Hello,



More of my philosophy of can the not smart creative humans be competitive and more of my thoughts..

I am a white arab from Morocco, and i think i am smart since i have also invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..

I think i am highly smart since i have passed two certified IQ tests
and i have scored above 115 IQ, so now i will ask a philosophical
question of:


Can the not smart creative humans be competitive ?

I think that even if creativity can come from the not smart humans,
i think that if the not smart humans that are creative are exposed
to the smart humans that are creative, it is too risky for them,
so the way for the not smart creative humans is to know how to smartly hide from the competition of the not smart creative humans,
but this process, too, needs smartness, so it is why i think that the not smart creative humans are not competitive with the smart creative humans, so then smartness is the key to success, but there is still a philosophical question of: Can we say that
the genetically smart humans merit success by there genetical smartness?, since smartness becomes easy for them ?, i think that it is morality that enforces the fact that we have to say that they merit success, since we have to be disciplined since
morality needs order in a society, and since also capitalism rewards merit, and this brings quality , and the merit can become the to be genetically smart.


More of my philosophy about the successful business way of doing and more of my thoughts..


I think i am highly smart since i have passed two certified IQ tests
and i have scored above 115 IQ, and now i will talk about an important subject, so i invite you to look at the following video that is making a mistake about how to be successful in business:

How to Master the Art of Leadership | Simon Sinek’s Greatest Speech

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iu7nwbFm8Os



I think the above video is making a mistake, since we are living in a world based on competition, and it is competition that brings quality,
but how can we define quality? i think that it is also competition that creates efficient medias that also talks about the criteria that makes a product or a service a good product or service, so it is smartness in action that measures the quality or
successfulness of a product or service , and of course you can have a competitive advantage in this or that criterion that makes your product or service successful, so of course that you have to be smart so that to know "how" to be smartly competitive in
this world based on competition, so then creativity and inventiveness is not the the only factors that makes the product or service successful, since it is also the being smart that makes your product or service successful. Other than that you can read
all my following thoughts so that to understand my views:

More of my philosophy about capitalism and more of my thoughts..



I think i am highly smart and i say that in capitalism, overtaxing and imposing excess regulations is not good, since capitalism rewards merit, so overtaxing can hurt capitalism and can kill the spirit of innovation, and of course the government can and
should play a role in our capitalist system by using and enforcing antitrust laws and by clamping down on fraud and the exploitation of labor, so i can then say that the capitalist believes that wealth in the hands of bright, successful, hard-working
people (entrepreneurs) will be the incentive to produce newer and better products and services because of the expectation of the monetary rewards from which they will benefit, and i have just said the following about it:

Now i will talk about a so important thing about the: Does capitalism really drive innovation? so i invite you to look at the following video about it:

Does Capitalism Really Drive Innovation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNhdKpTGfAU


I think i am highly smart and I have just looked at the above video and i am noticing that it is making a big mistake, since i think that the public investment has the tendency to be efficient, where capitalism is
not efficient, for the long-term research and development, but the private sector of capitalism has the tendency to invest on projects promising commercial advantages in the short-to-medium term, and this investing on the short-to-medium term of
capitalism is also good, so then i can say that capitalism is good for an "optimal" efficiency.

And you can read the rest of my "interesting" philosophical thoughts in the following web links so that to understand my views on different subjects:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/vc32viYv1SY

And read also here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/CmaowkjUJVY


And i invite you to read my following other thoughts of my philosophy in the following web link:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/s8IZ5i5Udm0


More of my philosophy about how to lower inflation and about USA and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart and i can go into more details by saying that
the american Democrat's way of today of wanting to higher the federal minimum wage is not so bad, since the highering the federal minimum wage has its limit, so Democrats are not wanting to higher too much the federal minimum wage, since it can for
example hurt economic investment and it can hurt employment, so we have not to be pessimistic about this way of doing of president Biden governance or of the japanese Kishidanomics, other than that i am not speaking about how the Biden's plan lowers
inflation, since i have just talked about the standard way of lowering inflation of the Federal Reserve, and i think that the kind of president Biden's tax increase on the rich is not a problem, read carefully the following so that to notice it:

"In an interview, Mr. Pomerleau said the drag was small from the
proposals because Mr. Biden was largely taxing savings of high earners,
which are not major drivers of economic growth given those Americans
have a lot of their wealth saved.

