side of the world, you might be a typical American worker.
#9 If a trained seal could do your job and you feel like your expensive education is going to waste, you might be at typical American worker.
#10 If you don’t have any health insurance at all, you might be a typical American worker. Only about 25 percent of all part-time workers in the United States receive employee benefits such as health insurance or paid sick leave.
#11 If your car is older than your kids are, you might be a typical American worker.
#12 If you can’t afford to buy the things that you are selling to the public, you might be a typical American worker.
#13 If the balances on your credit cards are larger than your bank accounts are, you might be a typical American worker.
#14 If going to Burger King is your idea of “fine dining”, then you might be a typical American worker.
#15 If it costs more to fill up your car with gas than you will make at your job today, you might be a typical American worker. The price of gasoline has increased by 83 percent since Barack Obama first took office, and the average cost of a gallon of gas in the United States is now up to $3.52.
#16 If you eat your cereal with a fork so that you can save milk, you might be a typical American worker.
#17 If your electricity bill keeps going up but your paycheck never does, you might be a typical American worker.
#18 If it feels like you are losing an organ every time you pay for health insurance each month, you might be a typical American worker.
#19 If you feel like your employer is constantly tempted to replace you with someone younger and cheaper, then you might be a typical American worker.
#20 If you are so poor that you cannot even afford to pay attention, you might be a typical American worker.
dude - where's my dividend
Generally a good rant, except for the price of gasoline stuff. Rather than clamor for cheaper gasoline, people need to start facing the real costs of a gasoline addicted society, make some personal lifestyle changes, and especially, clamor for public transportation - which stunningly, is undergoing an wholesale dismantling in spite of higher gasoline prices wher I live.
A transit authority could run buses every 2 minutes on every main through-street in an average city, using well-paid union drivers and mechanics, at a tiny fraction of what the resident are collectively are paying in gasoline purchases. And, of course, at a tiny fraction of the previous carbon footprint too.
Love # 16, lol. Pretty funny.
Although I realize that the list could easily be made twice as long, I'm a little surprised by one omission:
#21 If you had to pee in a cup to be hired, and at your employer's whim are subject to peeing in a cup with satisfactory results to maintain employment, you might be a typical American worker.
Flat taxation is NOT a good idea - terribly regressive. Graduated progressive taxes ar far better for income taxes. Real estate tax millages could also be adjusted on a progressive scale based on household income, or landlord's net income from the property.
And just think, if a flat tax were implemented now in our history, it would shift the paying off of the national $15 trillion debt to all classes of taxpayers equally. (Assuming of course that we could get to the point in the future of paying down the debt.)
A perfect plan for the elites: accumulate debt primarily to benefit the elites for about 30 years, then shift the burden of payback to everybody equally. How clever. 150,000,000 people pay back the debt to the tune of $100,000 apiece, and Whammo! the debt is paid off. Say, $10,000 a year for 10 years (as long as no other debt arises) and we would be back to about where we were when Jimmy Carter was president.
I'm all for it. All us patriots sharing equally in the shared sacrifice it takes to get our house in order. And showing our gratitude to all those elites who loaned us the money for those all-important jobs and defense missions they have provided to us. I feel blessed by such a fair-minded idea.
P.s. The couple in the photo??? Too poor to have rings??? I think this guy is feeding, bottom feeder, off the progressives.
Looking at a couples, especially a woman's, hands for rings to make ligitimate a relationship is regressive and mysogynistic. How old are you?
I knew someone would bitch that comment. hahahaha thanks for falling over into the pile of...I can't think of a remark except to blab the obvious...sorry, you didn't get my MY point. I happen to be an anarchist senior bitch from hell.
