Simple Economic Financial Platform

One of most fundamental precepts of economic exchange for a human population to be successful is to maintain economic stability. To create a plateau that an economy's participants can operate from consistently and with a fair amount of predictability (albeit nature will throw in unpredictability) for those participants to plan and function, ought to be a basic principle of human progress and government support strategy. Human beings need to be able to stand on firm ground, in order to venture forward and take the risks that can propel them to better circumstances. It is virtually impossible to be caught in quicksand and afterwards escape to firm ground, without help from those on safer ground. I believe it is the responsibility of government to provide the foundations necessary for human beings to step forward and become productive participants in society and civilization, and to act as a buffer against adversity inherent in the natural and human-made environments.
        During the Late 1970s and start of the 1980s, it was apparent to me, just through following the trends of what we now call globalization, that were effectively institutionalized by the post-war designs of the various Roosevelt administrations, in combination with the effectiveness of the Marshall Plan to create trans-Atlantic economic stability and grow, that deploying a similar plan for Africa, Latin America and Asia, could jettison the world's economic growth, along with the U.S.'s at a time when the world had stalled economically, both East and West. But it wasn't the price of petroleum at the time that was the impetus for the stall, but the aging of infrastructure, facilities and equipment. Had the U.S. undertaken a Marshall Plan at the time, it wouldn't currently still have the debt of the U.S. Saving and Loan Crisis appended to its accumulated debt of the 2008 crash. Additionally, much of the debt still hampering the global economy in 2018 - that the world is unlikely to ever be able to pay off, since it now measures 230% of world GDP - would never have been included in the current debt carry load. For instance, the debts accrued by the Latin American Debt Crisis of the Late 1980s, wouldn't have ever been exercised initially. The domino effects of the debt-driven 1980s are still part of the debt accruals of Latin countries, as are the those of the U.S., Japan, and many newly emerged African nations of the time. The world would also be further along in its development than it is in 2018.





Suggestions proposed following the economic challenges of the 1970s and early 1980s:

A) Continue to develop renewable energy, as in solar, wind, hydroelectric power.
B) Use the United States as a resource and beneficiary to power the rest of the Developing World (what was then called the Third World) through financing and supplying U.S.-built and manufactured equipment, supplies, services and expertise to the Third World in a concerted and coordinated effort to build up the Third World as a purchasing market for the United States, and its Western allies. It was obvious then, that we were in a world of global concern and interest at that time, and that was and should have been the next focus of international development. It also would have been our strategic counteraction to the initiatives of the Soviet and Sino-blocks and their influences around the world.

To do this, obviously borrowing from the undertakings of the Marshall Plan, and even deploying some of the











Suggestions proposed following the economic debacle of 2007-2009:

A) Gold Standard  international currencies pegged to price of gold [?]  International Exchange Mechanism, would provide a more tangible valuation of a nation's currency, and a slower
B) End and prevent hostile takeovers through punitive measures
C) Institute a financial transaction tax on short-term transactions. Investments in business ought to be designed to benefit the long-term outcome of a business venture. Short-term turnover of investments constitute a tax on the securities of a business venture adding an additional cost to the price of the security, as if the securities trader were a middle-man.
D) Ban the short-selling of financial securities which is by its nature designed to take advantage of the failure of a business enterprise.
E) Eliminate margin trading of securities, (?) which encourages tremendous risk-taking in business enterprises without the investor becoming a stakeholder in the business venture and its outcome. It also encourages sizeable volatility in the holdings of investors, in essence making their investment a form of gambling.
F) Develop a battery industry for the U.S.
a. Similar to SemaTech (nurture or incubate)
G) Globalization
Implement population planning controls
a. Reduce commercialization of farming (more of an American problem)
H) New Types of Plastic cannot be produced without an accompanying recycling solution
I) Long-term economic objectives are to be designed (& rewarded through tax incentives)
a. Eliminate long-term capital gains taxes
b. Adopt short-term capital gains taxes
J) Favorable Tax policies for capital reinvestment
K) Inheritance Tax (reasonable one)
L) Income Tax graduated in rate against threshold of achievement but not enough to discourage you from not enjoying the improvement - that is the rule of thumb...
M) Short-term capital gains tax == financial transactions tax
N) Use government to create competition models
a. Set up competing government entities to compete with private sector where no competition exists
b. Allow government enterprises to earn a profit and plan and implement reinvestments
c. As does private industry (such as I.E. DuPont de Nemours {some political operatives are not too fond of them as a company but my lack of appreciation only centers around their food and plastic activities, each of which I have an opinion on) but I think their offers of informational assistance to corporations and management advisory assistance was a phenomenal contribution to the effectiveness of corporations, which sometimes really suffer from poor strategy, poor objectives and/or execution. Private industry has to earn a profit and it really is a barometer of their effectiveness at doing so, when they do. It is an indication of how well they are able to sustain themselves by reinvesting profits which are surpluses built up from human labor. That is why I think it is necessary that all people should get some form of profit sharing when corporations become sustainable or possibly even from the early start of their formation so that the contributors that make something happen can have the finance and stability and resources that go with that to further that achievement. But I think that ownership, if it is to be fairly experienced by humanity, then it must be done so that opportunities are not architected to benefit one person's advantage from another's disadvantage. The Ayn Rand World.
O) Encourage Venture Capital  Is there a way that capital can be appropriated for Venture Capital investments from the Federal Reserve System?