“Some tax increases have larger effects on growth than others,” he said. “Biden has chosen taxes that don’t have a massive effect.”"

Read more carefully here so that to understand:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/18/business/biden-tax-plan-economy.html


Also here is my thoughts about the standard way of lowering inflation by the Federal Reserve that i am talking about above, read it carefully:

More of my philosophy about the Keynesian economics and more..

I think i am highly smart and i will invite you to look at the following new video about how the governments of Europe and USA have spent more in the economy and were following the Keynesian economics in the period of economic Crisis of Covid-19, since i
think that Keynesian economics even if it is not the modern way by using the supply of money and by interest rates, can still has some "advantage" in this kind of economic crisis, and the macroeconomic theories and models of Keynesian economics is about
how aggregate demand (total spending in the economy) strongly influences economic output and inflations, so i invite you to look at the following new video so that to understand the how of it:

The EU's New Plan to Transform the Economy - VisualPolitik EN

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2-HqLZJIhU


But i will say that Milton Friedman, an American economist awarded the 1976 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics for his contribution to consumption analysis and to monetary history and theory, including his observations of the complexity of stabilization
policy, was the founders of the modern monetarist school of economics, that held that the business cycle is determined mainly by the supply of money and by interest rates, rather than by government fiscal policy - contrary to the long-prevailing view of
Keynes and his followers. So then you have to understand that the modern way in economics with wich we manage inflation and unemployment is no more using keynesian economics, but it is by using for example the following way using the supply of money and
by interest rates:

I think i am highly smart, and i think that the Federal Reserve policymakers of USA are trying to slow down the economy and subdue inflation by highering interest rates, and highering interest rates make money costlier and borrowing less appealing and
that, in turn, slows demand to catch up with supply, which has lagged badly throughout the pandemic, but that's the macroeconomics of it, and its potential effects include lower wages, a halt or even a drop in home prices and a decline in stock market
valuations etc., but notice that the highering of interest rates reduces the demand, so i think it has a macroeconomic effects of balancing by creating lower prices in one side and part of the economy and this compensate much more for the higher prices
in the other side and part of the economy, but notice that it doesn't mean that the highering of interest rates solves all the problems.


More of my philosophy about Kishidanomics and about USA and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart , since i have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, and now i will talk about an important subject and it is about the how we have to grow economy , since as you have just noticed, i have just said, read
it below, that the Democrats and Republicans in USA have two different ways of how to grow economy, since as i have just for example said that the U.S. Congress believes that today's debt will be dwarfed by tomorrow's economic growth. Driving economic
growth is one way to reduce the national debt, but Congress tends to disagree on how to create that growth. Most Democrats push increased spending, while most Republicans champion lower taxes, and it looks like the different economic ways in Japan of
Abenomics and Kishidanomics, and i invite you to read the following article about them:

https://cscr.pk/explore/themes/politics-governance/kishidanomics-the-economic-policies-of-fumio-kishida/


But i think that the problematic is that compelling data reveal a discouraging truth about growth today in for example western countries. There has been a marked decline in the ability of traditional levers of production capital investment and labor to
propel economic growth, so those traditional levers in economics above have there limits, and here is what i have just said about how to solve this problematic by also using artificial intelligence etc., and read it carefully in my below thoughts:

More of my philosophy about McKinsey and more of my thoughts..

I invite you to look at the following interesting video about McKinsey:

How McKinsey Became One Of The Most Powerful Companies In The World

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBmmMj_maII

And i also invite you to read this interesting article about McKinsey:

How McKinsey Destroyed the Middle Class

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/how-mckinsey-destroyed-middle-class/605878/

I think i am smart, and i have just looked at the above video and i have
just read the above article, and i think McKinsey was doing it with like the traditional levers, but i think this classical way of managing is not so difficult for countries, but i think this classical way of managing is much less important than the much
important way of doing it with artificial intelligence, since compelling data reveal a discouraging truth about economic growth in western countries today, since there has been a marked decline in the ability of traditional levers of production capital
investment and labor to propel economic growth in western countries, since i also say that in economic management we know that firms with a large part-time employment share are more productive than firms with a large share of full-time workers, but a 10%
increase in the part-time share is associated with 4.8% higher productivity, so as you notice there is a limit to this way of managing with part-time employment, like was also doing it McKinsey, so i think that it is AI(artificial intelligence) that
could increase much more the economic growth rates in western countries by changing the nature of work and creating a new relationship between man and machine. The impact of AI technologies on business can increase much more labor productivity and enable
people to make more efficient use of their time, but the most important thing is that Digital and AI literacy is of utmost importance to help countries businesses scale and compete internationally. Investing in widespread digital and AI literacy for the
entire population will increase domestic demand for technology and technology jobs. A technologically literate population will create more data, which fuels AI and thus the data-driven economy as a whole. It is also necessary for workers to be able to
upskill and re-skill in order to remain productive and competitive in an automated workforce. Countries businesses that adopt AI technology will save from lower production costs, have increased output, and be able to invest more. Increased revenue from
this domestic demand, and with a global reputation for responsible AI, will help countries businesses scale globally and compete on the international level.

And read the two following web links so that to understand more what i am saying:

"Compelling data reveal a discouraging truth about growth today. There
has been a marked decline in the ability of traditional levers of
production capital investment and labor to propel economic growth."

And it it says the following:

"Accenture research on the impact of AI in 12 developed economies
reveals that AI could double annual economic growth rates in 2035 by
changing the nature of work and creating a new relationship between man
and machine. The impact of AI technologies on business is projected to
increase labor productivity by up to 40 percent and enable people to
make more efficient use of their time."

Read more here so that to notice it:

https://www.accenture.com/ca-en/insight-artificial-intelligence-future-growth-canada

And McKinsey estimates that AI(Artificial intelligence) may deliver an additional economic output of around US$13 trillion by 2030, increasing
global GDP by about 1.2 % annually. This will mainly come from
substitution of labour by automation and increased innovation in
products and services.

Read more here:

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/637967/EPRS_BRI(2019)637967_EN.pdf

More of my philosophy about the US problems and world problems and more of my thoughts..

I think that i am highly smart, and the main problem of USA as i am showing it above by posting the web links, is that Management consultants, like of the powerful McKinsey, implemented and rationalized a transformation in the American corporation by
downsizing in response not to particular business problems but rather to a new managerial ethos and methods; they downsized when profitable as well as when struggling, and during booms as well as busts. So i think it is the main problem, since for
example read in the following paper that says that: "In contrast to the conventional wisdom, we find that plants of the U.S. manufacturing sector that increased employment as well as productivity contribute almost as much to overall productivity growth
in the 1980s as the plants that increased productivity at the expense of employment."

Read more here so that to understand:

Downsizing and Productivity Growth: Myth or Reality?

https://www.jstor.org/stable/40228705

But about the other problem of part-time employment, i think American corporations have to understand that this way of managing
by part-time employment is limited, since we know that a 10% increase in the part-time share is associated with 4.8% higher productivity.

