Cathedral Round-Up: Give Zuck a Chance?

Yale’s commencement speech was delivered this year by Epstein, a major-league baseball guy with a story about teamwork and winning the World Series.

MIT’s commencement speech was delivered by Matt Damon, no wait that was last year, this year they’re going to have Tim Cook, CEO of Apple.

Wellesley, of course, had Hillary Clinton. (Warning: link goes to Cosmopolitan.)

And Harvard’s commencement speech was delivered by Mark Zuckerberg, who discussed his presidential bid:

You’re graduating at a time when this is especially important. When our parents graduated, purpose reliably came from your job, your church, your community. But today, technology and automation are eliminating many jobs. Membership in communities is declining. Many people feel disconnected and depressed, and are trying to fill a void.

As I’ve traveled around, I’ve sat with children in juvenile detention and opioid addicts, who told me their lives could have turned out differently if they just had something to do, an after school program or somewhere to go.

Just a second. Do you know what I did after school to keep myself busy and out of juvie?

Homework.

Today I want to talk about three ways to create a world where everyone has a sense of purpose: by taking on big meaningful projects together, by redefining equality so everyone has the freedom to pursue purpose, and by building community across the world.

First, let’s take on big meaningful projects.

Our generation will have to deal with tens of millions of jobs replaced by automation like self-driving cars and trucks. But we have the potential to do so much more together.

Every generation has its defining works. More than 300,000 people worked to put a man on the moon – including that janitor. Millions of volunteers immunized children around the world against polio. Millions of more people built the Hoover dam and other great projects.

These projects didn’t just provide purpose for the people doing those jobs, they gave our whole country a sense of pride that we could do great things. …

So what are we waiting for? It’s time for our generation-defining public works. How about stopping climate change before we destroy the planet and getting millions of people involved manufacturing and installing solar panels? How about curing all diseases and asking volunteers to track their health data and share their genomes? Today we spend 50x more treating people who are sick than we spend finding cures so people don’t get sick in the first place. That makes no sense. We can fix this. How about modernizing democracy so everyone can vote online, and personalizing education so everyone can learn?

Oh, Zuck. You poor, naive man.

I’m not going to run through the pros and cons of solar panels because I don’t know the subject well enough. Maybe that’s a good idea.

I’d love to cure all diseases. Sure, nature would invent new ones, but it’d still be great. But what’s actually driving medical costs? Diseases we have no cures for, like ALS, Alzheimer’s, or the common cold? Or preventable things like overeating=>obesity=>heart disease? Or is it just a nasty mishmash of regulation, insurance, and greedy pharmaceutical companies?

According to What is Driving US Healthcare Costs:

Half of all adults in the U.S. have at least one chronic disease, such as heart disease, cancer, and [type 2] diabetes. Twenty-five percent of adults in the U.S. have two or more chronic diseases. An aging population, lifestyle choices (like exercise and nutrition), and genetics contribute to the growing prevalence of chronic illnesses.

Chronic diseases contribute to rising healthcare costs because they are expensive to treat. Eighty-six percent of all healthcare spending is for patients with a chronic disease. Patients with three or more chronic diseases are likely to fall into the most expensive one percent of patients, accounting for 20 percent of healthcare expenditures. Many of these patients require high spending in every cost category – physician visits, hospital stays, prescription drugs, medical equipment use, and health insurance.

These are the diseases of Western Civilization, and they’re caused by sitting on your butt eating blog posts and eating Doritos all day instead of chasing down your dinner and killing it with your bare hands like a mighty caveman. Rar.

Luckily for us, unlike ALS, we know what causes them and how to prevent them. Unluckily for us, Doritos are really tasty.

But this also means that until we find some way to outlaw Doritos (or society collapses,) we’re going to keep spending more money treating Type-2 Diabetes and heart disease than on “curing” them.

I don’t see how “modernizing democracy” is going to put millions of people whose jobs have been automated back to work, though it might employ a few people to make websites.

As for education, you’d think Zuckerberg would have learned after throwing 100 MILLION DOLLARS at the Newark public schools and getting ZILCH–ZERO–NADA student improvement in return, but I guess not.

There’s this myth that students have “individual learning styles” and that if you could just figure out each student’s own special style and tailor the curriculum directly to them, they’d suddenly start learning.

