译文/Translated：
上周我关于普遍资源继承（URI）的博客在自由主义者和无政府主义者之间引发了争议。他们非常担心，我提出的这个观点带有所谓的共产主义性质。我也意识到，很多新读者不清楚我对通过非暴力和自发的方法解决生命、自由和所有人的财产安全问题所抱有的热忱，对他们来说，我的文章并没有很好地解释我的原则。
我是提到了5%的财富“税”，但是我没说在不使用暴力和入侵式审计的情况下，会有多少这样的“税“能够被征收。所有的“税收”都会遇到的挑战是：市场是绕着人工收取的费用转的。
人们的财产主要是以这三种广义上的财产体现的：
- 钱
- 股权
- 房产
钱以每年5%的速度发生轻微通胀。假设这是唯一一个供给通胀，这种情况下，一个拥有技术的且经济稳健的国家很可能会遇到价格下跌。比特币、以太坊这样主要的加密货币以每年高于5%的速度增发，美元增发的速度也高于5%。美国供给预计是14万亿，同时，国债以每年1.4万亿的速度增长。考虑到很有可能这个“债务”永远不会被偿还，经济学上来看，这几乎近似于每年以10%的速度印刷美钞。实体货币每年增长5%远远低于现行有效的每年增发速度。请记住，美元是实体借出去的，如果供给不是以平均利率的速度同步增长，那么就会导致大范围的债务违约。
上市公司的股权是很好的资产，因为他们能够在不承担责任的情况下代表所有权。当公司造成诸如严重的石油泄漏等问题时，上市公司的股东不必承担责任。股东把这种经济特权“赋予”公司的“法人”。每年一个公司可以增发5%的股票并拍卖转化成金钱。钱可以被平均分配给某些股东。因为全球的资源绝大部分集中在公司手中，5%的股权费最终将覆盖大多数生产性资产、知识产权等。一个在区块链上运行的国家可以轻易地将股票征税写进注册公司的条款中。
如果有人想通过合同（而不是法律）成立公司，绕开这5%，那么公司的全部所有人都将要承担公司的责任。如果所有人不参与运营的话，这种责任模式就不能很好地扩展。
这种方法一个巨大的好处是公司不能通过做假账欺骗系统，除非他们愿意压低原本由市场控制的股价。
房产本来也要根据评估价值缴纳“房产税“。现有的系统不好的原因是它需要政府的评估。一个简单的解决方法是把所有的房产放到一个公司中，该公司每年发行和拍卖5%的股票。拥有51%的股份就获得土地使用和改善的表决控制权。
我先前的URI提案中所有数字都仅仅是基于相对自愿地对以上三种财产征税。
缺陷
这样一个提案的主要挑战在于人们会采用加密货币资产，因为他们不需要支付5%的税。他们会用金子，移民到不用缴纳财富税的国家等等。这种资本外逃和从所有人手中偷窃一样的，如今的央行的通胀是被裙带资本主义和裙带社会主义分配的。没有哪个系统是完美的，我们不应该让“完美“成为”挺好“的敌人。
任何法律系统都不能让道德败坏的民族变得公正和诚实。即使不违反法律，大多数人也不会从邻居家里偷东西。名誉败坏、社会地位降低，这已经足够让人们望而却步了。同理，不公正的法律也会受到广泛的破坏并且难以实施。版权原来是为了审查媒体产生的，现在却成了很多人不尊重的一种财产法。
URI系统旨在教育人们一个新的代际公平感，它是针对前几代人严重侵犯财产权的自我纠正系统。为了让它行之有效，民众需要理解和支持这个基于内在公平的理念（参考我对cookie博弈论的分析）。
相对改进
两害取其轻，从这个角度来看，URI系统应该取代所得税制度，因为所得税制度既复杂难懂又侵害隐私。URI系统可以代替我们败坏的失业、福利、儿童、社保体系。实际上，有一半人已经获得了现金支付。现在的系统惩罚的是哪些增加收入的人并告诉人们他们可以根据自己的“需要“获得资金。这种基于需求的分配方式对于接受它的民众产生的心理上的伤害比基于继承的分配方式大得多。
和平协定
URI系统不是权力系统，它是一个和平协定，他的目的是促成对于财产权的公平谈判，否则这个世界依然是靠拳头说话。为了获得谈判的资格，一个人必须能够展现他们理解这个和平协议，拒绝和平协议就是让大众拒绝你对於财产的主张，正如你拒绝了他们的一样。
无法实施？
有人说URI是不可能实施的，因为“大人物“是永远不会允许这样的。我可以用同样的观点反对当今世界通用的累进税制及其带来的福利/社会化制度。这些制度能够存在是因为“大人物”知道“没什么好失去“的人是真的”失去了”。当“大人物”的财富和力量依靠的是大众承认其财产主张的合法性。让民众挨饿带来的后果就是人们在饿死之前就揭竿而起了。
几乎已经有一半的人口支持UBI，不支持的人绝大多数是从哲学的角度来反对的。如果URI能够为全球资源的最初分配提出一个逻辑严密的哲学基础，那么可以预见它能够获得绝大多数人的支持。
尽管我不提倡暴力或者强制政府，我却相信很多人能够容忍政府强制要求如实汇报财产并缴纳税收，否则以驱逐出境处罚。这样的一个直通能够改善我们今天的税收和财富的再分配制度。
同时，我认为公平产权系统真诚的支持者会自发地创造一个在这个规则框架下运行的私有社会。如果这个社会能够增强市场竞争力和影响力，最终它将掌握公共舆论。这个私有社会成功的关键是它的会员有准入条件，即需要再测试通过对于URI背后的经济学原理和原则的理解程度并且同意按财富比例支付税收的两个条件下才能进入。
价格不会一直上涨吗？
对于URI一个常见的批评是“地主会不停地提高低价，最终取消URI。”这是基于所有的房东串通垄断提高价格这个前提下得出的。但是第一个违反这个约定的房东会拥有租户。此外，除了住在一个更好的地方以外，很多人有更重要的事情，所以他们可能会把钱花在其它商品和服务上，比如有机食品等。当然，因为供给/需求发生变化，很多价格肯定会上涨，但是他们不会加到一起抵消收益。相对的财富差距仍然会保持在低位。
对于房东来说，如果他们能提高租金，那么房产的价值也会增加。作为业主，他们将向他人支付5%的费用。在所有的人都获得更加民主的资源分配之后，自由市场会在不同的地方达成供求平衡。由于自由市场会根据价格信号组织生产“人民的”需求，相比由人民投票选出政府中谁替他们花钱，URI系统是更加有力、高效和民主的组织社会的形式。
大富翁
我觉得有一个类比可以很好地帮助人们理解这个概念：大富翁游戏。相当于，我们把游戏规则这么修改：每轮游戏之后重新分配玩家1%的财富，通过这个简单的规则，这个游戏可以一直玩下去。那些有良好的交易技巧和一些运气的玩家依然可以走在前列，但是他们永远不能让别的玩家破产。
现代的资本主义就像一场大富翁游戏，生产资料的所有者由于规模经济带来的效益获得巨大的收益。赢得越多，赢得越快。有钱人越来越有钱，恰恰只是因为他们本来就有钱。这就像让一个手上只有一把铲子的穷人和一个拥有挖掘机的富翁在市场上比挖沟。不管穷人多“聪明”多“努力“，他的劳动都没有价值，除非他能够和挖掘机代表的资本联合起来。
商品和服务的生产日益自动化就像是给每个行业的富人一台挖掘机。很多时候，他们是靠着偷来的商品和政府的青睐买到这台挖掘机的。而财富自动积累的本质最终带来中心化，为了保护我们的生命、自由和财产，我们需要URI实现长期地去中心化目标。
结论
每个人都应该放下关于财产权、社会主义和资本主义的偏见仔细思考URI这个概念。
原文/Original：