My point was that Barnes was attempting to make a point with a photo of an interracial couple, that could not afford wedding rings. His disgusting effort to make us think that this country is capable of giving us each a couple grand a year to keep our yaps shut. The constant banging on the word 'class' just makes me scream. SO FUKING WHAT? Why are people even discussing "class"like it means anything. We are talking about human beings who each have their own personal deeply cut experience of life. TOO MANY of them are currently suffering diseases caused by the environment. Too many of them have lost their homes. TOO MANY of them are walking the streets looking for a job. TOO MANY of them are seniors who have to choose between heat and food, I being one. I sit here in my very small home humbled by the fact that I have a roof, a car, some ss checks, food basics called rice and beans, and a seriously old laptop on dial up. I am educated and read too much. I have my say daily because the current state of the world makes me want to do myself in, like get drunk or whatever. But I don't because I know that based on the sum total of the world, because I own an acre, a car, a home, a computer and a tv, I am in the top 1%. And I am as guilty of abasing humanity as the Kock jerks. Why? Because I am not doing enough to make a difference. And when I readBarnes and hear his blab about how to help the middle class...I want to puke. He has no none zilch nada idea whatsoever what the people who used to work at GM, Ford, Chrysler, Delco, Westinghouse, IBM, that WAS the middle class. Barnes cannot be serious. I think he's on drugs.
No mention of the fact that even with 'free trade' agreements the average tariff the usa charges on Imports is around 3% -
Meanwhile the average tariff we are charged on our Exports going into s korea and china etc is around 20+%....
I never hear that talked about.......
Those 10,000 page free trade agreements are actually codified coporate giveaways........
A truly free trade agreement would be 1 paragraph.
And a question for the author - if you're already in Rainbow Stew territory why not suggest a return to the tax rates the republican eisenhower gave us.... 93% tax on all income (and capital gains) above 3 million a year.....
Rather than couching modeling on Alaskan petroleum industry in an era of society grappling with 'peak' everything, why not pay more attention to the state bank of North Dakota?
"on the foundation of high-paying, mostly unionized jobs in the manufacturing sector"? No credit given to those who fought and gave up their lives for workers rights that gave rise to the unions that now have been mostly wiped out ...by the union-busting Republicans in government (eg Reagan and the air traffic controllers, Scott Walker, et al)
The biggest problem is that we have a money-based system where nothing else counts--people, morals, or even the planet. In such a system, the only solution is redistributing money. Unfortunately, we've destroyed so much, there are no easy answers. It is very hard to change behavior and this means the greed, the passivity born of creature comforts, anger and despair arising from lack of money and/or opportunities, drug abuse, mental illness, violence and other criminal activities--these aspects of society seem to be growing.
Still, it's hard to give up hope that positive change is possible (sorry to sound like Obama here)...but it's not going to come from the .1% or their friends in Washington DC or the media.
I like the idea of corporations paying for land and resources instead of living off the dole--our resources! But even this could mean higher prices or unavailability so we would still pay. Here again it is a matter of what we have become accustomed to.
It's the voracious appetite for emulation the Elite's conspicuous consumption and material wealth that has been the driving force for first the rise and the natural and subsequent demise of the middle class. Why should we try to preserve a way of life that has directly led to the present coupled crisis of resource depletion, overpopulation and climate chaos?
Nice plan. Let's rebuild the middle class using government handouts. Brilliant...
But surely, the right-wing state of Alaska must be a favorite of yours, and they do such a thing.
And while I'd prefer social benefits like free healthcare, free higher education, free public transportation, and federal aid for union organizing to cash handouts, what are you proposing to fix the ongoing impoverishment of USAns - including ones with full-time jobs?
Dont say "free markets"; there are plenty of examples historically (the guilded age) and geographically (central America, Colombia, Mexico, Russia) that show that this does not work.
I'm not really an economist so I can't say. The scheme this guy is proposing will work for while until they run out of other people's money to spread around. what then? I don't know...
The wealthy are the ones with "other people's money" and that never "runs out." One need not be an economist to understand that.
That is how you got where you are.
If you are talking about me personally, i find that offensive. I never received anything from the government. On the contrary every year i have to send them an extra 5-6 grand, on top of the regular tax withholdings. That's the for the fed gov alone. I also have to about to fork out about the same amount in property taxes.