In reality, this notion is idiotic. Learning is fundamental to our species; our brains do it automatically, all the time. Imagine a caveman who could only learn the location of a dangerous lion via pictograms sketched by other cavemen, rather than from someone shouting “Lion! Run!” Our brains are flexible and in the vast majority of cases will take in new information by whatever means they can.

But getting back to Zuck:

These achievements are within our reach. Let’s do them all in a way that gives everyone in our society a role. Let’s do big things, not only to create progress, but to create purpose.

So taking on big meaningful projects is the first thing we can do to create a world where everyone has a sense of purpose.

Overall, I think Zuckerberg has identified an important problem: the robot economy is replacing human workers, leaving people without a sense of purpose in their lives (or jobs.) Some of his proposed solutions, like “employ people in solar panel industry,” might work, but others, like “vote online,” miss the mark completely.

Unfortunately, this is a really hard problem to solve. (Potential solutions: Universal Basic Income so we don’t all starve to death when the robots automate everything, or just let 90% of the population starve to death because they’ve become economically irrelevant. Chose your future wisely.)

Back to Zuck:

The second is redefining equality to give everyone the freedom they need to pursue purpose.

Many of our parents had stable jobs throughout their careers. Now we’re all entrepreneurial, whether we’re starting projects or finding or role. And that’s great. Our culture of entrepreneurship is how we create so much progress.

Now, an entrepreneurial culture thrives when it’s easy to try lots of new ideas. Facebook wasn’t the first thing I built. I also built games, chat systems, study tools and music players. I’m not alone. JK Rowling got rejected 12 times before publishing Harry Potter. Even Beyonce had to make hundreds of songs to get Halo. The greatest successes come from having the freedom to fail.

12? Is that it? I’ve got about a hundred rejections.

Actually, those 12 were from publishers after J.K. Rowling landed an agent, so that doesn’t tell you the full number of rejections she received trying to get that agent. 12 rejections from publishers sounds pretty par for the course–if not better than average. Publishing is an incredibly difficult world for new authors to break into.

But today, we have a level of wealth inequality that hurts everyone. When you don’t have the freedom to take your idea and turn it into a historic enterprise, we all lose. Right now our society is way over-indexed on rewarding success and we don’t do nearly enough to make it easy for everyone to take lots of shots.

Let’s face it. There is something wrong with our system when I can leave here and make billions of dollars in 10 years while millions of students can’t afford to pay off their loans, let alone start a business.

Look, I know a lot of entrepreneurs, and I don’t know a single person who gave up on starting a business because they might not make enough money. But I know lots of people who haven’t pursued dreams because they didn’t have a cushion to fall back on if they failed.

We all know we don’t succeed just by having a good idea or working hard. We succeed by being lucky too. If I had to support my family growing up instead of having time to code, if I didn’t know I’d be fine if Facebook didn’t work out, I wouldn’t be standing here today. If we’re honest, we all know how much luck we’ve had.

Every generation expands its definition of equality. Previous generations fought for the vote and civil rights. They had the New Deal and Great Society. Now it’s our time to define a new social contract for our generation.

We should have a society that measures progress not just by economic metrics like GDP, but by how many of us have a role we find meaningful. We should explore ideas like universal basic income to give everyone a cushion to try new things.

Called it. Is Zuck going to run on the full communism ticket?

We’re going to change jobs many times, so we need affordable childcare to get to work and healthcare that aren’t tied to one company. We’re all going to make mistakes, so we need a society that focuses less on locking us up or stigmatizing us. And as technology keeps changing, we need to focus more on continuous education throughout our lives.

Or… maybe we could work on making employment more stable and using UBI to let parents take care of their own children instead of treating them like consumer goods to be produced by the cheapest possible workers?

I’m kind of biased here because I went to daycare as a kid and hated it.

He’s correct on healthcare, though. It definitely shouldn’t be tied to employers.

Now, while I do think that we should actually take a good, hard look at our criminal justice system to make sure we aren’t locking up innocent people or giving completely unjust sentences, society doesn’t normally lock people up for “mistakes.” It locks them up for things like murder. Like the Newark schools, I fear this is an area where Zuckerberg really doesn’t understand what the actual problem is.

And yes, giving everyone the freedom to pursue purpose isn’t free. People like me should pay for it. Many of you will do well and you should too.

That’s why Priscilla and I started the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative and committed our wealth to promoting equal opportunity. These are the values of our generation. It was never a question of if we were going to do this. The only question was when.

