Saturday, August 19, 2017

Joe Rogan Experience #1000 - Joey Diaz

Joe Rogan often seems to be on the cusp of describing Crowd Funded Government. In the "On Deck" section of this website, I have a few videos of Mr. Rogan's that I will discuss in future blog posts.

However, this one takes the cake, and deserves an immediate post. In Mr. Rogan's 1000th episode with Joey Diaz and Tom Segura, Mr. Rogan describes a generalized version of Crowd Funded Government starting about 16 minutes into the podcast.

Mr. Rogan first describes the ruthless nature of involuntary taxation. Under our current system, we are threatened with imprisonment ("they will put you in a cage") if we don't pay our tax bills.

The Crowd Funded Government system would instead collect these funds voluntarily. Involuntary taxation that takes money for government programs that you would otherwise voluntarily contribute less to is theft.

Mr. Rogan then describes our current system of taxation as servitude to "Big Daddy." He correctly inquires, "Why do we let any thing be Big Daddy? . . . No person should ever be Big Daddy."

Mr. Rogan finally lays out one of the principal arguments of the Crowd Funded Government movement: the right of the taxpayers to choose which government programs they fund by simply "checking off boxes."

Checking off boxes is exactly how the Crowd Funded Government system would function. If you support certain government programs, then check the boxes and choose the amount to give. If you don't support certain government programs, then leave it up to others who are more passionate to fund those programs. Your taxes should not be stolen from you to support government programs that you don't support.

As Mr. Segura describes, accountability levels of government programs are currently very low. He believes that government should be "mandated to explain in detail what they're doing and what they're spending on."

For every government program, Crowd Funded Government would provide:
1. the specific laws that authorize the objectives of that specific program,
2. the labor, material, equipment, and assets required to accomplish the objectives if 100% of the requested budget is received, and
3. the variations in the program if less than 100% of the requested budget is received.

Thank you Mr. Rogan for spreading the message of Crowd Funded Government! It's great to be reminded that the logic behind Crowd Funded Government is out there and is waiting for a group that is passionate enough to make it a reality. Crowd Funded Government is that group, and is spreading the message every day. 

Saturday, August 12, 2017

Does Crowd Funded Government Give More Political Power To Corporations?

Brian Johnson continues with another stimulating question: Does Crowd Funded Government give more political power to corporations?

Brian Johnson
August 1, 2017 at 7:38 AM

I just noticed this. Your giving the citizen the CHOUCE to pay taxes or not? If I had the choice to not pay taxes I would probably not pay taxes. Even if I did choose to pay, it would be at a much reduced rate. As I said before, I am the average American, so you are right, I'll probably spend it. You're implying that if that money goes into the corporate world then they will then distribute these dollars as they see fit. You are right in one regard, there would no longer be reason for the current practice of using lobbyest to make decisions since now corporate America has the power to put their money where they want. That is after they have taken their cut because corporate America is built on greed and glut.

So, the short story in this choice of taxation is maybe the average citizen doesn't pay taxes, or at least a much reduced percentage, but then spends it. Corporations grow larger and increase their bank rolls. The stock market severely inflates due to companies controlling their earnings through their choice of how much they pay taxes. And when said company sees something that benefits their business, they throw their bankroll at it. Instead of taking government out of the politicians hands and putting it in the people's, if you give citizens the "choice" of paying taxes or not, and in general they don't, you have just given control to corporate America. Trump would have never had to run for president in your proposal, because he would have already had a great deal of contol, and in fact the presidency would have given him less.

Crowd Funded Government
August 12, 2017

Some of the most common feedback that I receive is that voluntary taxation would be a bad thing, and that involuntary taxation is the best way to fund our collective desires. I have never been able to follow any logic supporting involuntary taxation.

Involuntary taxation is theft if you wouldn't voluntarily pay that amount. If you would voluntarily choose to pay fewer taxes than you are currently paying involuntarily, then you are admitting that the government is currently stealing the difference from you every year. I don't like being stolen from, so I don't support involuntary taxation. If someone is forcefully taking money from you for causes that you don't support, then that is theft. I have never met anyone who supports theft, therefore I know that Crowd Funded Government has the logical upper hand if we can get the message out there.

The Crowd Funded Government movement excites me because this will give us the chance to see exactly which government programs citizens actually support, and exactly how much they want to pay for those programs. My favorite example is currently the new spending program on the southern border wall. Many people are strongly for or against the wall, but the only way that we can settle that debate in our current political framework is to vote for politicians who are either for or against the wall. Why not cut through the bureaucracy and simply find out how much citizens actually want to pay for the wall?

Regarding the central points of your comment regarding corporate power, you are making an argument that I am finding hard to logically follow. According to you, corporations would have more power to direct government spending how they want via Crowd Funded Government compared to the current system. However, I see it differently. In my opinion, under the current system, corporations have the ability to use lobbyists to get their corporate objectives accomplished for a fraction of the cost compared to the Crowd Funded Government funding mechanism.

