Oil, funds, and dividends
The Alaska Permanent Fund
In 1976 Alaska's constitution was amended to direct at least 25 percent of state oil revenues into a permanent investment fund. The fund has grown to around $80 billion and pays an annual dividend — the Permanent Fund Dividend — to every Alaska resident. In recent years the dividend has ranged from roughly $1,000 to $3,000 per person per year, modest but meaningful. It has broad bipartisan support inside Alaska.
Singapore's reserves and the spending rule
Singapore took a different route. Its national reserves, built up from budget surpluses over decades, are invested by GIC, the Monetary Authority of Singapore and Temasek. Since 2008 a rule called the Net Investment Returns framework has let the government spend up to half of the expected long-term real return on those assets each year; the rest is kept to protect the reserves for future generations. The returns now supplement the annual budget alongside taxes.
Why these are templates
Both turn a finite windfall or long-run surplus into a permanent, broadly shared capital stream. They socialise some of the returns from resources that belong, in a deep sense, to everyone. Serious post-labour proposals often argue for AI-era equivalents — funds capitalised by a small tax on AI company profits, compute, or data use, with returns paid as dividends or invested in public goods.
Design questions that matter
Any fund of this kind has to answer four design questions. What is the revenue source — profits, compute, data, a windfall tax? What is the payout rule — a cash dividend, a public-goods budget, or both? Who governs it — elected politicians, independent trustees, a citizen assembly? How is it ring-fenced from political raids? Answers differ across jurisdictions and are part of the design choice.
If your country collected a small levy on every major AI company's profits and invested it in a shared fund, what would you want done with the dividends?