My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

Cobra Commander · 2004-10-12 10:07:09

Again, just for the record, I'm using the example of issuing non-lethal weapons to illustrate a point, not advocating a policy.

I may have to start running disclaimers. The opinons expressed by Cobra in this post are not necessarily those of Cobra or anyone else.

*Isn't -property- (land ownership) the rights on which all other rights and privileges rest

Unless you're unarmed and someone who is comes along and takes your property. Without the ability to exercise force, rights become privileges.

BWhite · 2004-10-12 10:18:32

*Isn't -property- (land ownership) the rights on which all other rights and privileges rest
Unless you're unarmed and someone who is comes along and takes your property. Without the ability to exercise force, rights become privileges.

Guns are a most imperfect form of power.

Ownership of land and other property requires lawyers, guns and money and IF secure ownership requires that everyone have a gun we are already in really big trouble.

Guns do nothing to help assure my ownership of 10,000 shares of Boeing, held by a family partnership trust lodged at the A.G. Edwards brokerage house.

= = =

A society which can secure property rights without universal ownership of guns will outproduce and thus out-compete a society which depends upon universal ownership of guns.

= = =

The genuis of Adam Smith rests on the division of labor. We hire police to carry guns and secure our property rights so we don't have to and thus be more productive in other ways.

Palomar · 2004-10-12 10:23:00

I may have to start running disclaimers. The opinons expressed by Cobra in this post are not necessarily those of Cobra or anyone else.

*Yes, I understood that all along.

Maybe it's time to let go of this discussion.

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2004-10-12 10:48:36

The genuis of Adam Smith rests on the division of labor. We hire police to carry guns and secure our property rights so we don't have to and thus be more productive in other ways.

Yes, but the basic principle is the same. Without the exercise of force to secure rights, they don't exist.

Though if those to whom we grant authority to bear arms in our name usurp that power for their own ends, we're right back where we started.

RobertDyck · 2004-10-12 11:11:09

I did provide a long plan as an alternative for discussion. Here's a segue, initially the municipal police for the capital city will function as federal police. That avoids hiring and training another police force when the population is still quite small. (Police in place to defend settlers.)

RobS · 2004-10-12 18:18:12

I suspect the judges of the capital city will function as "federal" judges as well, until a sexond level of judges can be established. I have also wondered, when the Mars population is small, to what extent a judge sitting on Earth and running a court room via television would work. I suspect he or she would need a very capable helper on Mars to keep everything in order during the long time delays.

-- RobS

Cobra Commander · 2004-10-13 07:22:45

The opinions expressed in the following post do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the author. Mostly, but not entirely.

(Police in place to defend settlers.)

Police don't defend for the most part. They generally don't prevent crime, but rather investigate and apprehend after the fact. Absolutely we need them, but we need other lines of defense as well.

Moving on, and I apologize for having to brush against the firearms issue a bit here, but rest assured I'm going somewhere else.

From an economic standpoint Robert's plan is sound, some of the numbers may or may not add up if we actually had to budget everything, but such is life. Overall it seems workable, provided the payroll tax and lease fees remain low, if they become a major factor in a business's budgeting, they're too high.

So we've got a skeleton on which to build, but economics is only part of the mix. Civil and criminal law can be made as simple or complex as we desire, even (as mentioned) a simple "commandment" type approach. The same with general administration. However, there are some basic realities that can't be escaped, conditions imposed by the Martian enviroment.

As Cindy's concern of some yahoo perforating the dome while carelessly discharging a firearm illustrates, the colonists will exist in a very interwoven society, far more so than on Earth. One incompetent fool can potentially kill everyone (though the specific example is flawed). The habitable space will be a very small percentage of total land area and will require the labor of many to keep it livable. Very hive-like, very much a centralized "state" structure. A libertarian or direct-democracy system could work only if the vast majority always agreed. On the other hand, fascism could work wonderfully on Mars. See disclaimer.

We'll need some rigid controls or "norms", whether imposed or accepted by an ideologically homogenized group. On Mars any dispute, riot or work stoppage for whatever reason and everybody dies. Granted, we wouldn't expect our initial colonists to be prone to rioting, but then we wouldn't expect them to be those dome-shooting yahoos mentioned previously either. In any case, colonists have children and every bloodline produces a few nuts, fools and psychos from time to time. We'll have real crimes (murders, rapes, theft, etc.) and we'll also have lesser problems, people who for whatever reason don't mesh with the needs of the community, whether it be through laziness, "resource gluttony" or other inefficiencies that creep into any system with humans involved. For all these cases some form of correction/protection will be needed.

