>From: Dan Fabulich <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: Reforming Education
>Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 11:16:17 -0400 (EDT)
>'What is your name?' 'Bryan Moss.' 'IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOUR NAME
> > Anyone who wants to make a long-term investment.
>You appear to be missing the point. Suppose I'm a parent, who wants to
>make money off of giving my child an education. Suppose I go ahead and
>invest. Who will pay me for having done so? My kid? The state?
Suppose it became a standard practice in society for people to "incorporate" (actually, I much prefer the Massachussetts Trust structure), like David Bowie. Suppose that your ability to get a loan was tied predominantly to your personal shares' value. Suppose that your general credibility was tied closely to how valuable people found your shares. Then a parent could set up such a trust in their child's name, with the parents as primary trustees until the child was competent. The child, of course, could not legally be held to such a contract, but the advantages would be obvious. How else would he get a loan? A job? Etc. The parent would pay themselves in shares for raising the child. Perhaps the parents might attempt to take too much. The child could later issue more shares, but only of course at the cost of diluting the value and perhaps frightening off potential investors.