So no, i didn't get where i am thru gov handouts. If i would be in a soup line somewhere, living in subsidized housing, than you could say i got there using gov handouts. Not everyone is a freaking freeloader...
You don't think you have received anything from the government?
I rest my case.
True, not everyone is "a freaking free loader." Why do you consistently defend those who are?
Good thing for you that your Mother didn't share your view of the world when you were infantile and dependent and demanding (physically, that is.) Good thing your adopted country didn't share your world view when you were welcomed in.
Yep, you did it all yourself, didn't you?
"You don't think you have received anything from the government?"
I do not think so. I know so. And please don't tell come back with the cliche "you drive on public roads". That's what the crap load of taxes i pay are being used for.
"Why do you consistently defend those who are?"
I really don't defend any of them, at either end of the spectrum. I and i think i have said that before.
Do you expect fairness to operate when you purchase something by weight or volume? If so, you can thank government for ensuring that occurs. And that is just one of the very many little things government does that advances the state of our being. The only reason government acts as the quote from Tolstoy on this thread describes is because of the nature of those running the government and the method they employ for retaining power.
Roads are supported by fuel taxes. Where, then, are your "freaking freeloaders" in the example you chose to use?
Your taxes maintain the infrastructure. They didn't build it. You benefit massively from the contributions of millions.
Do you really think that the taxes you pay even make a dent in what you owe back?
Do you really imagine that people in soup lines don't pay taxes or get more than they pay in? The lower the rung on the ladder, the bigger the tax bite. You are the one who raised the issue of use tax, and that is where the bottom half is getting gouged.
Here is an example you in particular will love. Undocumented workers pay in to Social Security with no hope of getting any return. You are freeloading on them. Today, many of those undocumented people are from Latin America. When I was younger, many of them were from your part of the world. Of course, thanks to the government program of fast-tracking people from Eastern Europe to full citizenship, in misguided "anti-communist" zealotry, which allowed thousands of Nazi collaborators and sympathizers and participants in the extreme right wing genocidal death squads. Many were then funded and supported in developing extreme right wing think tanks and other activities, and encouraged to disseminate exactly the sort of extreme right wing propaganda that you do right here every day. So, you may have escaped that problem of being persecuted and targeted as "illegal" and "alien" and "free loader." It is not possible for one to be part of that eastern European immigrant community and not know exactly what I am talking about here.
You owe the rest of us your very life! You are welcome. Now, the least you could do would be to show some humility and gratitude and stop being such an ingrate, such an anti-social buffoon and free loader in so many ways.
Do you truly not see how your argument promote the interests of the wealthy and powerful few, the real "free loaders?" I think that may be true, if sad.
People are paying for protections that they are not getting. You are for dismantling those protection further.
You accused people from eastern Europe on previous thread under a different name so I'm gonna ignore that part. BTW, why can't you people keep one login. If you are ashamed of what you said then don't say it. Jeez, talk about chameleons...
Anyway, illegal aliens are not paying SS. They are most likely paid in cash. If they have a SSN then their wages are way too low and whatever they take out of society is more than they pay in taxes (nothing basically).
Not sure why i owe you my life. Care to elaborate?
"People are paying for protections that they are not getting"
On that, at least we agree. But I'm not the one who advocated giving more money and more power to the government. How much more does it take for you to realize that money given to the gov is just squandered. Take SS for example. That money is supposed to be kept in a trust fund. The gov, instead uses it for whatever and they put IOUs in there. How does that make you feel?
I have never posted "under another name." That is a blatant lie. We have had far too many exchanges for you to simply be confused about that and be making an honest mistake. You are knowingly lying to slander another poster.
Give it up 2Americas, chameleon also did not make use of public education. And his snappy offendedness means he can't read you either.
Uh, it's a dividend, not a handout. Are you sure you read the article? ;)
I thought about that. A dividend is a return on shares you own. In this case the gov owns the shares that companies would be forced to hand to them. The gov in turn hands cash to people. But i guess it does sound better than "welfare" or "being on the dole".
