X-Message-Number: 10836 From: "Olaf Henny" <> Subject: Thomas Nord & John de Rivas; Trust Funds Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 10:49:00 -0800 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00E2_01BE1861.35EBE920 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thomas Nord wrote about trust funds. >I've worked on this for years by studying the Swedish fund/trust-law here, >registered 3 here and interfered in politics when the law was upgraded. In >Germany its called Stiftung, Swedish Stiftelse, in English Trust or Fund in my >books. Sweden have one very open register supervising most of them, Lichtenstein >are very closed and secret. The English translation of the German word "Stiftung" is "endowment". Setting up an endowment to yourself appears to me a workable solution to part of the problem on how you can ‘take it with you’, at least in Liechtenstein and possibly in some other reputable tax havens. However the big problem I can see is one of identification. Since at the time of suspension we have really no idea of what we will have with us, when we are survived. If we reappear in a construct, we are not very likely to have our retinal pattern or our hand prints handy. A certified printout of our DNA leaves the question of who does the certifying. Since the amounts in question could be quite substantial (The relatively modest sum of $20,000 would, compounded at 10%, grow to over 6 million over 60 years*), the temptation for fraud could be extreme. *My personal assessment as to when the aging process can be reversed is in about 50 to 75 years. Eugene Leitl, whom I respect greatly for his knowledge in nanotec appeared to set a much shorter time-frame, when he stated on the subject something to the effect as ‘give it 30 years and you will be surprised’ (not a direct quote, but as I can best remember) while others appear to think more in a time-frame of a couple of centuries. My apologies to Eugene, if I misunderstood. If I understand both, Thomas Nord and John de Rivaz correctly, John is addressing an entirely different subject, namely that of a fund, which is set up for the express purpose of funding the revival of the suspendees. Such a fund would best be administrated through the cryonics organizations. As long as the annual number of suspensions remains as low as it is now it may, due to the relatively low sums involved, only be feasible to "group" the investments for such a fund once every 5 years. Per example: Relatives of all those presently suspended, as well as those presently signed up could pay a set amount ($1,000.- appears reasonable), which will be in vested in the year 2000. All those who sign up after Jan. 1st 2000 and before Dec. 31st 2004 will be invested in 2005 etc. This will have the effect, that the revival funds for earlier suspendees will be generally larger, that those of later ones. Such a discrepancy in funds available for revival would probably be quite justified, since generally the revival process will likely become more simple as suspension methods become more sophisticated. I wish to thank John for his analysis of investment alternatives, although I believe his estimates of returns to be rather optimistic, especially for the long term, as it will be extremely difficult to achieve optimum returns from the dewar, because of re-direction difficulties. ;-) Best, Olaf [ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] ------=_NextPart_000_00E2_01BE1861.35EBE920 Content-Type: text/html; Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10836