NOTE:
Human volatility is unnecessary and ought to be protected as it is for some (usually very wealthy) who want special privileges and rules for its risk and its benefice. It is very sad that so much of the World and its conflicts are based on who gets to control whom. Certainly, the conflicts in the Middle East are all based on control. Control of the mineral wealth, control of the religion and the rules, control over who makes them, control over who gets to murder whom, literally a fight to see who gets to kill whom and to take control of the population or more easily its centers of economy which pay for themselves in the costs of protection. Mineral Wealth should be more socially or group owned with only privatization of what may require incentivization of process. all people need a resting place - a place where they can take a break in time of work or effort or struggle. a vacation. It should be a guaranteed minimum income for that population that shares in its ownership in a proper democracy Where we all have a foundation to work from:

A nation where its population are all governed under the same rules of who owns whom. Where everyone can vote - everyone. You cannot lose your right to vote. Ever. Regardless of what you may have done you still as a participant get a right to vote. That should be unequivocal and unbridgeable. In countries where you still have a death penalty, even those who are to be executed still get the right to vote over their own execution.

Democracy requires anchors for people. People need places to rest, especially in a highly turbulent world. If you want to run the world using a turbulent, poorly anchored, poorly trained, poorly responsive population than turbulence would encourage that outcome. Its dynamism would also present certain calamities. It would also enable better anchored and more securely positioned peoples especially of high wealth who could adapt themselves more to the opportunities periodic instability present. It should be remembered and I don't know how you would hold this information in the queue of the human brain for the majority of people to retain, but that for every winner in the stock market there is also a loser. Turnover is largely to the benefit of the biggest traders and deepest pockets. That is both elementary physics (electro-magnetism) conjoined with the basic mathematics of distributed risk.




One of the key issues lately about the economy and the architecture of an economy is how "Too Big to Fail" is a key synopsis of the political failure the laws that have been put in over the last 20 years for some fields and for 30 or 40 years for others but I think the real issue is that it needs to be described further as "Too Big of a Single-Point of Failure to Fail" fault in the security of the human population that we sometimes call the constituency. It is a single-point in how it is architected and that familiarity and concept of avoiding risk that was part of the 1930s when a lot of things came crashing down such as the environment in the West and Midwest, industry in the East and Midwest. When Prohibition came to an end and the shootouts with the Bonnie & Clyde's increased and hit a peak...

That is the most central issue to start with in the determination of anti-trust laws that need to govern the globe just as they used to do and were devised for at the start of the World's most calamitous century... We need to define what it is corporations and size are most optimum in allowing people to function while still continuing to keep the blood flowing in the circulatory system. But we also don't want bleeding and open wounds and infection and cuts and mounds of wounds and scars that serve as the anthropogenic archaeology of the turbulent economy of Turbulent Economics. We want more say over own outcome. It is a simple request for freedom of choice.

As the world has grown in awareness of each others strand, as the outliers extend further out, and we are more affected and dominated by those decisions elsewhere and overseas that don't consider our welfare but may impact and shake the very cores of our lives - as that world has spread over the globe with the reaches of globalization, so too has the need for a global system of managing and anticipating and correcting and strengthening and enhancing the survival of the World in its entirety. As the free-marketeers have called for greater globalization, then we need to have greater global government to manage and measure and observe and lead a more sustainable, less wobbly, Fair Exchange of human endeavor and reward.



Humans need financial stability to function and succeed. It is what the great mass necessitate. They need to build equity. Even the poor do. Everyone does. They need to build capital and keep it stored. Things still get bumpy even in relatively stable winds of time. Stability is what undoes so many people. Certainly, the instability people may contribute to themselves hurts but as a human many of our houses are not built in the most effective places or the most effective ways. I am saying this figuratively as well as literally. Our house must have a chance to withstand the assaults of instability. We must have the right to stand up, to stand erect, to fend for ourself or ourselves, We must have the rights that all others have even those with extreme wealth - the Right to Stability... I should have the right to better myself and my station or circumstance. That should be non-negotiable. I should have the right to recover and to borrow to take another chance. The right to take another chance ought to be inherent to our inalienable set of groundfloor rights. And that is what a minimum income would provide; a constant platform to step from.