I say give this author a break. He is not trying to produce the definitve manifesto for solving all the ills you all understand. He's trying to counteract the confining box of economic discourse we suffer from in this country. Particularly the idea that the rich are all self-made heroic providers for the rest of us - the serfs. They are not. In recent decades, they got rich by fostering some kind of credo about being victims and being harmed by taxes, regulations, and tariffs, all things that historically protected the common good. Starting 31 years ago with you know who, call it Project Plunder. It was not create wealth, but transfer wealth upward, and don't tread on me while I'm doing it.
"Commonwealth" is a subject whose time is ripe - that can become a great opening in the waking up of the (disturbed) sleeping masses.
The author is surely glib and pie-in-the-sky and he proposes a highly flawed scenario, but I agree with you that the condemnations appearing here are a bit knee-jerk. Conceptually, the author's proposals aren't terribly far away from the guaranteed annual income idea once mused by Richard Nixon (who some have declared, without too much irony, as the last liberal president). The Alaskan program is not too far away from (re)distribution schemes proposed earlier in the 20th century under the political banner "Social Credit" (some Canadian provinces had Social Credit governments and programs, notably Alberta in the Depression era). The globalization of the world's economy is/was an inevitable process - it was predicted by Marx, and was an animating vision of labor activists early in the 20th century - but Big Capital has preemptively seized the initiative here.
Appreciate it. And Big Capital is doing it with Third World-style divide and conquer propaganda, as NateW says below. I would like to see a much more expansive definition of "commonwealth" when spoken about in this country. Safe air - water - biosphere as well as judicial system, transportation, health system, and education. These are all required in an interdependent, advanced society. These affordable taxpayer-funded entities make the trains run on time, as has been demonstrated in the past. They should be good targets for receiving redistributed income (I'm thinking as the civil engineer I am.) Recently minted generations of "pure" free marketeers, however, see all this inherent established commonwealth as somehow theirs for the taking, or dismantling, IMO. How to beat Big Capital? You're right, it's got to be a lot more than some variation of the Alaska model.
The diverting of the riches of the commons to well-connected elites has a long and dubious history. Ergo, the proposition of everyone benefiting from the proceeds, while a good idea on its face, falls apart upon consideration of its execution. This is due to the fact that the elite and their lackeys know how divert quite well, as it is one of their best hustles. The best way to restore the American Middle Class is to do again what worked before, unionization and political organization, with hopefully the historic lesson learned that elitist divide and conquer propaganda is put out to impoverish most everyone Third World style.
The problem is, here in Pennsylvania, anyone who suggests that the enormous, but depletable Marcellus Gas wealth under a real purported "Commonwealth" (along with Virginia, Kentucky, and Massachusetts) are common property, and therefore the government should collect royalties and severence taxes for public benefit, is dismissed as a "radical socialist".
So, how the hell do they get away with such "socialistic" royalties and taxes from oil and gas it in right-wing states like Texas, Wyoming or Alaska???
Peter Barnes is...a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more; it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing
"A cushion of reliable income is a wonderful thing. It can help pay for basic necessities. It can be saved for rainy days or used to pursue happiness on sunny days"
I'm really sorry to rain on people's parades. But the solution to the world's problems have to do with our values, ideas and views. The problem in the way this article is written seems much less relevant than the problems that are the subject of the article. But, truly, the MOST relevant issue is in HOW we view the problems.
Because HOW we view things governs HOW we react. The author is using a very familiar approach to writing that is very clearly a MOST relevant part of the problem that cannot be swept under the rug any longer.
The author starts off with an idea that he knows will ring familiar to us. "a cushion of reliable income is a wonderful thing". That is das kapital's premier lie-lesson. By using that to catch our attention, the author is basing his whole article on the entrenched komforts that das kapital delivers to us in exchange for our souls. We have to sell our souls, agreeing to ignore the destructive side of the lifestyle, as the key term of the bargain.
And so, after the author is finished making his point in this article, all find the bars on their cages reinforced with the fact that what his message boils down to is this: "We sold our souls for das kapitalist komforts, so we can only lament, but never act on, our loss of solidarity with our selves, with our communities, and with the biosphere".
