Freedomain Radio

I was trying to find ways of jump starting dros so that i wouldnt have to die in an enslaved world.

what would go wrong if a company decided to essentially compete with the welfare state, thus actively finding people, providing said help in a meaningful manner and not just superficially, but to get them to be self sufficient in hopes that they would repay the initial investment and the most successful and reliable gaining ownership in the company as incentive to further participate and invest?

Investment risk would be curtailed because its a periodic and interactive program where the level of investment depends on percieved reliability and effort on the member's part.

 If a company like that made its primary incom in the form of return on investment from people its has spent money to "train" the company will do its best to keep that investment and ensure that the investment pays off.. and that could lay the mechanism for Dro's. 

Assuming that it is even able to work itself to a sustainable level where they are able to strike a balance between failed investments and successes to be profitable, the company will then automatically end the poverty problem and ensure that those who decide to remain poor simply chose not to extend that effort to self sustainability.

its a lot more complex than what i just explained, but where are the flaws in this?

 

It's interesting; now that you mention it, I had talked about a similar idea long before I heard of DROs. It was based on the simple idea that, whenever the free market competes with the government, the free market wins (unless the government outlaws that competition). The idea was that the government would have a tough time outlawing a program that effectively helps people while decreasing the amount of money it has to spend on welfare. (I could be wrong.)

It seems to me that the biggest problem would be getting funding to start. It could begin as a sort of non-profit foundation. Unfortunately, these organizations are subject to tons of government regulations already.

Nevertheless, I can't say I wouldn't be interested in doing what I could to help if I heard that someone could think of a serious plan for it.

Prince:

I was trying to find ways of jump starting dros so that i wouldnt have to die in an enslaved world.

what would go wrong if a company decided to essentially compete with the welfare state, thus actively finding people, providing said help in a meaningful manner and not just superficially, but to get them to be self sufficient in hopes that they would repay the initial investment and the most successful and reliable gaining ownership in the company as incentive to further participate and invest?

Investment risk would be curtailed because its a periodic and interactive program where the level of investment depends on percieved reliability and effort on the member's part.

 If a company like that made its primary incom in the form of return on investment from people its has spent money to "train" the company will do its best to keep that investment and ensure that the investment pays off.. and that could lay the mechanism for Dro's. 

Assuming that it is even able to work itself to a sustainable level where they are able to strike a balance between failed investments and successes to be profitable, the company will then automatically end the poverty problem and ensure that those who decide to remain poor simply chose not to extend that effort to self sustainability.

its a lot more complex than what i just explained, but where are the flaws in this?

 

Getting people out of poverty in the midst of a welfare state is like getting people off drugs while they're paid to take free drugs. It's possible, of course, but it's a mighty slog...

And, of course, if you become successful, the govt will likely just shut you down.

It always protects its slaves. 

well i think as far as funding goes limit of say up to 20000 per person in a two year period and expecting repayment over a 30 year period.. which is pretty much the average car loan just spread out to far longer periods of repayment, so the payments are cheap  as long as the business could secure funding at reasonable rates for 40 years or so it seems feasible  getting the money isjust a process of testing the theory on a certain group to see how well it does in like a 5 year period.. and then use the initial success to draw more investments because i can prolly think of incentives to make members pay that sum faster if the program actually works..

as far as trynna get people off welfare.. well thats not so much my approach..  i want a different kind of member at least for initial growth..   im not after the moma with six kids who gets paid for it, its too late..  im goin after the multitude of teens i know who are bribed into the military because of no alternative and thiking they cant go to college due to brainwashing or cant find any other form of financing to attain professional goals.. people like myself who work for a living but just need an extra push in order to get to a confortable and sustainable state.   there are many people left to scoop up that for several reasons have not chosen welfare..  i guess my busines will not be proposed as a direct competition to welfare... but will grow to become that exactly..  and i think itll be harder to shut down if it can grow to an international corporation..  I mean..  if its actually sustainable as a business model..  there are many creative marketing campaings i can come out with to gain membership, not just from the down and out, but from the middle and upper class as well thus strengthening the social influence of the company.

I like this idea.

What first needs to be done is to figure out a profitable service / product to provide.....

LINK

Call me crazy, but I think that's a better way to jump start DROs.

Also, read the FAQ to see why it is a good approach. 

My suggestion would be a simple one.  Whenever you can enter into or write up a contract stipulate that should one or another party default on the standards of the contract that you will go into arbitration, with a specified number of appeals to other arbiters or none, rather than civil court.  Of course the party found at fault should contractually be obligated to pay whatever penalties are assessed by the arbiters as well as their fees.

