Tackling Inequality Through the Social Ownership of Capital

[Islam Imamate]

A detailed proposal for the creation of a dividend-paying social wealth fund.

In the paper, I argue that the federal government should create a new investment fund called the American Solidarity Fund (ASF) and issue every American adult one share of ownership in the fund. After the ASF is created, the government will gradually accumulate assets for the fund to manage, such as stocks, bonds, and real estate. As the assets under management increase, the value of the shares held by the citizen-owners will increase, causing wealth inequality to fall. Although the citizen-owners will not be permitted to sell their shares, they will be paid a universal basic dividend each year from the investment income earned by the fund.

The link leads to the full paper if you're interested. Here's two videos released by the same think tank that address first what they see as the systemic problem with capital income and the second which describes the Alaska Permanent Fund which they see as a model for tackling inequality.



What do you guys think, is this a good idea? Do you agree generally but disagree on this or that detail?

 

[HomerThompson]

Thoughts on this structure for a wealth fund in the states?

@Jack V Savage

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

What do you guys think, is this a good idea?

I like the idea of UBI. In regards to the Alaskan resident dividend, the public-resource rich/low population environment is what makes that fund viable. Isn't it?

 

[Lead]

I suppose it's better than just a flat out UBI. I feel like Alaska isn't the best example to use as it's a tough area to live in and the fund is almost some incentive to go or stay.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I like the idea of UBI. In regards to the Alaskan resident dividend, the public-resource rich/low population environment is what makes that fund viable. Isn't it?

Those factors can't be overlooked but the US in general is pretty resource rich and the paper suggests other ways to seed the fund other than taxes on oil resources.

I suppose it's better than just a flat out UBI. I feel like Alaska isn't the best example to use as it's a tough area to live in and the fund is almost some incentive to go or stay.

The example has its limits but its a working social wealth fund within the US so it has some value as a model I think.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Those factors can't be overlooked but the US in general is pretty resource rich and the paper suggests other ways to seed the fund other than taxes on oil resources.

My impression with Alaska though is there's a common claim to the resources. I don't know how much that'd be the case in the lower 48 and here out on an island in the middle of the Pacific.

 

[senri]

I could see Norway adopting this after they start to dip into their oil funds when making investment in energy research and finally coming up with viable solution for clean renewable resources that can be produced at a surplus.

 

[BAM]

Not sure if it would work on a national stage, but there are Indian nations that already do this. For example, the Ho-Chunk nation in Wisconsin has an elected government that acts closer to a business. They have their main businesses, which are casinos and they have ancillary businesses such as gas stations which produce income for the nation. The government engages in investments and looks into other business opportunities as well. The income is then reinvested into the community via yearly dividends. I think each member gets around $10,000 to $15,000 a year. Through this many in that community own their own homes and avoid the health issues that other tribes face, especially those on reservations.

However, when it comes to motivation to climb the ladder, anecdotally, my view is that many don't have that as the $15,000 serves as a top up and they stay comfortably in a job of around $30,000 and don't really strive to do more. While that's fine for them, I imagine on a grand scale that would hurt the economy.

Positive - less people bottoming out
Negative - lethargic economy

 

[cincymma79]

I suppose it's better than just a flat out UBI. I feel like Alaska isn't the best example to use as it's a tough area to live in and the fund is almost some incentive to go or stay.

Also few people relative to the money to disperse.

 

[Islam Imamate]

My impression with Alaska though is there's a common claim to the resources. I don't know how much that'd be the case in the lower 48 and here out on an island in the middle of the Pacific.

It wouldn't have to be taxes on resources though, the paper actually suggests various taxes on capital to seed the fund.

 

[Liquid Smoke]

What do you guys think, is this a good idea? Do you agree generally but disagree on this or that detail?

We've tried this before with fannie mae, student loans, welfare, etc.
Fact is you can redistribute wealth but you can't redistribute status.

 

[genecop]

Huh....

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

It wouldn't have to be taxes on resources though, the paper actually suggests various taxes on capital to seed the fund.

Sounds interesting. UBI's gotta come from somewhere.

 

[Lead]

The example has its limits but its a working social wealth fund within the US so it has some value as a model I think.

Doesn't Norway or some European country have a similar fund that relies on oil? I can't remember which one but it is a similar example. I tend to think there is a good argument for it when thinking about natural resources. This does cause a rift though between the idea of a ubi but also generating support for an industry like oil if they went that route. I think the better ideas with energy is to find the best ways for it to progress and lower costs. That way, the market can still move on and off of things that don't work and aren't tied to relying on certain revenue.

 

[MayhemMonkey]

all nations that are capable should have a social wealth fund. Norway used their oil wealth to start one. Scotland want to start a similar fund if we become independent.

 

[cincymma79]

Doesn't Norway or some European country have a similar fund that relies on oil? I can't remember which one but it is a similar example. I tend to think there is a good argument for it when thinking about natural resources. This does cause a rift though between the idea of a ubi but also generating support for an industry like oil if they went that route. I think the better ideas with energy is to find the best ways for it to progress and lower costs. That way, the market can still move on and off of things that don't work and aren't tied to relying on certain revenue.

Norway is basically Alaska. Yes.

 

[Leagon]

I don't have much a mind for money, so I won't really partake in the discussion, but I'm definitely looking forward to reading it and learning some stuff.

Great thread.

 

[cincymma79]

Doesn't Norway or some European country have a similar fund that relies on oil? I can't remember which one but it is a similar example. I tend to think there is a good argument for it when thinking about natural resources. This does cause a rift though between the idea of a ubi but also generating support for an industry like oil if they went that route. I think the better ideas with energy is to find the best ways for it to progress and lower costs. That way, the market can still move on and off of things that don't work and aren't tied to relying on certain revenue.

Oil is around 1/4 of their gdp and the majority of its exports. Vast majority

 

[Jack V Savage]

Thoughts on this structure for a wealth fund in the states?

@Jack V Savage

It's good. Not the only possible approach, though.

 

[Limbo Pete]

It's good. Not the only possible approach, though.