In stark contrast to this defunct scenario, we on the far left advocate that the people start demanding narratives that truly fit our agenda, by affirming at the outset our commitments to break, forever, das kapitalist komfort kontract.
And so the article will start off like this: "A cushion of reliable income is a wonderful thing, so goes the old kapitalist meme, but now we realize that material komforts cannot stand on their own, that they can only be icing on the cake of mass self-determination, universal solidarity, enlightenment, equity, and justice. We understand now that what income really means is a universal right to direct our personal energy toward our own BETTER interests, without the elites' relentless distractions and corruptions. We will discover our better interests, and serve them OURSELVES, so elites, GET OUT OF OUR WAY."
The writer is living in a dream world. His plan will not work because: "Due to energy limits, overwhelming debt burdens, and accumulating environmental impacts, the world has reached a point where continued economic growth may be unachievable. Instead of increasing its complexity, therefore, society will—for the foreseeable future, and probably in fits and starts—be shedding complexity."
http://richardheinberg.com/237-the-fight-of-the-century
I was just talking yesterday with a mid-50s peer about the services now available for post-70s elders and the odds that they'll still exist when we reach that age, and just who will be caring for us 20+ years hence. And although we currently have means, we both agreed we must not plan on those existing in the furure and plan accordingly. I'm sure there are others here, unlike the author, who share the same trepidation since they aren't ignorant of the dire dilemmas we confront and the gross lack of action in trying to solve them. The uncomfortable truth that must be confronted is the middle class will NOT be restored as the conditions that allowed for its creation no longer exist.
Exactly....but you also touch lightly on something more serious in Western Societies...the lack of community.....there was a time where dependance upon "outer structures", was not as important on how we depended on each other, within the community, where older people are valued, respected and cared for.
In our current Western values, once you stop "being a productive citizen"..then you are a "burden"..off to the recycle bin. That's the sad truth and the reason why there is so much fear and insecurity in so called "Western democracies "
I often write about the need to replace competition with cooperation as a precondition for success in facing our future and that such systemic change must begin within the family and its community. Unfortunately, many families are atomized--geographically scattered--and unable to even embark on such a project, which is made doublly difficult by the transient nature of the individuals that constitute communities, although this aspect of the USA is changing and has interesting nuances, http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2008/12/17/who-moves-who-stays-put-wheres-home/
People will and do move toward cooperation, and always have, if given the chance. We live under a set of social and economic arrangements that prevent that and that force people into competition. There have always been a few who will try to take advantage of cooperative society - which is necessarily vulnerable - and advance themselves at the expense of others, taking and not giving back. They are among us today, and they will argue in defense of the social conventions that support them saying that "it has always been this way" and that there particular strain of anti-social and dysfunctional thinking is "human nature" and inevitable. "We are all in it for ourselves, greed and selfishness are human nature, so we may as well structure the entire society around that" is their pitch.
The alienation and estrangement we see, and the destruction of families and communities, are products of a system forced on us for the benefit of the few, the most rapacious, self-serving and anti-social among us.
This particular author promotes that idea in an especially offensive and dishonest way. He claims to have some tricks whereby selfishness can be harnessed and produce the opposite of selfishness. In this way he can promote inequality and injustice while appearing to do the opposite.
Yes, the author promotes the continuation of a grossly dysfunctional system. Instead of restoring the middle class, we should pursue these points made by Bookchin and others related to them:
" Granted, we need profound cultural changes and a new sensibility that will teach us to respect non-human life-forms; that will create new values in the production and consumption of goods; that will give rise to new life-fostering technologies rather than destructive ones; that will remove conflicts between human populations and the non-human world; and that will abet natural diversity and evolutionary development. I have written on these needs for scores of pages in books and articles. But does anyone seriously think these cultural changes can be achieved in a society that pits people against one another as buyers and sellers, as exploited and exploiters, as subjugated and subjugators at all levels of life?"