I agree in principle. Alaska's state fund has worked phenomenally well. But there's a problem -- coincidentally one Alaska has recently faced. A fund with meani

I agree in principle. Alaska's state fund has worked phenomenally well. But there's a problem -- coincidentally one Alaska has recently faced. A fund with meaningful returns would be measured, quite rapidly, in the trillions of dollars. That is an enormous incentive to 'borrow just a little from' to solve this issue or that issue. Alaska has been facing a multi billion dollar budget deficit as they recklessly spent during times of high oil prices -- ironically not dissimilar to the events that led to the initial creation of the fund. So what was their solution? The governor unilaterally slashed payments from the fund - a decision that was challenged and then upheld in the state courts. We can write all the sort of legalese we want to try to prevent this from happening, but I think the current state of society illustrates quite clearly that laws are subject to the views of those in power. For instance are the actions of the NSA and CIA the sort of government programs the founding fathers intended to allow when passing the 4th amendments? I doubt many would say yes, yet here we are. And I'm not even considering the inevitable graft involved in the management of such a monumental fund. Ultimately, I just do not think this sort of idea is possible in the US on a national level. State level initiatives are a very interesting idea, however.