Now it gets interesting, as incarcerating people is extremely problematic. If we simply lock them up, they're a drain on the entire colony while producing nothing. If we use prisoners in some form of forced labor to offset the expense, we create an economic incentive for creating new prisoners, separate from any criminal issue. Essentially the same as speeding ticket quotas, but with higher stakes. For serious offenses (murder, rape and the like) execution makes a great deal of sense, from an economic standpoint. Cutting your losses in a sense. Yet clearly we don't want to go shoving every petty thief and shirker out the airlock, meaning we need something lesser than death but not prison. I'm opposed to fines for the same reason I oppose prison labor, creating economic incentive. Once government agencies begin factoring revenue from punitive fines into their budgets we have a serious problem. We need something that costs the "state" nothing and from which the state gains nothing beyond correcting/punishing the offense. Flogging comes to mind.

See disclaimer.

To cut this short, Mars will be a far harsher environment than any humans have ever lived in for long periods. That rigidity and harshness can't help but impose itself onto our social forms, the only question is whether we choose to select colonists who will mesh well with each other and those conditions, or force the issue by giving precedence to other concerns. It's a new world, but we may have to look backward in some respects to make it work.

RobertDyck · 2004-10-13 11:55:01

One comment, Mars won't be an ideologically homogenized group. We'll have different people from different backgrounds with different cultures. One key will be accepting people for who they are; as long as they don't hurt any but themselves, leave them alone. I expect English to be the language of commerce in the capital city, but other towns will have different languages, different religions, and different cultures. The over-arching value will be tolerance and respect for differences. If a Mormon wants to maintain 4 wives and a dozen children in his homestead, then as long as everyone accepts it. If a woman has multiple husbands, again that's their business. If a Hutterite colony wants to set up a farming commune where marrying a second cousin is common, then that's Ok. Accept a devout Muslim who wants to pray toward Mecca 5 times a day at specific times, eat his food with his right hand (never left), and not eat before sunset during the month of Ramadan. Just schedule his breaks to coincide with prayer times. If Muslim woman wants to wear a burka, or an Hispanic wears a miniskirt to teach Kindergarten, or a Polynesian runs around with bear breasts, that has to be accepted. (Personally I’ld like the bear breasts.) Does Japan still have public baths? However, no loose clothing around machinery, no flammable clothing while working around an open flame, police have to wear a uniform while on duty, etc. Accept cultural differences, but keep it practical at work.

America currently has the greatest proportion of its population incarcerated, so that isn’t the best model. Notice I said a job training system to replace Employment Insurance, or to use the American equivalent, the unemployment portion of Social Security. This wouldn’t have any provision to support individuals until they start training, and that’s only after an employer has committed to hire him/her upon graduation. There’s no welfare. If someone is unemployed, unable to become self-employed, and either can’t or won’t get a job through the training program, then the individual will have to go back to Earth. That’s one reason for the free trip back to Earth.

Cobra Commander · 2004-10-13 12:34:19

One comment, Mars won't be an ideologically homogenized group. We'll have different people from different backgrounds with different cultures.

I agree, certainly there will in time be a wide range of people on the planet. But individual colonies could be a very different prospect, how that will play out is still very much an open question. We could send anything from an intentionally diversified group of political appointees to a tightly-woven, ideologically homogeous group of dissidents. Either and everything in between has its own set of benefits and problems, but all are equally possible.

Personally, I'm leaning towards multiple colonies of various political/religious dissident groups, all with their own separate colony as my own skewed approach. A group who is self-motivated and disdainful of too much outside assistance yet allowing the sponsoring nation to lay claim in some sense (treaties aside, overtly or otherwise) to vast tracts of territory offers all sorts of possibilites. Particualrly given that they are nominally independent, thus absolving the sponsoring nation from any mishaps that may occur.

I expect English to be the language of commerce in the capital city, but other towns will have different languages, different religions, and different cultures.

With varying degrees possible, from extreme to mere local flavor. If the first to colonize exploits the situation well, the range of possibilites can narrow very quickly to those the colonizing power finds desireable.

If someone is unemployed, unable to become self-employed, and either can’t or won’t get a job through the training program, then the individual will have to go back to Earth. That’s one reason for the free trip back to Earth.

