<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Should Tennessee Take Bailout Money?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.itfrom.us/2009/02/should-tennessee-take-bailout-money/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.itfrom.us/2009/02/should-tennessee-take-bailout-money/</link>
	<description>A Good Christian Raisin' and a Eighth Grade Education</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 02:24:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Alex Lavidge</title>
		<link>http://www.itfrom.us/2009/02/should-tennessee-take-bailout-money/comment-page-1/#comment-3929</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Lavidge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 15:24:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.itfrom.us/?p=1497#comment-3929</guid>
		<description>I like the way you think ... :).  But unfortunately, all the federal money that&#039;s available are &quot;restricted funds.&quot;  Meaning ... those funds can only go toward what they&#039;ve been allocated for.

I think ultimately the vision you&#039;re talking about is inspiring.  We don&#039;t hear the debate enough in public policy the need to explore possibilities for providing additional public services from the nonprofit sector.

Theoretically, imagine if instead a branch of the government was a just a giant non-profit foundation with elected office positions.  Rather than have a $11 trillion debt, imagine if we had a $11 trillion public trust fund that that paid out an average of 5% interest to support annual expenditures.  So, that&#039;s basically $500-$600 billion that could be covered in public services without the need for additional taxes -- between a fourth to a third of the Federal budget.  The trust fund money would be essentially accessible capital to fund additional economic development.  This, in turn, could improve the size of the principal.  Over decades, we could eventually phase into a voluntary tax -- and any tax revenue collected would go into the principal rather than straight into expense accounts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like the way you think &#8230; <img src='http://www.itfrom.us/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> .  But unfortunately, all the federal money that&#8217;s available are &#8220;restricted funds.&#8221;  Meaning &#8230; those funds can only go toward what they&#8217;ve been allocated for.</p>
<p>I think ultimately the vision you&#8217;re talking about is inspiring.  We don&#8217;t hear the debate enough in public policy the need to explore possibilities for providing additional public services from the nonprofit sector.</p>
<p>Theoretically, imagine if instead a branch of the government was a just a giant non-profit foundation with elected office positions.  Rather than have a $11 trillion debt, imagine if we had a $11 trillion public trust fund that that paid out an average of 5% interest to support annual expenditures.  So, that&#8217;s basically $500-$600 billion that could be covered in public services without the need for additional taxes &#8212; between a fourth to a third of the Federal budget.  The trust fund money would be essentially accessible capital to fund additional economic development.  This, in turn, could improve the size of the principal.  Over decades, we could eventually phase into a voluntary tax &#8212; and any tax revenue collected would go into the principal rather than straight into expense accounts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
