Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Extraordinary tax on capital to supply world with clean energy.

Posted 7 years ago on Sept. 25, 2011, 4:43 a.m. EST by soloenbarcelona (199) from Barcelona, CT
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

If the world is ready to have a commun enemy that is not religion-, culture- or race based: I propose a tax on everybodies belongings.


Cost for switching to a worldwide new clean energy based economy = x

All joint belongings is : sum of negative and positive belongings = y

(might be negative, then we just have to clear percentage of all debt first), then worldwide everyone has to pay or will be cleared of there debts depending on what they have, and enough funds should arise to save our planet and have a minimum free clean energy for everybody.

I say we should fight to accomplish this goal because it is an enemy we all have in commun, use it!!! Parallel or after we could fight for other principles. shelter, food, healthcare, education and whatever.

Problem now is we dont have a commun goal, just individual drive to be more powerfull, richer and respected. Nothing wrong with that when playing a game (we all love it) but its time for a healthy revolution.

A little remark: Our economy (capitalism) doesn´t make sense when debt leads to the fact that people stop working. Its like "oh, too much debt, I cant work to pay it of, so I stop working completely."

I believe in capitalism, but now this accumulated weath has to be used for an extraordinary cause.




Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by woodfoe (25) 7 years ago

People wouldn't have to pay a tax for clean energy if they even knew that there is technology out there that is being kept from the public that could supply the entire world with free energy. Take a look at this website and the work of Tom Bearden: http://www.cheniere.org/ We could all live in a totally different world if we just changed our desire for "things" that corporations try to push on everybody simply to create money.

[-] 1 points by soloenbarcelona (199) from Barcelona, CT 7 years ago

Cool, very interesting. I like the electromagnetic generator presentation i just saw. New to me. Just saying I know the world has the knowhow and resources for worldwide clean energy but the switch from todays energy to clean new energy is very costly (resources and labour, translated in tax or money) and one of the reasons change goes maybe too slow (besides the problem we have with the greed of those now in power). All industry, machinery, house holds, cars... have to be replaced with new one. And making these generator, windmeals, solarpanels..... is an expensive operation for mankind.

[-] 1 points by Alex (79) from Rhoon, ZH 7 years ago

What if people don't want to pay this tax on their belongings? Are you going to force them? Put a gun to their heads? Throw them in jail? What authority do you have over other humans and their belongings?

[-] 1 points by soloenbarcelona (199) from Barcelona, CT 7 years ago

Hey Alex, thanks for your thoughts. As you pointed out well, I m no authority. maybe 99% would be. I just believe this global (r)evolution could just be a revolution of our principles and mindset. If we manage to believe that the enemy is within us and we can solve it together by fighting for a commun goal, this planet and us have a (prosper) future. Laws can change and we are part of a "global" economy. Just see our destruction of planet earth as an invasion of dangerous spicies. How could human kind fight it without a global intervention? Banks will participate when the right (or right amount of) people see the need. I suppose corporate-USA, Petrol industry and banks (todays authority) would get a bigg part of the exploitationrights of surplus energy to reach a global ok, but that is just the way it works (they have the right infrastructure anyway). By the way, nothing wrong with sending some people to jail if 99% believes it the right thing.

[-] 1 points by Alex (79) from Rhoon, ZH 7 years ago

So if 99% think the protesters needs to be shot dead, then they are right?

I give an example; if I don't want to be raped but 99% wants me to be raped, to rape me would still be immoral. Same thing with the 99% wanting to force something upon one person would be wrong. However there is nothing wrong with the 99% doing there own thing and ignoring that one person completely. Why the need to force anybody for laws that you want? If the law was so good there would be no forcing needed. If something you want but can't be done if one person doesn't help, then seek something to do that doesn't need that one person. To force someone to do anything is wrong. 99.99% has no authority over one human being. They just doesn't have the right, the can only force someone with the use with violence, and that is inherently wrong.

[-] 1 points by soloenbarcelona (199) from Barcelona, CT 7 years ago

Sorry Alex, I can sort of understand what you mean, but you live in a world where many rules obly us to do many things we dont like. That is the only way we can live in some sort of harmony, so no problem with that. Problem now is these obligations are mad up (benefit) 1% and 99% has to accept.

[-] 1 points by Alex (79) from Rhoon, ZH 7 years ago

Are we living in harmony because of all these rules and laws? Have you not seen all that is happening around of us? Do it seem harmonious? The same that 1% shouldn't be forced by 99%, the 99% shouldn't be forced by the 1%. Nobody should be forced to do anything, everything should be based on free will. As long there is forcing going on, there is no morality in it and it will end being corrupt.

Laws and rules are made by a few humans to dictate many humans how to live their lives. It's an idea to bind others. It's flawed as in everything man-made can be flawed. Rules and laws do nothing, it's humans that do everything. We don't need them to function, we think we need them because we are made dependent on them and taught early on to think about them as a necessity.

Same with the notion that Democracy is the best system we ever have. We are taught this and it's enforced by everybody and we believe this as fact, while is it? Have we really taught about if it's indeed the best system? Have we not seen what the results are from this system? Have we really looked at what it will bring for the future? Have we scrutinized its morality? We humans are made to depended on the system early on in our lives. We are taught it's the only right one, and we are not encouraged to criticize it, we are told about it as if it's a fact. Most are afraid to admit to the faults and they will ignore the facts of life, and attack vigorously anybody that points them out. Most prefer to believe in the illusion than see the truth.

[-] 1 points by soloenbarcelona (199) from Barcelona, CT 7 years ago

Well, looks like you are in favour of anarchy. Maybe nothing wrong with that except i picture it as the survival of the fittest. I like some rules and wish we needed no institution to control us.

Question about what I believe of democracy? Well I think it´s fxxxed up. USA is the example of why. Organizing a society where 49,9% of the voters are against government and 50,1% elected the government, just makes harmony very far reached. On top a high percentage doesn´t vote and just has to except the "democracy" even if they would like the system differently.

Here is what I found from the Dalai Lama: "Every religion emphasizes human improvement, love, respect for others, sharing other people's suffering. On these lines every religion had more or less the same viewpoint and the same goal." ( I see religions as guidelines for governments, and many generations of thinking on how to reach some harmony in our society) These concepts are quit simple and maybe enough to build a harmonious world. Just dont know how we can respect the 1% if they don´t play by the rules. Obly them to follow these rules! By the way, these rules are made up to protect the 1% especially, they just forgot that and greed blinded humankind.

[-] 1 points by Alex (79) from Rhoon, ZH 7 years ago

Anarchy is not survival of the fittest, we humans tend to be social, and contrary to what they have made most of us believe, we humans are not inclined to do bad things. In a real anarchist society (or libertarian) there still will be enough people with a heart in the right place helping those less fortunate.

Where there are laws and rules, they will be abused by those in power. It's less a problem if there are 6 billion in power than a million.

If you want democracy I will not interfere with you having it, as long you respect me in having my freedom and don't impose said democracy on me, then we can live in harmony with each other. The moment one side decides to impose his views on the other, the harmony is broken and strife will be the end result.