I find this preferable to traditional welfare programs for the simple reason that the cost is fixed for the moment and will drop in time as opposed to a steady rise. This may be the best of all imperfect solutions for the chronically unemployable, but it gets much fuzzier with regards to criminals. (invoking disclaimer, stream of consciousness follows) Some minor crimes, particularly if committed as a youthful indiscretion, can be easily corrected with a simple... flogging, to stick with that example. Behavior corrected, no loss to the colony. Sending the offender back to Earth is an excessive expense. Moving up the scale, say we have the first murderer on Mars. If we rule out prison for the reasons mentioned previously, we have execution or deportation back to Earth left as options.

Or, if we want to be a bit more bureaucratic about it, we could send him to "prison" such as a greenhouse or storage shed, then not pass funding to maintain the "prison". We can't let the offender back into the general population, air runs out, de facto execution. Insidious, but we already do this sort of thing here on Earth in some ways, just with more buffer steps.

The point being, can we really justify the expense of sending a murderer back to Earth so that he can be dealt with there rather than just "spacing" him? I suppose it depends largely on the values of the colony in question, but revulsion at the idea is by no means guaranteed.

We all have our ideas of what sort of society can and should work on that virgin world. One's optimistic future is another's nightmare, and nothing has yet been ruled out.

clark · 2004-10-13 12:37:18

I wonder how Earth and the receiving nations of Martian export...er, I guess it would be Martian 'deports', how they might feel about being the dumping grounds of another worlds problems...

Maybe we could send American bums to Canada, Candian bums to Australia, Austrilain bums to Germany, and German bums to Norway. There are no bums in Norway, just people of leisure.

RobertDyck · 2004-10-13 13:13:22

Actually, sending someone back to Earth isn't a great expense if the interplanetary ship that cruises from Earth orbit to Mars orbit and back is reusable. The ship will normally carry settlers from Earth to Mars, and return empty. The deportee will just occupy an otherwise empty cabin. What's the cost? Food as well as a shuttle trip to Mars orbit, shuttle return from Earth orbit.

Crime: I remember a news story of a thief in New Guinea or somewhere around there, who was caught stealing from someone's home. Villagers were going to hang him from a tree. Police had to protect the thief from the crowd so he could stand trial. That part of the world has a very low crime rate, and I believe the fact citizens get involved is why. Harsh, prompt punishment like flogging is something that should be considered for serious crime. But lesser sentences can be made for lesser crimes; for example I suggested suspending someone's driver's license for driving under the influence, and ceasing their vehicle for driving while under suspension. Of course if it's a stolen vehicle, give the vehicle back to its owner and flog the thief. Not that I expect a lot of vehicles inside a Mars city; it'll basically be a large building or set of interconnected buildings. Public transit and walking would be normal.

RobertDyck · 2004-10-13 15:29:35

I wonder how Earth and the receiving nations of Martian export...er, I guess it would be Martian 'deports', how they might feel about being the dumping grounds of another worlds problems...
Maybe we could send American bums to Canada, Candian bums to Australia, Austrilain bums to Germany, and German bums to Norway. There are no bums in Norway, just people of leisure.

One welfare bum here in Winnipeg is from Germany. His mother is retired, and his sister is employed as a computer programmer, but he's milking the welfare system for all it's worth. Sad, he's damn good at technical support. I had a problem with my ADSL modem in Miami in 1999, even a Bell South tier 3 technician couldn't figure out the problem, but my friend did. He used to work for a call centre providing technical support for AT&T Worldnet tier 1, but got fired for taking too much time off work. He's talented, but a lazy ass who scams as much money from family as he can get away with, as well as welfare.

clark · 2004-10-14 05:48:15

Your anecdote is well taken Robert, and it is precisely because of individuals who approach a system with selfish motives that any over arching plan based on the good will of the individual will fail. Not to say your thoughts don't have merit, but there are certain checks and balances that are necessary to ensure it can cope with individuals who want to game the system, or have no desire to improve themselves.

Dumping them on Earth may be a solution, but that is rife with its own problems. Earth may not want the deportee after all. Cutting out social services for the laggard’s results in creating visible inequality and the basis of a criminal element out of bare necessity. This in turn feeds into a greater reliance on a social structure that requires larger and more aggressive security to maintain social stability and a semblance of peace.