According to Wikipedia:

The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI) is a limited liability company founded by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan with an investment of “up to $1 billion in [Facebook] shares in each of the next three years”.[2][3][4] Its creation was announced on December 1, 2015, for the birth of their daughter, Maxima Chan Zuckerberg.[2]

The aim of the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative is to “advance human potential and promote equality in areas such as health, education, scientific research and energy”.[2]

Priscilla Chan’s Wikipedia page states, “On December 1, 2015, Chan and Zuckerberg posted an open Facebook letter to their newborn daughter. They pledged to donate 99% of their Facebook shares, then valued at $45 billion, to the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, which is their new charitable foundation that focuses on health and education.[3][12]

If I were there kid, I might be kind of pissed about my parents celebrating my birthday by giving away my inheritance.

Note, however, that:

The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative is not a charitable trust or a private foundation but a limited liability company which can be for-profit,[15][16] spend money on lobbying,[15][17] make political donations,[15][17][18] will not have to disclose its pay to its top five executives[17] and have fewer other transparency requirements, compared to a charitable trust.[15][16][17][18] Under this legal structure, as Forbes wrote it, “Zuckerberg will still control the Facebook shares owned by the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative”.[17][18]

So maybe this whole “charity” thing is just window-dressing. BTW, one of CZI’s projects is Andela:

Andela is a global engineering organization that extends engineering teams with world-class software developers. The company recruits the most talented developers on the African continent, shapes them into technical leaders, and places them as full-time distributed team members with companies that range from Microsoft and IBM to dozens of high-growth startups. Backed by Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, GV (Google Ventures) and Spark Capital, Andela is building the next generation of global technology leaders. Andela has offices in Lagos, Nairobi, Kampala and New York.

So Zuck’s going to solve the problem of people dying of hopelessness after losing their jobs to automation by training and importing third worlders to replace more jobs. (Meanwhile, they’re skimming the most talented people out of the third world, leaving countries there with even less human capital.)

But back to the speech:

Millennials are already one of the most charitable generations in history. In one year, three of four US millennials made a donation and seven out of ten raised money for charity.

I’m going to call bullshit on this, mostly because charitable giving correlates with age, not moving around too much, and most importantly, religiosity. The nation’s most charitable state is Utah, followed closely by the Southern states. The least charitable states are in New England, which is highly atheist, and whose lower classes are notably clannish:

“It Was Like a War Zone”: Busing in Boston:

Southie was ground zero for anti-busing rage. Hundreds of white demonstrators — children and their parents — pelted a caravan of 20 school buses carrying students from nearly all-black Roxbury to all-white South Boston. The police wore riot gear.

“I remember riding the buses to protect the kids going up to South Boston High School,” Jean McGuire, who was a bus safety monitor, recalled recently. “And the bricks through the window. …

From the start of busing, police at South Boston High outnumbered students. Yet the violence continued. Then-Mayor Kevin White, making a rare TV appeal, declared a curfew and banned crowds near the school, but said there was only so much he could do to protect students and enforce the federal mandate. …

Law enforcement tactics toughened, and what had started out as an anti-busing problem soon included anti-police sentiment. Many of the police officers were Irish from Southie.

“I had never seen that kind of anger in my life. It was so ugly,” said patrolman Francis Mickey Roache (South Boston High Class of 1954), who was on duty at the school that first day of desegregation, when protesters turned on him.

“These are women, and people who were probably my mother’s age, and they were just screaming, ‘Mickey, you gotta quit, you gotta quit!’ They picked me out because they knew me. I was a South Boston boy, I grew up in Southie,” he remembered. …

A group of whites in South Boston brutally beat a Haitian resident of Roxbury who had driven into their neighborhood. A month later some black students stabbed a white student at South Boston High. The school was shut down for a month.

Then-Gov. Francis Sargent put the National Guard on alert. State police were called in and would remain on duty on the streets of South Boston for the next three years.

Maybe they should have sent the black kids to Zuckerberg’s school instead of the Irish schools.

Millenials do give to charity on the internet, however, as entrepreneur.com notes:

Millennials frequently get berated for supposedly being selfish and not generous. Despite being the largest U.S. demographic by age, the generation of 18-to-34 year-olds donates less and volunteers less for charitable causes than any other age group.

But maybe it depends where you’re looking.