My last blog post on Universal Resource Inheritance (URI) sparked some controversy among libertarians and anarchists. There is substantial concern about the so-called communist nature of the proposal which I want to address. I also realized that I didn’t explain all of my principles for new readers who may not understand my deep commitment to non-violent, voluntary, solutions for securing life, liberty, and property for all.
I argued for a 5% wealth “tax”, but didn’t to disclose how such a “tax” would be collected without the use of violence or intrusive audits. The challenge with all “taxing” schemes is that markets route-around artificial fees.
There are three broad classes of assets which people hold their wealth:
- Money
- Equities
- Real Estate
Money is trivially inflated in supply by 5% per year. Assuming this was the only supply inflation, a productive economy with advancing technology would likely see price deflation. Major crypto-currencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum grow their supplies by more than 5% and the supply of US dollars is also growing by more than 5%. The estimated money supply of the US dollar is $14 trillion dollars, meanwhile the federal debt is growing by $1.4 trillion per year. Since it is reasonable to expect that this “debt” will never be repaid, it is economically similar to printing dollars at 10% per year. A 5% increase in supply of real money is FAR below the current effective dollar supply growth. Remember, dollars are lent into existence, if supply doesn’t grow by the average interest rate, then widespread defaults result.
Equities in publicly traded companies are interesting assets because they represent ownership without liability. A shareholder of a publicly traded company is not held liable when said company causes a catastrophic oil spill. This economic privilege is “granted” by the people to the “artificial person” embodied in the company. Every company can issue 5% more shares each year and auction them for the money. The money can be evenly distributed to unique individuals. Since companies own the vast majority of the woulds resources, a 5% equity fee would end up covering the vast majority of productive assets, intellectual property, etc. A country run on a blockchain could trivially bake the share-tax into the terms for registering a company.
If someone wanted to create a company-by-contract (instead of by law) and bypass the 5%, then all the owners of said company would also be personally backing the companies liabilities. This kind of liability model doesn’t scale well when owners are to far removed from operations.
A huge benefit of this approach is that a company cannot cheat the system by cooking the books unless they are willing to suppress their own stock price which is determined by the market.
Real Estate is already subject to a “property tax” based upon assessed value. The existing system is broken because it relies on appraisals given by the government. A very simple solution is to put all real estate inside a company and issue shares which are auctioned off at 5% per year. Owning 51% of the shares gives voting control over use of the land and all improvements on it.