I've been faulted for this, but the reality is that in colony on Mars is an artificial endeavor in creating a community of public landownership dependant upon a social group. The public space does not exist without the public to create and maintain it. The efficiencies required to maintain this, the frailty of the public space, and the mortal dependence upon it requires for some serious changes in how we operate, and what we can reasonably expect in terms of privacy and liberty.

Things like total surveillance of all areas of the colony, be it camera or basic sensor that monitors things like air quality, structural integrity, temperature, locations of people (in case of emergency and for monitoring vital areas). Now consider this, if every home in Canada had a camera, and that camera was hooked into the police station, how often would there be break ins? If every back alley had a camera, and tracked all individuals time and place that were there, how often would there be muggings or violent attacks? Sure, you might have some, but not to many, and almost all of them would be met with either instant police response or resolved shortly after the fact.

The inability to successfully engage and commit a criminal act (not punishment itself) will reduce instances of crime. Of course, what we give up is a greater degree of individual privacy. What it requires is a greater latitude of allowing individuals not to feel threatened that their private behavior be used to persecute them. You see, as an example, take sodomy, which is illegal in some states of the US- under a persistent monitoring as I have described, you end up creating tension for a supposed crime that posses no threat to the public safety. This approach requires a more permissive atmosphere in some respects in order to effectively work and prevent social chaos as people rebel against what they perceive as oppressive control over their individual choices in life.
Just something to think about.

RobertDyck · 2004-10-14 10:00:43

I'm talking about a system where government gets the hell out of people's lives, and you want to put a camera in everyone's home?

clark · 2004-10-14 16:59:15

yes, that's it. that's entirely it. :laugh:

you want a government that gets out of peoples lives yet is involved with their health care, their deportation, their security, their rights, etc. etc.

You put a camera in your own home then use it to show the police yourself, after the crime has been committed. This is your alternative to owning a gun. Yet it does nothing to prevent the crime itself.

So here is another solution. I'm not saying I would particulary enjoy it myself, but there it is.

RobS · 2004-10-14 23:27:43

I've had to think about crime issues in my novel. In one volume I had two crimes: a "date rape" and a major embezzlement of Martian gold. In both cases Mars had a small population--about 150 people--but it already had an elected LOCAL government which included the only lawyer on the planet elected as the official judge. So both men had jury trials.

In the case of the date rape, the relatively small outpost was still extensively wired with sensors, including microphones and cameras, against depressurization and other accidents. The data, however, is stored for future examination after an accident and is not normally available. The judge, however, was empowered to order the release of data relevant to the trial. The recordings from microphones and cameras that caught their conversation and actions in public locations--the cafeteria, which late Satursol evenings also served as a sort of singles lounge, and in the corridors on the way to his flat--were released. The judge could have ordered the recordings from inside the flat to be released as well, but the way I wrote the story, it wasn't necessary, and would have intruded on the privacy of the victim.

By the way, I have also assumed that as Mars settlements get larger, they have far less "sensoring" and no cameras/microphones in private spaces at all. But the crime happened early on, when the reliability of systems was less certain and therefore the "sensoring" of spaces was more extensive.

As for the punishment, both men were sentenced to prison time on Earth, but the sentences could be reduced greatly for good behavior. This gave them incentive to behave themselves on Mars and in transit back to Earth. While on Mars awaiting the next launch window to Earth, both men were sentenced to house confinement. They were allowed to leave their flats once a day only for a specified period for exercise and a trip to the cafeteria and stores. They had to wear locator devices so that their location was always known. At home, they were expected to put in a full day's work controlling telerobots or robotic equipment.

This system punished, but maximized prisoner cooperation and minimized prisoner cost. If they refused to cooperate, they could always be moved to a habitation unit not connected to the outpost and not supplied with a pressure suit, where they would essentially be in solitary confinement. Again, they could be expected to work on something via a computer.

Now what does one do with a terrorist? In my novel, I am about to have a terrorist group release a modified influenza virus in New York, creating a world-wide pandemic that killed millions. One member of the group has a vial of virus with him and is en route to Mars as a colonist. They will catch him, of course. But what should they do with him?

