Where is is written that the Great State of Texas cannot become the regional Texas system of three states? Where does the constitution prevent smaller states from retaining regional government? So, hey, we get the California system , with Cascadia extending into Canada, and Texas system, each regional system retaining its fair share of Senators by subdivision.
Western States could pay a price for their fair Senaor share, buy taking in a fair share of the Congressional debt, Regional governmens hold this debt and pay it back with remits from the newly divided states. Regional governents get regional fiat currency with federated central banking. Break up the to big to fail system.
Who are we fooling, robots and transparent transactions make the fiat solider, let's get solider fiats. Let's subdivide politically and financialy. Lets put 150 Senators in DC. Leave regional governments back home.
part of the bargain? Cenral goverment can only tax the very wealthy, we leave them with that bracket only. Regioanl governmens allocate the next level of income tax, and carry the majority of residual Congressional debt. Regional central anks get som flex to create bank issue in marketable baker notes backed by their won high powered currency variation.
That is our solution no? Filling in the dimensionality to get smoother, more variable product space.
What about medical entitlment and costs?
Limit the remaining central government to a fixed payment subsidy for direct hospiral expenses. Debate the rest. Social Security remains he same or improves. Easy to do with a fair Senatorium.
No comments:
Post a Comment