.

My name is Alfred F. Andersen; pure Dane, as far as I can tell from my family tree. I am in my 80th year with this particular body; still working quite well. My undergraduate degree was in science and engineering. But my studies in quantum physics made a philosopher of me before graduating. So, while working for several years as partner, then owner, of a 20-employee manufacturing business in Connecticut I slipped out to take courses at Yale (from Ernst Cassirer and F.S.C. Northrop) and Columbia in philosophy and psychology respectively. But my true mentor during those years was Wm. Ernest Hocking, then of Harvard. Later, I completed my PhD studies at the University of Pennsylvania. My teaching has been in math, science, and philosophy, with emphasis on philosophy of science and moral philosophy -- the latter being applied primarily in conceptualizing economic and political structures designed to assure what I call "sustainable justice for all sentient beings, human and non-human, local to global, in both current and future generations." My two published books are "Liberating the Early American Dream" (1985) and "Challenging Newt Gingrich, Chapter by Chapter" (1996). My current interests are reflected in the sites on my URL, given below. My wife and I work together through the medium of the Tom Paine Institute, which we established about 15 years ago. We have been living in Eugene, Oregon for the past five years, and are thoroughly rooted here.

I became interested in this seminar because of its implied reference to concern about today's growing injustices worldwide by way of its explicit reference to "the poor" in the following paragraph describing the purpose of this seminar:

"The Land and Real Estate Initiative has a broad agenda. Conceptually, its main concern is how to realize the full benefits of land and real estate assets -- that is, real property -- to the economy, and how to extend those benefits to the poor."

I noted, however, that efficiency in wealth production as such is primary and concern about "the poor" secondary. And the discussion thus far has largely followed this pattern.

As noted above, my concern is primarily with sustainable justice, with efficiency a goal only in relation to sustainable justice. Therefore I am only marginally interested in some mathematically expressed utilitarian calculation regarding "the greatest good to the greatest number" without concern about sustainable justice (extending to future generations) in relation to winners and losers. I justify my participation in this conference by way of the first sentence in the above-mentioned paragraph: namely, "The Land and Real Estate Initiative has a broad agenda."

Concern about poverty is not the same as concern about injustice. I believe that true economic justice would put an end to poverty around the world, now growing from one billion to 1.3 billion persons within a recent five years, according to World Bank figures.

I believe it can be clearly demonstrated that world poverty amid super-affluence is the result of injustice as regards access to nature, including its land and natural resources. This is partly explained by the fact that *private* ownership of our *common-heritage, natural resources* is legalized throughout world-dominating Western civilization. Conclusion: today's mounting injustices worldwide has its roots in morally flawed economic and political *structures.*

Briefly, I maintain that both the injustice problem and the derivative poverty problem would be solved by assuring the equitable sharing of the financial and other benefits of our common-heritage wealth, including what economists call "natural capital": i.e., land and its natural resources, but including also all "intellectual property" inherited from previous generations. I will be more specific by way of historical background.

In his Nov. 26th message, Adam Jon Monroe lists historical figures (like Thomas Jefferson, Horace Greeley, William Blackstone, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and Thomas Paine) who recognized, as Thomas Paine put it, that "men did not make the earth... It is the value of the improvements only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property." Other names could be added: Jerrard Winstanley (1649), Thomas Spence (1775), William Ogilvie (1782), Patrick Dove (1850), and Monroe's own mentor, Henry George (1879). All recognized that every resident of this earth has a right to a fair share of all wealth which can not be attributed to human effort. Thomas Paine came closest to offering an equitable remedy. John Locke, on the other hand, failed glaringly and thus set Western civilization on its present inequitable course during the past three centuries. Henry George's proposal has had most influence, but stops far short of what is required by "sustainable justice."

Much as I appreciate Adam Monroe's introducing this historical information to our discussion, and much as I agree that taxing land at full market value would largely put an end to one means by which poverty is increased (namely, by way of land speculation) I maintain that such a remedy of poverty would be trivial compared to what cries out to be implemented. It does nothing to assure *an equitable distribution of income from it among all the residents of this earth.*

In short, whereas the position of Adam Monroe and modern Georgists is to use the income from leasing our common-heritage wealth to pay for governing, it seems to me crystal clear that such income ought to be distributed among the earth's residents in some truly equitable way. I maintain that a person or corporate body should be charged for the cost of governing to the extent that s/he behaves in ways that require governing.

The financial amounts at stake are enormous. I have calculated (Appendix A, of my Gingrich book) that in the U.S. the average family of four should be receiving about $36,000 per year as its fair share of income from our common heritage wealth.

For details, please see the following links on my URL, below. In order of thoroughness: "Natural Capital, Key to Economic Justice"; "Tom Paine Institute Philosophy"; and "Envisioning, etc." For those with appreciation for the relevance of quantum physics to today's injustice issues (by way of discrediting the three-century dominance of the materialistic-mechanistic conception of reality) I welcome comments on the link entitled "A Cosmic Community Paradigm" which includes correspondence with Werner Heisenberg, the father of quantum physics, thirty five years ago.

Finally, I will be happy to FAX documented charts showing current income distribution in the U.S. (limited because it would have taken over nine miles of paper to reach the income of the wealthiest) and what income distribution would be if income from our common-heritage wealth were to be equitably distributed.

Warm greetings to all. And thanks to the sponsors for a well organized Online List.

Tom Paine Institute (Tom.Paine.Inst@att.net) committed to truly just economic and political structures http://csf.colorado.edu/sustainable-justice