All of my numbers in my prior URI proposal were based only on taxing these three things in this relatively voluntary way.
Defection
One of the major challenges with such a proposal is that people will adopt crypto-currency assets which don’t pay the 5% tax. They will use gold, move to countries without a wealth tax, etc. This capital flight is as much theft from the rightful owners as today’s central bank inflation being allocated by crony capitalism and crony socialism. No system is perfect and we shouldn’t let perfect be the enemy of good enough.
No system of laws can make a corrupt people fair and honest. Most people wouldn’t steal from their neighbor even if it wasn’t against the law. The loss to their reputation and social standing would be enough of a deterrent. Likewise, an unjust law will be widely broken and difficult to enforce. Copyright, originally created to censor the printing press, is an example of a property law which many people do not respect.
A URI system is about educating people about a new sense of inter-generational fairness and a self-correcting system for gross violations of property rights by prior generations. For it to be effective, the vast majority will need to understand and support the concept based upon its intrinsic fairness (see my splitting the cookie game theory).
Relative Improvement
From the lessor of two evils department, a URI system could replace complex, impossible to understand or follow, privacy destroying income tax systems. It would replace our corrupt unemployment, welfare, child support, and social security systems. In effect, half of the population is already receiving cash-payouts. The current system punishes those who increase their income and tells people that they qualify for money based upon their “need”. This need-based distribution is far more harmful to the mental wellbeing of those who accept it than an inheritance-based distribution.
Peace Treaty
A URI system is not an entitlement system, it is a peace treaty designed to recognize fair negotiation of property rights in a world otherwise governed by might-makes-right. To qualify one must be able to demonstrate they understand the peace treaty, to reject the peace treaty is to have the masses reject your claim to property rights as you have rejected theirs.
Impossible to Implement?
Some people have claimed that URI is impossible to implement because the powers-that-be would never allow such a thing. The same argument could me made against the graduated income tax schemes and resulting welfare / socialized systems throughout the world today. These systems exist because the powers-that-be know that people with “nothing left to lose”, “lose it”. The wealth and power of the “powers-that-be” depend upon the masses continuing to recognize the legitimacy of their claim to property. Allowing the masses to starve will result in a revolt before people accept death by starvation.
Almost 50% of the population already supports UBI proposals, and most of those who reject UBI proposals do so for philosophical reasons. If URI can provide a logically consistent philosophical foundation for initial allocation of the universe’s resources then it is conceivable to get supermajority support for the concept.
Even though I do not advocate violence or coercive governments, I believe that many would tolerate using governments to enforce honest reporting and taxing of wealth upon penalty of deportation. Such a system would be an improvement to the system of taxation and wealth redistribution we have today.
In the mean time, I believe that non-hypocritical supporters of a fair property right system could voluntarily create a private society that operates under these rules. If this private society can grow in market power and influence, then eventually it could take over public opinion. The key to the success of such a private society is that it condition membership and therefore qualification for URI upon tested understanding of the economics and principles behind URI and voluntary payment of dues proportional to wealth.
Won’t prices just rise?
One of the common critiques made is that “landlords would just raise rents and cancel URI”. This is based on the premise that all landlords are colluding as a monopoly to raise prices. The first landlord to defect would get the customer. Furthermore, many people have higher priorities than living in a nicer place, so they might spend their money on other goods and services like organic food. Surely prices will rise due to changing supply / demand dynamics, but they will not uniformly cancel out the benefits. The relative wealth disparity will still be lower.
With respect to landlords, if they were able to raise rents then the value of the property would increase as well. As a property owner they would be paying 5% right back to everyone else. The free market will balance supply and demand in a different location after all people are given a more democratic allocation than today. Since free markets organize to produce the desires “of the people” based upon price signals, a URI system is a much more powerful, efficient, and democratic means of organizing a society than one where people vote on who in government gets to spend their money.
Monopoly
One analogy which I have found helps people understand the concept is a modification of the game of Monopoly. With the simple rule of reallocating 1% of the weath of the players evenly after each role, the game can go on for ever. Players that exersize good trading skill and a bit of luck can still get ahead, but they never bankrupt the other players.
Modern capitalist systems are like a game of monopoly where the owners of the means of production see compounding gains due to effeciencies of economies of scale. The more you win, the faster you win. The rich get richer simply by virtue of being rich. Ask a poor man with a shuvvel to compete in the market for ditch digging against a rich man with a backhoe. It doesn’t matter how “smart” or “hardworking” the poor man is, his labor is worthless unless it can be mixed with the capital represented by the backhoe.
The move toward increasingly automated production of goods and services is like giving the rich capital holder the equivalent of a backhoe in every industry. In many cases, they purchased that backhoe with stolen goods and government favors. The compounding nature of wealth naturally centralizes, URI is needed to keep a sustainable decentralization of power required to secure our life, liberty, and property.
Conclusion
The concept of URI is something that everyone should carefully consider after setting aside preconeived notions about the nature of property rights, socialism, and capitalism.
原文链接/Original URL:
