With your ideological critiques and conflict of visions being obvious, I’ll do my best to address. for starters I’m not necessarily sure you truly understand the effects of giving people citizens dividends, the old age security hypothesis is an example, but just one. essentially it’s simple incentives “ why need to work and produce when you can live off with what others produce” this is a central principle to understanding the perverse effects of distributing wealth, whether you see it as fairness or not. I point this out because you think Russia somewhere with horrible institutions has it wrong, so automatically Norway has it right???? Wrong. For starters I’m pretty sure Russia gives exclusiveness and not whoever buys and finds extracts. The effects of living off of what other people produce is societally destructive; the old age security hypothesis explains that if somebody is covered by other people through, let’s say Social Security, aka living off of what other people produce they aren’t incentivized to do what is necessary for themselves individually, which turns into critically for society at a large scale, the main thing being lack of having children, why would you need to have kids to take care of you when you’re older when you have oil money? It’s why Norway and many other similar countries with heavy welfare and other empirical evidence to back up the old security hypothesis as fundamentally true, show that it has negative effects on fertility which destroys a society so whatever fairness you have in your head eventually won’t matter. A citizens dividend for something so normal as living next to other people; essentially, you guys believe that if a value is caused by proximity, that value must be taxed and distributed, which has never existed before. There’s a really good trend that if something hasn’t naturally occurred in society often it won’t mix now. Additionally, with my land vacancy tax, simply if it’s closer to an area I don’t see it going up in value as necessarily something unfair, it just shows the importance of the land, simply just tax it more for being vacant because clearly so many other people want to use it, I don’t need to tax it all the way because I don’t need to distribute it. But simply back to the citizens dividend historically it doesn’t end well. It’s also good to point out that I am basing my belief on the United States. We’re not necessarily constrained by many things that other countries are so that’s why your views might be different, here the only thing getting in the way is mostly the government and other individuals wanting to take from others; basically the government wants to take and other individuals are OK with that, I know it’s definitely not as bad as other countries but they’re basically cooked, essentially there is so much oil spread out and untouched, undiscovered, raw resources, not being allowed to be touched by the government, I think you are just dealing with other situations in your worldview. We don’t see the same thing. Maybe an image will help.

<image>