Living Income Guaranteed and the Nationalization of Banks

Posted on July 2, 2013 Updated on September 5, 2013

Banking in fact is a resource that is required by all citizens equally. If we look at what are resources that should be nationalized, the minimum guideline is that they are all the resources that are equally required by all citizens – this implies water, electricity, roads, transport systems, media, banking, etc. All of the stuff that is necessary for each one to have a decent life, and banking falls within this category.

Banking in a way has become so technological that it is no longer a major job creator; it is simply a management of funds. Therefore, if we nationalize the banks within the approach that with minimum wage one no longer allows personal debt to accumulate – because we will forgive all debt – and the banks facilitate points like building houses and facilitate the placement of motorcars that are debt based on capital investments, which are good for the economic growth – then we are looking here at a very stable banking sector. The profits that come from a minimal interest rate will be distributed according to what is required to facilitate the Basic Income Guaranteed in its totality in a particular country.

The point of importance to note with the Basic Income Guaranteed proposal is that personal tax will be abolished, but taxation in terms of transactions – which is a use tax, a per sales tax and value added tax – those types of taxes would be fair because it would be based on how much one uses the system and those taxes specifically would be accumulated to pay for the functions of government. 

To facilitate a society that will stop abusing each other, there is an interesting point that will have to be considered and that is to move away from cash money to total digital money, because with total digital money one will reduce the propensity to deal outside the system and as such to take part in criminal activities. This will also bring an end to the current issues with protests and social dissidence where the problem is being approached from the starting point of demanding others to make the necessary changes, without proposing any agenda that can lead to a feasible practical solution.

 

Within the Basic Income Guaranteed system the excuse of some wanting to deal with cash because of ‘not wanting to pay tax’ will become irrelevant. It’ll bring stability for the system because those that do pay tax on their services or their products bought will contribute to the tax resource that that will be collected by the banking sector. And so the financial system for the country will be very stable and the budget will be according to available money; and when necessary, pricing or tax will be adjusted for extra money and the governments will not be allowed to borrow money, so that these exorbitant amounts of interests that even go towards ‘unidentifiable parties’ paid for by the labor of the citizens, can finally be stopped.

With the Basic Income Guaranteed system: governmental debt and national debt won’t exist, there is no need for it. Proper accounting, proper planning will prevent this and it is suggested that in the basic Constitution it is placed that: a government cannot make debt. And ‘not being able to make debt’ will also mean that the government will have to spend money on issues that are genuinely relevant where things like war will come to an end and the education, healthcare and all sectors that are relevant to the citizen is what will be considered in the budgets.

Obviously when somebody disagrees with such practical reasonable solutions, one must investigate what criminal activities they are participating in that they want to protect, so that they can have ‘more money’ when it is not necessary because: there is and will be sufficient for all. 

 

Equal Life Foundation Research Team