I feel that a progressive idea is that all natives of a country have ownership of its territorial resources including land and oil
That’s quite a radical idea, actually—that collective ownership is exactly a sum of individual ownership, and can be decomposed at will into individual private ownership. Even more radical if you’re including semi-private resources like oil fields by a royal family. It’s not implemented anywhere that I know of, and it’s unclear how common/popular the idea itself would be.
I also don’t see why any remaining populace (or it’s region-based government) would even consider this. Mostly the attitude toward emigrees falls between “well, I can’t stop them” and “good riddance to bad rubbish”.
Also why should natural resources be owned by a few oligarchs, or companies, or a royal family?
As a consequentialist I would argue that the “resource curse” would be minimised if the ownership or profit from natural resources is owned instead by every resident.
The Alaska fund is exactly the opposite of your proposal. It’s very clearly not individual ownership or any control over assets, it’s a government program to provide a payment to current residents. Specifically, it doesn’t go with a refugee/emigrant when they take residence elsewhere.
That’s quite a radical idea, actually—that collective ownership is exactly a sum of individual ownership, and can be decomposed at will into individual private ownership. Even more radical if you’re including semi-private resources like oil fields by a royal family. It’s not implemented anywhere that I know of, and it’s unclear how common/popular the idea itself would be.
I also don’t see why any remaining populace (or it’s region-based government) would even consider this. Mostly the attitude toward emigrees falls between “well, I can’t stop them” and “good riddance to bad rubbish”.
I was inspired by the Alaska oil fund
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund
A 1000$ a year for every resident is quite good.
Also why should natural resources be owned by a few oligarchs, or companies, or a royal family?
As a consequentialist I would argue that the “resource curse” would be minimised if the ownership or profit from natural resources is owned instead by every resident.
The Alaska fund is exactly the opposite of your proposal. It’s very clearly not individual ownership or any control over assets, it’s a government program to provide a payment to current residents. Specifically, it doesn’t go with a refugee/emigrant when they take residence elsewhere.