Millennials are the driving force behind a movement that is rapidly disrupting the $241 billion market in the U.S. alone for charitable giving. Crowdfunding is no longer just for indie film projects and iPhone accessories. The segment for personal appeals such as medical expenses, memorials, adoptions and disaster relief is soaring–an estimated $3 billion in 2014, according to research firm Massolution.

Just for the record, I detest the term “Millenials.” But let’s get back to Zuck:

Purpose doesn’t only come from work. The third way we can create a sense of purpose for everyone is by building community. And when our generation says “everyone”, we mean everyone in the world.

OKAY FULL COMMUNISM.

Quick show of hands: how many of you are from another country? Now, how many of you are friends with one of these folks? Now we’re talking. We have grown up connected.

In a survey asking millennials around the world what defines our identity, the most popular answer wasn’t nationality, religion or ethnicity, it was “citizen of the world”. That’s a big deal.

Here’s a little challenge. Why don’t you go live in China, and when they ask to see your passport, just loudly proclaim that you’re a “citizen of the world” and therefore don’t need a visa to be there? (No, not as Zuckerberg, the man with 63 billion dollars, but as a just a common millenial.)

Then move to Afghanistan and let the local warlords know that you’re a “citizen of the world” and going to live in their village, now, and would they please respect your religious and gender identities?

Try moving to Japan, North Korea, Bhutan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Mexico, or any other nation, buying land, voting in local elections (if they have them,) and hanging out with your new neighbors.

Let me know how that works out.

Every generation expands the circle of people we consider “one of us”. For us, it now encompasses the entire world.

Zuck, have you even asked the people of Nigeria if they consider you “one of them”? You don’t speak their language. You don’t share their values (otherwise you’d have a lot more children.) You probably haven’t even spent a day of your life hanging out with your Nigerian friend in a poor neighborhood in Lagos.

I understand the naivety of a well-meaning young person who just wants to be friends with everyone, but adults understand that not everyone wants to be friends with them. Just because you like the pleasant idea of having a few friends from other countries does not mean that you are actually part of those cultures, nor that the people from those places actually want to you there.

We understand the great arc of human history bends towards people coming together in ever greater numbers — from tribes to cities to nations — to achieve things we couldn’t on our own.

How did that work out when the German city states united into one country?

We get that our greatest opportunities are now global — we can be the generation that ends poverty, that ends disease. We get that our greatest challenges need global responses too — no country can fight climate change alone or prevent pandemics. Progress now requires coming together not just as cities or nations, but also as a global community.

But we live in an unstable time. There are people left behind by globalization across the world. It’s hard to care about people in other places if we don’t feel good about our lives here at home. There’s pressure to turn inwards.

Related:

This is the struggle of our time. The forces of freedom, openness and global community against the forces of authoritarianism, isolationism and nationalism. Forces for the flow of knowledge, trade and immigration against those who would slow them down.

Because we all know that Japan, one of the few nations that is actually dealing reasonably well with robotification by not adding more laborers to a shrinking market, is horribly un-free.

Trump supporter beaten bloody by “ideas”

This is not a battle of nations, it’s a battle of ideas. There are people in every country for global connection and good people against it.

This isn’t going to be decided at the UN either. It’s going to happen at the local level, when enough of us feel a sense of purpose and stability in our own lives that we can open up and start caring about everyone. The best way to do that is to start building local communities right now.

We all get meaning from our communities. Whether our communities are houses or sports teams, churches or music groups, they give us that sense we are part of something bigger, that we are not alone; they give us the strength to expand our horizons.

That’s why it’s so striking that for decades, membership in all kinds of groups has declined as much as one-quarter. That’s a lot of people who now need to find purpose somewhere else.

But I know we can rebuild our communities and start new ones because many of you already are.

Interestingly, Zuckerberg is citing data from Robert Putnam’s Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. From the Amazon blurb:

Drawing on vast new data that reveal Americans’ changing behavior, Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from one another and how social structures—whether they be PTA, church, or political parties—have disintegrated. Until the publication of this groundbreaking work, no one had so deftly diagnosed the harm that these broken bonds have wreaked on our physical and civic health, nor had anyone exalted their fundamental power in creating a society that is happy, healthy, and safe.

