# A Burn Proposal **URL:** \ **Category:** Tokenomics\ **Created:** [April 2, 2023, 4:58am UTC](https://forum.cosmos.network/t/a-burn-proposal/10328 "2023-04-02T04:58:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 12
**Author:** ![common\_spelling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@common\_spelling](https://forum.cosmos.network/u/common_spelling)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2023, 6:16pm UTC](https://forum.cosmos.network/t/a-burn-proposal/10328/12 "2023-04-02T18:16:59Z")
> [@Hush](#): > > Any group doing work would like to be paid and even now persons managing the treasury are being paid. You would need to justify the claim of unnecessarily high salaries and explain why that isn’t the case right now. I base this on the assumption that DAO treasury systems would be stupid large given no current budget proposal to base fund distribution on and the assumption that the larger the treasury the larger the salary required to keep them from stealing it. combined with the fact that a DAO responsible for distribution and in control of all community pool funds is entirely unnecessary with ranked choice voting to distribute funds solves these issues by limiting risk of theft or waste and making predictable the nominal value of funds available to any one council based on community sentiment and desire and reflected on chain. > [@SubDAO Treasury System for the Hub](https://forum.cosmos.network/t/subdao-treasury-system-for-the-hub/10110/10): > > Funding can be made transparent, predictable, accessible, decentralized and eliminate the need to pay treasury managers using existing governance mechanisms to direct the chain by market forces. > > Starting with an annual governance vote to assign a budget as a % of the community pool or $ amount of development funds to be distributed across general categories of funding like infrastructure 40%, innovation 20%, marketing 10%, ecosystem 30% as an example, > projects that want community pool funding then campaign for their project to the community to support their project in a semi-annual ranked choice voting where the top 3 or 10% or other is granted a vested award allowing funds to be revoked through a confirmation vote before the next round of funding is voted for. \*could also distribute additional vested awards if you move up significantly in rank from one award to distribution vote or other incentive structure. > > This makes the funds validators will inevitably pay themselves through governance predictable in their regular governance distribution, transparent and goes to someone with a strong reputation in the community. this system incentivizes community growth through outreach to get the best funding. > > Half the annual allocation of CP funds could be converted into a stable coin over 6 months to reduce price impact on ATOM > > The funds would be available to anyone who applies and vested funds are awarded based on the top ranked teams in their class. > > If devs and validators want to be funded well from the community pool, they should have to work for it. --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.cosmos.network/t/a-burn-proposal/10328)._