This done on a wide enough scale will dry up the need for civil courts...the criminal courts will probably be around as long as the sate since violence is their ultimate goal.  Also, since you are in Texas then you know it is very easy to hire "gray" labor.  That is unlicensed professional trades such as plumbing, HVAC, contractors, electricians, etc.  They are always cheaper and since they have to rely on the goodwill of their customers and word of mouth (they would probably get shut down pretty quick if they advertised work without a license) they have to deliver a good service.  

im not so sure about the sea colonies..  i mean they sound cool..  but im not sure as far as the effect on the government.. 

if anything it gives me encouragement that a project far more outlandish than mine is actually getting tried...    mine would actually be far easier to get off the ground and wouldnt even raise nearly as many "defenses" .

there are already many companies dedicated to the problem my company attempts to solve.. i jus have different motives and approaches. the number of nonprofit funds dedicated to different causes.........   

i still dont even see what would promt the governments involved to even want to initiate attack against a private insurance/investment business. 

risk assesment will be a very crucial part of the member evaluation process and training or basic initiations in the program.  and the methods relied upon as far as enforcement goes would only be social.  i can think of a lot of ways to socially enforce such a program at least to a point where the risk is greatly reduced and the company can be profitable.

Yes, but look at it from the lens of the State. You are taking away their dependents. A seastead is in international waters and it does not aim to take anybody off the drug of welfare.

makes sense..  but i still dont think theyll be immune to government reach.. and itll just kinda push international gang wars into seasteds because i dont see whats stopping the nearest mafia from finding some paranoid reason to get involved..         and taking their depepdents is one thing, but how will the seasteds be self sufficient.. they will have to operate with ad through states.. i mean the idea is cool.. but if something that people actually have to pay for and give up their comforts like "pioneers" to live in middle of sea is feasible..  then a business plan that can end poverty, not get people out of welfare, but to create a mechanism which actually fullfills all the claims welfare makes and actually raises the productivity of members on a consistent basis to a point where anyone is garanteed to survive comfortably above their means and at least give people who actually want to do something productive but stuck in destructive envirionments another option..  i mean..   i dont think anyone has ever even thought of investing in  people the way i put it here...  except for welfare and government programs that dont teach self sustenance, but grow farms of dependents to keep milking for extended state power and fundinig.  my company is only worried about return on investment, and profitability.. we dont need generatiojns of dependents.. 

i do like the idea,

my question would be HOW are you helping them get out of poverty in teh first place.  the gov gives out student loans for much to cheap so that seems like something that would be hard to compete with, and banks can give out loans using fractional reserve banking.  so if a bank makes 1% on a loan its ok because 9/10 of the money did not exist before so they are really making 9%+

so you would have to become a bank to make it a fesable model (i think)  otherwise no one will invest in something that makes 1%.

just my two cents 

mr evil:

i do like the idea,

my question would be HOW are you helping them get out of poverty in teh first place.  the gov gives out student loans for much to cheap so that seems like something that would be hard to compete with, and banks can give out loans using fractional reserve banking.  so if a bank makes 1% on a loan its ok because 9/10 of the money did not exist before so they are really making 9%+

so you would have to become a bank to make it a fesable model (i think)  otherwise no one will invest in something that makes 1%.

just my two cents 

i agree,  thanx.. it would pretty much operate like a big financing company.lending a certain amount and expecting it back with interest and fees. 

but for the government competition..  again  i know many a person who are not even eligible for such loans..  government student loans are cool.. but they fall short in so many aspects..    my initial approach would not include extensive 4 year training for a college degree  but for quick and accelerated training programs for specific trades to at least be able to get them to a comfortable income level..    further invesment in the person can be made as far as higher education is concerned, but our primary concern in the begining is self sustenance and a reliable income source thats respectable.  I even have a business sponsoring program in mind  like a consulting company that invests in members businesses in exchange for part-ownership in their success.  with businesses we just split the profit, but on the personal side, part of our whole return on investment is some kinda repayment schedule and a period where an agreed upon part of the member's income due to our company's efforts is paid. 

i want my company to take a highly intrusive, and involved approach to provide a sort of like company that is only interested in your raw profitability.. the more u make, the more they make.. and vice versa..  which is why its gonna take a lot of networking and dealing with existing businesses to help reduce costs and provide more incentives to foster lifetime memberships while providing more avenues for earning more money.  the initial investment limit for each person wouldnt be much, but enuff to make a significant difference.