Bowling Alone attributes these changes to a variety of causes, including TV and declining religiosity, but Putnam’s Wikipedia page notes:

In recent years, Putnam has been engaged in a comprehensive study of the relationship between trust within communities and their ethnic diversity. His conclusion based on over 40 cases and 30,000 people within the United States is that, other things being equal, more diversity in a community is associated with less trust both between and within ethnic groups. Although limited to American data, it puts into question both the contact hypothesis and conflict theory in inter-ethnic relations. According to conflict theory, distrust between the ethnic groups will rise with diversity, but not within a group. In contrast, contact theory proposes that distrust will decline as members of different ethnic groups get to know and interact with each other. Putnam describes people of all races, sex, socioeconomic statuses, and ages as “hunkering down,” avoiding engagement with their local community—both among different ethnic groups and within their own ethnic group. Even when controlling for income inequality and crime rates, two factors which conflict theory states should be the prime causal factors in declining inter-ethnic group trust, more diversity is still associated with less communal trust.

Lowered trust in areas with high diversity is also associated with:

  • Lower confidence in local government, local leaders and the local news media.
  • Lower political efficacy – that is, confidence in one’s own influence.
  • Lower frequency of registering to vote, but more interest and knowledge about politics and more participation in protest marches and social reform groups.
  • Higher political advocacy, but lower expectations that it will bring about a desirable result.
  • Less expectation that others will cooperate to solve dilemmas of collective action (e.g., voluntary conservation to ease a water or energy shortage).
  • Less likelihood of working on a community project.
  • Less likelihood of giving to charity or volunteering.
  • Fewer close friends and confidants.
  • Less happiness and lower perceived quality of life.
  • More time spent watching television and more agreement that “television is my most important form of entertainment”.
Alexander Wienberger, Holodomor

Perhaps it is a sign of how far our communities have degenerated that today’s young adults imagine themselves to be as connected to people in China and Nigeria as with their own neighbors.

Zuckerberg’s not dumb, but I suspect he has spent his entire life ensconced in a very expensive cocoon filled with people who are basically like him, from his highschool, Phillips Exeter, to Harvard and Silicon Valley. Strip him of his 63 billion dollars and send him to a normal school, and Zuck’s just another unattractive dweeb whom women wouldn’t date and jocks would shove into lockers.

Communism starts with well-meaning idiots who want to help everyone and ends with gulags and mass graves.

 

That said, I think it’d be interesting to give Zuckerberg a chance to put his ideas into practice. Why not take his 63 billion and buy his own island, sign a semi-autonomy deal with whatever country’s jurisdiction it’s under, (probably in exchange for taxes,) and set up Zucktopia? He can let in whomever he wants–Africa’s top coders, Syrian refugees, Chinese gameshow hosts–start his own scientific and medical research institutions, and try to build a functional society from the ground up. If any of his ideas are terrible, he’ll probably figure that out quite quickly. If they’re good, he can turn his island into a purpose-driven economic powerhouse.

I don’t think Zuck has a good shot at the presidency just because he’s dorky and Americans hate dorks, but I didn’t predict Trump’s victory, either.

28 thoughts on “Cathedral Round-Up: Give Zuck a Chance?

  1. I think part of the “confusion” regarding “personalized learning” (or whatever the current buzzwords are…) is that psychologically speaking, “zone of proximal development” seems to be a real thing, and probably is subtly to substantially different in different people. However, what this pretty much means in a practical sense is that, um, it makes sense to divide courses into levels like “slow” and “fast” or “remedial” and “advanced”… The only difference by having everything individualized is that you avoid the political correctness issue of admitting that some kids are going to learn algebra earlier and faster than others, and other kids might need an extra 5 years to make sure they come out of school with an acceptable basic level of literacy and numeracy. And, of course, the awkward fact is that even if you developed the most efficient and effective individualized learning system that was adjusted to each child’s zpd each day, if you ran statistics on all the kids together, chances are good you’d still come up with some politically unfortunate results…

    (Why can’t we all just be satisfied if, say, 95% of kids have basic literacy and numeracy by age 18, and let the brighter ones go to bigger and better things when they’re 12 or 14 or 16, and find a nice way as a society to deal with the 1% or 5% or whatever who seriously can’t get it… Or something like that. I don’t know. I don’t have one set idea, just something that accepts reality as it is in a humane manner would suffice…)

    Like

    • Everyone is selling something, and teachers are selling teaching. If regular dieting doesn’t work, try a fancy, specialized diet! If regular teaching isn’t working, try specialized teaching! And it probably has mild results in the short term, but nothing long-term, because life isn’t specializied.

