Tuesday, 1 October 2013

Global Citizen's Dividend calculator

This is something I'm working on for JJS and I'm posting it here to see if it works:

My latest blogpost: Global Citizen's Dividend calculatorTweet this! Posted by Mark Wadsworth at 21:06

Labels: ,

12 comments:

Derek said...

So if I live in Antarctica, I get a CD of $4,880 but on the Moon I only get $3,400? Now you've got me puzzled. Where do the figures come from?

1 October 2013 at 22:11
Derek said...

$11,000 on Mars but only $1,040 on the Sun. Wonder where the lowest CD in the Solar System would be?

1 October 2013 at 22:16
Derek said...

Or perhaps I should move to Middle Earth. Rohan is offering a CD of $41,560!

1 October 2013 at 22:28
Graeme said...

it's a good start but how would I answer question 6? Who gives me that answer? Isn't that a major problem here?

yes I know, as an auditor, I asked companies those questions...and they just gave me a number.

1 October 2013 at 22:54
Kj said...

D: I believe you don´t have to go far out in the atmosphere to make both CD and LVT zero.

How about a really "global CD". Every country throws in 1% of GDP in the pot, and it´s redistributed per capita. Global GDP is somewhere around 10K USD, so the global CD would be around 100 USD, enough to increase the GDP of Congo by 25%. End aid. Heck, just handing out the portion of Norwegian oil funds that isn´t spent every year is around 30 USD per living human.

2 October 2013 at 06:29
Derek said...

Absolutely, Kj. That's why I wondered how the CD was calculated, given that you can type in "Mars", "Oz" or "Rohan" into the country box and still get a CD figure.

And I'm with you on the global CD idea in principle. Unfortunately the biggest issue would be the same as with current foreign aid: ensuring that it stays in the hands of ordinary people for long enough to make a difference.

2 October 2013 at 06:47
Kj said...

Make that 5 USD, not 30 USD.

D: Ofcourse, it´s entirely utopian, but only at the margins. In many countries, the lack of proper infrastructure and respect for personal property would make it nigh impossible to make sure people got it. Still, in most countries it´d work most of the time, unfortunately least likely those where the amount would matter the most. OTOH it´s a good exercise in managing the most basic bureacratic element a proper country should have, registries and all that.

2 October 2013 at 06:55
Mark Wadsworth said...

D, "Global" = "relating to our planet aka Planet Earth"

G, that's the clever bit. If you are a tenant, you already pay them, but try typing in "H".

Kj, in theory that is a great idea, but it's difficult enough getting people to trust their "own" government and to be prepared to share and share alike with people in the same country, you'd never get support for it on an international basis.

And if you did have support, then would we really want to send money to N Korea, Bongo Bongo Land, Islamic countries, China etc? The rulers would nick the money and either send it to Switzerland or spend it on weapons.

D, I'm using "Lookup" function in Excel which looks for the thing you entered and if not chooses the one before it in the list which is the closest match alphabetically.

2 October 2013 at 07:26
Derek said...

Aha! So it's Qatar, not Rohan, where you could in principle get $41k. Cheers!

2 October 2013 at 07:56
Kj said...

MW: Yup. As for the distribution side, it's a big challenge to say the least. As for what revenue to collect, offshore minerals/ sea fisheries, is quite a good candidate. It doesn't rely on goverment provision to enhance the value ( maybe except for fisheries), and "ownership" of those resources are controversial.

2 October 2013 at 08:35
Anonymous said...

D, the figures are from the CIA factbook, the link is further down the spreadsheet.

Kj, if you are going to go along with the principle, then all rents can go in the pot.

i.e. land in Norway is worth more because it is not at war with Sweden; land in Sweden is worth more because it is not at war with Norway etc.

2 October 2013 at 09:56
Anonymous said...

Since governments don’t do a good job of keeping track of how much society spends for nature and privilege, all the terms used in this calculator are very rough approximations.

To find out how much you owe to your community for your location – your Land Dues (or land tax, if you prefer), you enter either the selling price of your home or the assessed value of your property.

To get the annual rental value, I chose 1/10, partly for ease of calculation and partly because it is close to the actual ratio in the neighborhood where I live.

To convert the rental value of your apartment or house to literal rent for the location alone, I chose a half. Only a minority of properties have exactly half their value from the location, half from the building, but for an entire region that would be a fair ratio.

Your actual Land Dues would be off by 20% or more, either way, up or down.

If your local government or real estate web site provides a separate value for your land, then by all means use that number (and do not divide it by 2).

The resulting net is how much extra income you might have in a geonomic society – approximately. But it’s good to know even only ballpark numbers. Now you have a rough idea of what you’re missing, of what’s being kept from you and most everyone else.

Imagine if you did get an extra income apart from your labor or capital but from your region’s land. You’d be much better off so you’d not need as much in the way of social “services”. And if you and everyone you know were to get a share of what should be our common wealth, then those who now get it wouldn’t. The oil companies and big banks would not have the wherewithal to buy politicians. Government could quit wasting so much money on warfare and the rest of corporate welfare. In the US, Congres’ spending for warfare plus insiders subsidies is easily over half the federal budget. Plus, state and local governments likewise overspend on things like prisons and paving for cars.

No longer being milked by the 1%, nor paying as much conventional welfare to the bottom 10%, government could be streamlined. Taxes by the feds, states, and localities – which consume close to a third of the average American household’s budget – could be cut. Taking both of those steps (streamlining and de-taxing) saves you money.

It not only saves you money it would also make you money. Out from under hampering taxes, entrepreneurs would make commercial sites in your region more valuable. Your Land Dues might go up some but your share of society’s surplus would go up even more.

Ultimately taxes on income, sales, and buildings could be abolished. Government could finance itself by a mix of fees for using certain services, like licensing drivers, and dues for universal services, like police protection. With the government efficient and the citizenry prosperous, life would be so much simpler and more pleasant, eh?

* * *

SMITH, Jeffery J. 503/568-5889
3603 SE 66th Av, Portland OR 97206 USA
Outreach/Website, CommonGroundOrWa.org
President, Forum on Geonomics
Editor, www.progress.org
Share Earth's worth to prosper and conserve.

2 October 2013 at 23:57

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)