-- RobS

Martian Republic · 2004-10-15 00:58:44

I've had to think about crime issues in my novel. In one volume I had two crimes: a "date rape" and a major embezzlement of Martian gold. In both cases Mars had a small population--about 150 people--but it already had an elected LOCAL government which included the only lawyer on the planet elected as the official judge. So both men had jury trials.
In the case of the date rape, the relatively small outpost was still extensively wired with sensors, including microphones and cameras, against depressurization and other accidents. The data, however, is stored for future examination after an accident and is not normally available. The judge, however, was empowered to order the release of data relevant to the trial. The recordings from microphones and cameras that caught their conversation and actions in public locations--the cafeteria, which late Satursol evenings also served as a sort of singles lounge, and in the corridors on the way to his flat--were released. The judge could have ordered the recordings from inside the flat to be released as well, but the way I wrote the story, it wasn't necessary, and would have intruded on the privacy of the victim.
By the way, I have also assumed that as Mars settlements get larger, they have far less "sensoring" and no cameras/microphones in private spaces at all. But the crime happened early on, when the reliability of systems was less certain and therefore the "sensoring" of spaces was more extensive.
As for the punishment, both men were sentenced to prison time on Earth, but the sentences could be reduced greatly for good behavior. This gave them incentive to behave themselves on Mars and in transit back to Earth. While on Mars awaiting the next launch window to Earth, both men were sentenced to house confinement. They were allowed to leave their flats once a day only for a specified period for exercise and a trip to the cafeteria and stores. They had to wear locator devices so that their location was always known. At home, they were expected to put in a full day's work controlling telerobots or robotic equipment.
This system punished, but maximized prisoner cooperation and minimized prisoner cost. If they refused to cooperate, they could always be moved to a habitation unit not connected to the outpost and not supplied with a pressure suit, where they would essentially be in solitary confinement. Again, they could be expected to work on something via a computer.
Now what does one do with a terrorist? In my novel, I am about to have a terrorist group release a modified influenza virus in New York, creating a world-wide pandemic that killed millions. One member of the group has a vial of virus with him and is en route to Mars as a colonist. They will catch him, of course. But what should they do with him?
-- RobS

I suppose it would all depend on whether they believe in capital punishment or just solitary confinement. Or it could depend on whether they considered him a serious threat to the Martian colony or not. You could twist the story several different ways before you catch him. He could hide the vial inside the main complex and they don't know where it at. They don't know if it radio controled dispursion system where he could punch a button or on a time release action wired to an alarm clock operation. That would really make that Martian colony twist in the wind on what they should do and which way they should jump.

Just a few ideas.

Larry,

RobertDyck · 2004-10-15 11:00:41

Let's be positive; the glass is half full, not half empty. Most people work at their job or business without being a thief or mugger. I laid out provisions for police, and laws against murder, assault, left, armed robbery, vandalism. Once done, let’s focus on the positive. Build a society based on cooperation and enabling people, not on forcing them at the point of a gun. That’s one reason to take guns away from people, so they aren’t tempted to try to force someone by pointing a gun whenever they have a disagreement.

Video cameras in public areas may happen, and it’s a decision for the municipal government of that town. Cameras in peoples homes can and will be abused; it would be used to try to control people. Are they watching this video, or dating that person, or staying up late on a work night, or drinking in the privacy of their homes during their free time. How neat do they keep their home, are they working on projects in their living room and making a mess on the carpet. All these things are personal and no one’s business but the person him/herself. However; there are people who would try to use that sort of thing to gain advantage in some dominance game. I view such dominance games as childish or animal, and well beneath me, but people who participate in that sort of crap can make your life at work very difficult. Someone jealous could even try to break-up your marriage. To make matters much worse, they could concoct false accusations within the legal system. I’ve seen video on the internet from hidden cameras in showers or toilets of a collage dorm room; do you want that or even a video of you making love with your spouse viewed by strangers for their voyeuristic enjoyment? That’s why it’s important to control any camera or other surveillance taken in personal space.

clark · 2004-10-15 11:19:50

Hey Robert, I get it, don't worry. But as you point out, "most people work at their job without being a theif or mugger," yet assume that this wouldn't be true if video camera's are involved. Don't worry, i understand and largely agree with you about the danger in a loss of privacy. That said, I did mention that a certtain amount of lattitude of non-judgement was required in order for this to work. You need adults, not children, to make this kind of system work.

There are of course alternatives, which might include allowing individuals to have the ability to turn on or off any camera within their home at their leisure. The rationale behind all of this though is that individuals need to be secure, but are limited in what they may use for security on Mars. You can't realistically have a gun because its ownership endangers far more than its utility to protect.

Responding after the fact to violent crime like rape or murder in an enclosed space can lead to all sorts of problems. Vindictive people may decide to take matters into their own hands, or people become fearful as a group and things get really ugly, endangering the public space.