      Like

  2. Somehow, I’m sure that Zuck will manage to keep his billions while we are all taxed to death for that universal basic income. Guys like Zuck – who have actually lived a relatively non-diverse life – really believe that “diversity is our strength” when diversity is really a challenge. Our culture is our strength (or weakness) – a strong culture is able to meet the challenge of diversity without being destroyed or subsumed.

    Like

    • Diversity might be a strength when your diversity is hand-picked for “ability to get into Harvard.” (Or when picked for whatever trait one personally values and enjoys in others.) Huge difference between that and just cramming random people together.

      Like

    • Maybe it’s a good idea on paper. But then again, maybe not.

      Of course, we already have a form of UBI. We call it EBT, and it works…if what you want is more diversity.

      Like

    • I am not sure UBI is a good idea or not but I am also pretty sure the long term term choices term choices are UBI or massive bloodshed.

      Right now most desperate folks in the usa think their is still a political solution and their great hope, Donald Trump, will ultimately fail long term. People aren’t going to take a whole lot more of this shit but the Fair Tax combined with a UBI might by the time required to figure shit out. Or it might just kick the can down the road again

      Either was, long term the USA and the West are out of decent options

      Like

  3. I actually saw Trump getting elected. During the end of the Obama years, I kept hearing white people without college degrees complaining the loudest about decline even though technically the economy had been adding jobs and Wall Street had been increasing every year. I found it odd that this demographic that normally voted Democratic had been so pessimistic. Then, in 2012, I was floored that none of the Republican candidates seemed interested in illegal immigration although I thought it was very easily a number one issue for many white working class folks. When I heard Trump’s rhetoric on illegal immigration and on job growth, I knew he hit a raw nerve in the most important electoral demographic.

    I knew he was definitely going to win in July 2017 when he spoke about law and order in his acceptance speech after black men kept successfully murdering cops . “Law and order” to me had very racial connotations and implied that many white folks thought that minorities were getting too brave to respect authority while Obama was in power.

    Even if Trump were impeached tomorrow, the pissed white people will keep voting Trumps into power. They won’t be happy until immigration is severely curtailed.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. There’s a line in “The Incredibles” that really resonates here. Something like, “if everyone is special, no one is.” Why build anything if somebody else can do it interchangeably. If humans are interchangeable parts, why favor us against robots? First they killed G-d, but instead of replacing him with something good, they want to be our idols.

    Like

    • In a small community, I think (almost) everyone can be locally special, and that is what we’re geared to want. But now many of us work for companies larger than a traditional community and live in cities larger than whole nations. Social relations have difficulty scaling.

      Like

  5. I think individualized teaching works to a certain level. I have watched my mother turn a lot of hopeless special ed kids in to mostly functioning adults but no amount of individualized teaching is going to turn me into a math nerd

    Like

    • There are always exceptions to anything–deaf kids will certainly learn in a different way from blind kids, but they can both learn. There’s decent intuitive reason to think that one person explaining a concept carefully to 3 small, wiggly children will do a better job of it than one person explaining the same thing to 30 kids. But I suspect that most special ed kids are more the exception than the rule.

      Like

      • I can’t really argue for or against becuase I don’t know enough about the topic but I have a feeling on the society wide scale it probably isn’t worth the investment in resources

        Harsh as that sounds but I also am making that statement in regards to programs that might target middle level intelligent kids to…. say turn them into professionally liencened engineers too.

        Perhaps it is possible but the ROI seems poor

        Any rate purpose of the comment was to expand the thinking vs set up a yes/ no right/ wrong discussion

        Like

  6. Great essay and perfectly accurate.

    I do like the idea of basic income. There’s one problem with it. Blacks and other poor people can not be allowed to have as many children as they want, be paid for each child and then let them grow up in improvidence. One of the big problems in the ghettos is the welfare Moms raise serial kids for the welfare and at eighteen throw out the males. You could see how this causes crime. One of the big bugaboos about basic income is over time most of the population will become people with very little to no impulse control. So…you get one kid then birth control. No extra money for kids. This would lead to two parent households because Women would need a Male to add his basic income to live with a kid.

    Basic income starts at 18 years old. That way it can be used to help support if you want to go to school.

    I would add that a law needs to be passed that no one can take the Basic Income for debts or any other purpose. I would allow confiscating it while in jail but for some period of time, say a month or whatever decided, it’s saved up so when they get out of jail they’re not back on the streets. It also shouldn’t be attached in divorce or child care payments. If we don’t do this then Basic Income for all Blacks would go to Black Women and we would be right back where we started.