Consider Government Widgets (Gwidgets) as an example of how lobbying in the current system gives corporations much more political power than they would have under the Crowd Funded Government approach. In this example, Gwidgets are produced by private sector companies and are then only purchased by governments. Manufacturing companies that would benefit from Gwidget manufacturing currently only need to spend a fraction of the cost of the total production on lobbyists. The lobbyists help the politicians write the laws that authorize the funding of Gwidget manufacturing. Those Gwidget manufacturing contracts are worth much more than the lobbyists who wrote the laws. The funding of those government contracts is then involuntarily collected from all citizens via taxation. The Gwidget manufacturing corporations have now received a payoff from the taxpayers that is far greater than their lobbying costs.

Under a Crowd Funded Government design, the Gwidget manufacturing companies desiring to fund the publicly funded manufacturing of Gwidgets could still hire lobbyists to write the laws. However, the laws would only matter if citizens choose to fund them. Corporations could voluntarily fund Gwidget manufacturing themselves, but why would a corporation contribute $1 to a government program that would then pay them back the $1 that they contributed? Crowd Funded Government solves the problem of corporations lobbying the government to spend money on projects that then provide a greater payoff to the corporations that paid for the lobbyists.

Crowd Funded Government is the best solution regarding the current problem of corruption in government funding. If you, or anyone reading, has an answer regarding how we can stop corporations from paying lobbyists to write laws that provide a greater payoff to those corporations than the cost of lobbying then I'm ready to support that idea. Until someone presents me with a better idea, I'm going to continue to spread the logic of Crowd Funded Government.

I'm going to move all questions to Twitter moving forward. I will copy the best Twitter discussions to this blog and expand on them as time allows. I also need to start going through the "On Deck @" list, which is finally possible now that the flooding in northern Illinois has subsided. Until next time, please remember that the truth should never fear the light.

Monday, August 7, 2017

How Can The Average Citizen Make Informed Decisions Regarding Complex Budgets?

Brian Johnson is on fire! He asks another great question: How can the average citizen make informed decisions regarding complex budgets?

Brian Johnson
July 31, 2017 at 2:45 PM

Have you seen political discussions on social media... rhetorical question because I'm sure you understand how nasty, biased, and quite frankly unproductive they are. Most recently in my experience my town was pushing through a development project for a downtown apartment complex. I'm friends with an alderman in town so I had good information directly from the source. The incorrect, hypothetical, and some completely made up informotion that was spewed on Facebook, message boards, and other platforms by folKS who were against it was unbelievable. Along with that was name calling, personal attacks on others. People think because they can hide behind their keyboards and not look into someone's eyes they have the right to say whatever they want. Im not sure I want to live in a world where that is mine, and my neighbors primary information source.

Also, in big government, at the National scale there are at minimum of thousands of different things to fund. Again to ask the average American as myself to chose, and do so in an informed matter what's best for me is a lot. I may know that I want to fund one of say pro choice or pro abortion, but when it comes to national defense, the security of our country, I'm not qualified to make those decisions, and neither are 90% of my neighbors.

At some point you're asking the people to throw darts if the entire government is crowd funded.

I could see it working if the voter or "funder" has a smaller list to chose from. Let's say 15-20 different topics. So in general a certain percentage of your dollars are going to general government, and the other choice percentage goes to where you chose. If you don't show up to vote then it's as if you "checked the box". More people may actually show up to vote then also.

Crowd Funded Government
August 7, 2017 at 7:57 PM

If the downtown apartment development site required government funded improvements, such as public road access or utility modifications, then that would be a good example of how Crowd Funded Government is an improvement over the current system. Currently, the developer would lobby the local government officials to include these modifications as part of a larger capital improvement program. Well-connected developers with better political ties get their projects funded and executed faster.

Crowd Funded Government would eliminate this corruption. The developer would be forced to either pay for the costs of that capital improvement on their own, or convince fellow citizens to contribute to that government project.

You have a valid concern regarding the funding of thousands of projects, some of which are very complex and require a very detailed understanding. This ties back to our previous discussion about the crowd sourcing of information. Those who are knowledgeable about national security projects would share their opinions regarding which government programs should or should not be funded. Every citizen does not need to be an expert in every field of government spending. We just need enough passionate citizens to share their expertise with one another.

More broadly, I envision certain political parties, figures, and organizations to be the answer to your dart dilemma. Those with a better understanding of the overall budget could issue predetermined lists of the projects that they recommend funding and the percentages that they would recommend allocating. Citizens would then have a starting point of programs and percentages that they could then customize to suit their exact preferences. I would imagine that very few citizens would be interested in going line-by-line through the entire budget.

Crowd sourcing our collective intelligence is the best way to make the most informed decisions regarding how to spend our tax dollars.