Now, unfortunetly, I think I am largely right about how it will be. You're living in a vacum on Mars where you depend on metal and electricity to keep you and everyone alive. Things like this require that everyone be tracked- in cases of emergency we need to know where people are so we know which portions of the habitat we can close, and who needs to be saved or rescued. We need to know who was near the reactor when it went critical- to save them, or to find out who damaged it. That's just tracking. No live feed there.

We can forgo video within homes, but then how do we solve the security issue? It's to unstable with after the fact crime solving. Give everyone stun guns ala Cobra? Then you have a bunch of people zapping one another until some yahoo invents a home-brewed gun.

Again, the major reason people commit crime is because they think they can get away with it. Punishment is largely meaningless.

Public squares will be monitored, it really isn't a discussion- public areas are exsposed and if something happens in that area, it can endanger the entire habitat and community. It simply is a matter of saftey which is made more pertinant than on Earth because of the Martian environment.

With persistent monitoring you can reduce the number of people you need for actual physical security- this is a neccessity given the effecncies required to make some kind of profitable life on Mars for any community. Less physical security also precludes the possibility of jack-boot type government since there isn't enough concentrated power by which to challenge the entire populace (if they felt threatened). You in essence ensure that the majority will not be oppressed.

RobertDyck · 2004-10-15 13:08:19

From an economic standpoint Robert's plan is sound, some of the numbers may or may not add up if we actually had to budget everything, but such is life. Overall it seems workable, provided the payroll tax and lease fees remain low, if they become a major factor in a business's budgeting, they're too high.

I'm going to remain focused on economics, because that's the only thing preventing us from building a Mars settlement now. The land lease fee within the capital city would pay municipal police, and since they double as federal police the capital city basically pays federal police salary. The payroll tax only pays for health care, pension, and administration costs of the job training system; in American terms pension and job training are equivalent to Social Security. I think payroll tax can be firmly set to 10%, and if someone thinks the land lease fee gets too high, then they can build their own town. After all, what does it take? A dome with pressure, heat, oxygen, humidity control, water, electricity. Or a pressurized building. Or perhaps someone will construct a building the size of a mall outside city limits without bothering to form a town. Competition can keep land lease down. That's a point I argued with the previous mayor here in Winnipeg; he wanted to establish taxes on people outside city limits, and restrictions on building outside the city. I stated that was the way citizens deal with city government that raises municipal taxes too high, and his attempts to prevent out-migration was out of line. The solution is to keep taxes down. At the time he wanted to create several new taxes; obviously I argued against them.

So, if the framework I mentioned is Ok, then I have a plan to make it happen. I'm treating this as market survey for potential customers.

clark · 2004-10-15 13:19:20

I'm going to remain focused on economics, because that's the only thing preventing us from building a Mars settlement now. The land lease fee within the capital city would pay municipal police, and since they double as federal police the capital city basically pays federal police salary. The payroll tax only pays for health care, pension, and administration costs of the job training system; in American terms pension and job training are equivalent to Social Security. I think payroll tax can be firmly set to 10%, and if someone thinks the land lease fee gets too high, then they can build their own town. After all, what does it take? A dome with pressure, heat, oxygen, humidity control, water, electricity. Or a pressurized building.

How are the maintenance fees for maintaining air, water, humidity, structrual integrity, power, heat paid for?

RobertDyck · 2004-10-15 13:28:31

Water would be treated as a utility. Operation cost as well as maintenance would be paid by monthly billing, based on metered consumption. Each apartment block would have a water meter. Power would also be a utility. Air, humidity, structrual integrity, and heat would be maintained via the land lease fee. Oh, by the way, no combustion powered vehicles inside the dome; electric only. Since oxygen is paid by land lease, we don't want it consumed by someone's car. You also don't want polution in a sealed habitat.

RobS · 2004-10-15 17:43:49

One system we have on Earth that I think amounts to the same thing is a condo fee, which covers some utilities. I suppose if one has private property on Mars, there is a distinction between a land use fee (owed to the government) and a condo fee (owed to a condo association).

One quibble: the land lease fee is being used to cover utilities. But what if we privatize utilities? I don't think we should assume that even oxygen (and heat, which is easiest delivered by delivering the oxygen at a certain temperature) can't be privatized. There may be reasonable ways.