    This is actually the way things used to be. Much harsher for Women but much more likely that Women would be careful to pick a Man that would provide instead of excite the passions.

    I did some simple math about the basic income and found that for $16,000 per year per person we need about a Trillion dollars more revenue. It’s actually less than that as I divided roughly the population and didn’t account for age.

    Here’s for over 18 @ $12,000.
    Number of people age 18 and over 242,834,652

    So we need $2,914,015,824,000 call it $3 Trillion for revenue for a basic income of $12,000 for everyone over 18.

    Budget is currently $3.9 Trillion.

    I looked up average SSI check and it’s $14,160 a year. If that was the basic income we could call it $3.5 Trillion for age 18 and over.

    OK I found another graph and SSI, welfare and food assistance all comes to around $2.45 Trillion. So that comes to $8,166 per person but I don’t know how many people that covers already as they would all be moved to basic income. It’s the rest that would have to covered.

    We’re short roughly $ 1 Trillion. If you look at the last graph above I think we could cut Defense if we stopped all these wars for the Jews, take a little from the other category, (earned income tax credit, supplementary food assistance), take from non-Defense the housing and maybe raise a wealth tax. The wealth tax would be to balance gains in wealth, and the deficits of the less wealthy, from mass immigration. This should be taken from the wealthy every year until we stop mass immigration. We could also privatize the FED, an abomination, and get $241 Billion in interest payments after some adjustment period.

    I’m willing to bet that revenue would go up. Lots of people, if they had a known fixed income, could move around and get a better job. Especially the poor. Some people would lay around and do nothing but they’re they same people doing it now anyways so I doubt there’d be much change. It could very well be that we would see a sharp rise in the underclass Women deciding that if you have no job or prospects that you would be left out of the breeding equation. Right now if you’re a smooth talker and aggressive you’re more likely to get ghetto Women. That would change fast I bet. Could very quickly turn the unlivable violent ghetto into a livable place. I also have an idea that would stop crime almost completely or at least separate the criminals. The great Western Permaculture Project, (The Gulag). Combined with the Basic Income we could have our cities back.

    This will give you an idea of what we could do with the Desert in the great Western Permaculture Project, (The Gulag). It would take a lot of labor but we have plenty of criminals and it wouldn’t cost a dime except for maybe the first two years when it was getting started. It would be profitable after a couple years and would green the whole Desert West. Delighting the global warming crowd, theoretically, and stopping almost all violent criminals which now are just let loose to attack more people.

    This Desert transformation it super interesting, to me anyways.

    Liked by 1 person

      • We gave, during the banking crisis, the banks we know $16 Trillion dollars and through auditing government documents it’s believed the number went to over $29 Trillion. At $29 Trillion and 300 million Americans we could have given a zero interest loan for every family of four of $386,666. Housing crisis solved and the economy would have roared with all that cash going into people’s pockets. Let’s say this was turned into a family basic income. For every family of four they could have had a basic income of $10,000 for over 38 years. That’s a damn long time. Another way to look at it is it could provide that income for ten years for each individual.

        The problem with Socialism is the elites control it. They don’t just give people money they tie up everything they give people in a mass of rules and regulations. If they provided money for the basics then let people alone while providing protection from criminals things would slowly get better. All Socialistic States eventually fall because they end up attacking the population.

        We are being totally ripped off by the Oligarchs and Bankers in this country.

        Like

  7. You want big projects. Here you go. Here’s a guy who has figured out how to provide all the calories every single person needs, (quality food too like Tuna, Ocean fish, etc), and four times the electricity of a present American citizen with beach front condo property for every human on planet Earth with about zero ecological concerns in 15 years. Really. Maybe cost a billion or so as it builds itself after you start it.

    Atmospheric Vortex Engine-The power plant that works off of tropical ocean water (remember most of the Ocean is basically dead).

    Exponential Remediation of Civilization’s Footprint

    http://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2014/05/introduction-extinction-of-human-race.html

    http://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2013/08/breakout-labs-funded-prototype-of.html

    http://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2014/05/greenhouses-are-not-next-green.html

    The Earth has an equatorial diameter of 12,756 km. So with Islands 1KM apart you could easily have 10,000 @ 100,000 per Island, so 1,000,000,000 with maybe 10 Km North and South the same for 10 Billion people.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s