Robert, have you ever heard of Henry George and the "Single Tax Movement"? This was a nineteenth century American movement. The idea behind the movement is that real taxes is a form of theft by society, but there is one value society does create that it therefore can legitimately tax--the value of land. Consider the experience of nineteenth century North Americans; a patch of "useless" prairie suddenly has the railroad come through, a few people plat a township, and the next thing you know, in ten years 10,000 people live there and the "useless" land is suddenly worth a fortune. How did that happen? The community decided the land was worth a lot, so it was. Henry George said a land value tax was therefore a legitimate tax. He also argued that such a tax we very democratic (it hit wealthy people more).

The Single Taxers set up a single tax colony in Alabama and named it "Fairhope." To this day, Fairhope is a town where no one owns the land on which their houses are built; rather, the land belongs to the colony. I don't know how they handle taxes now, though!

I am sure googling Henry George and Single Tax will yield all sorts of hits. The theory is a crock by modern economic standards. It still has a small band of dedicated Single Taxers advocating it (some of whom even gave me a complete set of George's works, in gratitude for having mentioned their movement in my first book).

I am struck by the parallel with your land lease fee though. Maybe Henry George was one century and one planet too soon.

-- RobS

RobertDyck · 2004-10-15 23:46:27

Well, one reason I came up with a land lease fee rather than private property within the dome was expropriation. The idea that government can take something that you own I find highly offensive. But what about constructing a highway, or Light Rail Transit, or access to a new bridge, or other public facility that requires specific land? My solution was that in the highly organized land of a pressurized city with life support, land would be leased. The lease would include a guarantee that for the term of the lease it cannot be expropriated for any reason. If you want to replace that with something common to 20th century North America, you could replace the land lease with private property plus property tax. In that case the property tax would still have to pay for pressure, oxygen recycling, humidity control, structural integrity of the pressure envelope, and heat of the enclosed space. However, my land lease scheme would only apply to the capital city; the rest of land on Mars would be purchased. Actually, the company that built the dome would purchase the land and everyone else within the dome would lease land from that company. If someone builds a homestead on their own acre of land, then no one can expropriate it, not even the federal government. If the government wants that land they must buy it and the owner wouldn't have to sell unless they like the deal. If someone wants to establish a town somewhere else with conventional private property and property tax, then they're entitled to do so.

I tried to find a way to run Mars with no tax at all. This scheme is the closest I've been able to get.

RobertDyck · 2004-10-16 00:26:17

One question is whether a 10% payroll tax is enough. According to Statistics Canada, the 2002 average income for non-elderly families (2 or more individuals) was $63,200. The average non-elderly single male earner made $31,300 and female $28,300. From this I conclude that about $30,000 (Canadian dollars) is a reasonable estimate. For that the Canada Pension Plan premium would be $1,245.50 and the maximum Employment Insurance premium was $858. When I worked in Calgary and Virginia in 1996, my premiums to Alberta Health (in Canadian dollars) were $102 every 3rd month, which adds up to $408 per year. So the total is $2,511.50 or 8.37% of gross income. I mentioned replacing EI with a job training program which would treat rent, utilities, and cafeteria food as a student loan. Right now there's a controversy that EI premiums are slightly higher than necessary, government is accumulating money. The Heath Care system on Mars will be just building, so it might cost a little more. All this argues for around 8.37%, which is why I said 10%. Besides, 10% is a nice round number; easy for tax payers to budget.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2004-10-12 10:07:09

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#27 2004-10-12 10:18:32

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#28 2004-10-12 10:23:00

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#29 2004-10-12 10:48:36

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#30 2004-10-12 11:11:09

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#31 2004-10-12 18:18:12

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#32 2004-10-13 07:22:45

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#33 2004-10-13 11:55:01

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#34 2004-10-13 12:34:19

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#35 2004-10-13 12:37:18

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#36 2004-10-13 13:13:22

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#37 2004-10-13 15:29:35

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#38 2004-10-14 05:48:15

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#39 2004-10-14 10:00:43

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#40 2004-10-14 16:59:15

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#41 2004-10-14 23:27:43

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#42 2004-10-15 00:58:44

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#43 2004-10-15 11:00:41

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#44 2004-10-15 11:19:50

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#45 2004-10-15 13:08:19

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#46 2004-10-15 13:19:20

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#47 2004-10-15 13:28:31

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#48 2004-10-15 17:43:49

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#49 2004-10-15 23:46:27

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

#50 2004-10-16 00:26:17

Re: My idea on mars governance - Im feeling optimistic

Board footer