More of my philosophy about productivity and about economic growth and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart, and as you are noticing in my below thoughts that the powerful McKinsey has used the management methodology of downsizing and of part-time employment so that to higher productivity so that to higher economic growth, since the
ideal GDP growth rate is between 2% and 3%, and since we know that economic growth is measured as the annual percent change of gross domestic product (GDP), and we know that when you higher GDP per capita you higher richness of the country, but you have
to notice that this management of the powerful McKinsey was deficient in that it has destroyed much more the Middle Class, and i am
posting the web link below that shows it, and i say that it is why it was not a Long-term good management, but it was done not wisely for short-term benefits of highering productivity, so now it is why it is also necessary to implement progressive
capitalism, of Joseph E. Stiglitz the recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics, so that to solve those problems, and you can look at his videos in youtube.

More of my philosophy about the wage levels and the wage ratios and more of my thoughts..

I will say that workers living standards depend on wage levels, not wage ratios, eventhough when measuring wage dispersion, economists frequently look at the 90/50 ratio — the wage of the worker at the 90th percentile divided by the wage of the worker
at the median, but you have to understand that i am talking above about how McKinsey has used the management methodology of downsizing(there is also a destruction of jobs in it) and of part-time employment so that to higher productivity and i am
explaining how it has much more destroyed the Middle Class.

More of my philosophy about downsizing and about outsourcing and more
of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart, and as you are noticing i have just spoken
about the downsizing methodology that is used by McKinsey, read it above, but i can go more and more into more details by saying that notice how i am saying that the downsizing higher productivity, and i think i am smart by saying so, since i say that in
management the downsizing can create a cost reduction and it can create more "value", and both cost reduction and this more value can attract investors that makes the company much more productive, so as you notice we have not in management just to focus
on the short term of the cost reduction of downsizing, and of course i can also say that there is also the way of doing some outsourcing in a company so that to higher productivity and reduce the costs as well, but here again, in this case, it can also
attract investors and make the company much more productive.

More of my philosophy about specialization and about efficiency and productivity..

I am a white arab from Morocco, and i think i am smart since i have also invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..


The previous CEO Larry Culp of General Electric and the architect of a strategy that represented a new turning point in the world corporate strategies, Larry Culp's strategy was to divide the company according to its activities. Something like we are
better of alone, seperately and
focused on each one's own activity, than together in a large
conglomerate. And it is a move from integration to specialization.
You see it is thought that a company always gains economies of scale
as it grows, but this is not necessarily the case, since as the company
gains in size - especially if it engages in many activities - it
also generates its own bureaucracy, with all that entails in term
of cost and efficiency. And not only that, it is also often the case
that by bringing together very different activities, strategic focus is lost and decision-making is diluted, so that in the end no one ends up
taking responsability, it doesn't always happen, but this reasons are
basically what is driving this increasing specialization. So i invite to look at the following video so that to understand more about it:

The decline of industrial icon of the US - VisualPolitik EN

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hqwYxFCY-k


And here is my previous thoughts about specialization and productivity so that to understand much more:

More about the Japanese Ikigai and about productivity and more of my thoughts..

Read the following interesting article about Japanese Ikigai:

The More People With Purpose, the Better the World Will Be

https://singularityhub.com/2018/06/15/the-more-people-with-purpose-the-better-the-world-will-be/

I think i am highly smart, so i say that the Japanese Ikigai is like a Japanese philosophy that is like the right combination or "balance" of passion, vocation, and mission, and Ikigai and MTP, as concepts, urge us to align our passions with a mission to
better the world, but i think that Japanese Ikiai is a also smart since it gets the "passion" from the "mission", since the mission is also the engine, so you have to align the passion with the mission of the country or the global world so that to be
efficient, and Japanese Ikigai is also smart since so that to higher productivity and be efficient, you have to "specialize" in doing a job, but so that to higher more productivity and be more efficient you can also specialize in what you do "better",
and it is what is doing Japanese Ikigai, since i think that in Japanese Ikigai, being the passion permits to make you specialized in a job in what you do better, and here is what i have just smartly said about productivity:

I think i am highly smart, and i have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, and i will now talk about another important idea of Adam Smith the father of economic Liberalism, and it is about "specialization" in an economic system,
since i say that in an economic system we have to be specialized in doing a job so that to be efficient and productive, but not only that, but we have to specialize in doing a job in what we do better so that to be even more efficient and productive, and
we have to minimize at best the idle time or the wasting of time doing a job, since i can also say that this average idle time or wasting time of the workers working in parallel can be converted to a contention like in parallel programming, so you have
to minimize it at best, and you have to minimize at best the coherency like in parallel programming so that to scale much better, and of course all this can create an economy of scale, and also i invite you to read my following smart and interesting
thoughts about scalability of productivity:

I will talk about following thoughts from the following PhD computer scientist:

https://lemire.me/blog/about-me/

Read more carefully here his thoughts about productivity:

https://lemire.me/blog/2012/10/15/you-cannot-scale-creativity/

And i think he is making a mistake in his above webpage about productivity:

Since we have that Productivity = Output/Input

But better human training and/or better tools and/or better human smartness and/or better human capacity can make the Parallel productivity part much bigger that the Serial productivity part, so it can scale much more (it is like Gustafson's Law).

And it looks like the following:

About parallelism and about Gustafson’s Law..

Gustafson’s Law:

• If you increase the amount of work done by each parallel
task then the serial component will not dominate
• Increase the problem size to maintain scaling
• Can do this by adding extra complexity or increasing the overall
problem size

Scaling is important, as the more a code scales the larger a machine it
can take advantage of:

• can consider weak and strong scaling
• in practice, overheads limit the scalability of real parallel programs
• Amdahl’s law models these in terms of serial and parallel fractions
• larger problems generally scale better: Gustafson’s law


Load balance is also a crucial factor.


More of my philosophy about American universities and more
about USA and more of my thoughts..


Why American universities are the best in the world

"Americans can take pride that their universities — through a combination of competition, experimentation, and lots and lots of money — rose from small centers of rote learning to become the greatest research institutions in the history of the world."

Read more here in the following interesting article:

https://bigthink.com/the-present/american-university/


And the following other article says that the education system of USA is not so bad as we can think and you can read about it here:

America's Not-So-Broken Education System

Read more here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/06/everything-in-american-education-is-broken/488189/


More of my philosophy about U.S. debt and about capitalism and more of my thoughts..


U.S. Congress believes that today's debt will be dwarfed by tomorrow's economic growth. Driving economic growth is one way to reduce the national debt, but Congress tends to disagree on how to create that growth. Most Democrats push increased spending,
while most Republicans champion lower taxes. So i invite you to read the following article
so that to understand more:

Will the U.S. Ever Pay Off Its Debt?

https://www.thebalance.com/will-the-u-s-debt-ever-be-paid-off-3970473


More of my philosophy about capitalism and about innovation and more of my thoughts..

Now i will talk about a so important thing about the: Does capitalism really drive innovation? so i invite you to look at the following video about it:

Does Capitalism Really Drive Innovation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNhdKpTGfAU


I think i am highly smart and I have just looked at the above video and i am noticing that it is making a big mistake, since i think that the public investment has the tendency to be efficient, where capitalism is
not efficient, for the long-term research and development, but the private sector of capitalism has the tendency to invest on projects promising commercial advantages in the short-to-medium term, and this investing on the short-to-medium term of
capitalism is also good, so then i can say that capitalism is good for an "optimal" efficiency, and you can now read my following interesting thoughts and writing about cluster of venture capitalists etc.

More of my philosophy about the cluster of venture capitalists and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart, since i have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, and now i will talk more about how is so important the cluster of venture capitalists, so i invite you to look
at the following video that shows a so important thing:

Economy Of Israel: Exploring The Israeli Economy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vzIsiqQoRc


And notice carefully in the above video that the cluster of the venture capitalists in Israel was a so important factor of the success of the Israel economy, and so that to understand how, i invite you to read the following so interesting article about
the Silicon Valley cluster of venture capitalists so that to understand how it is so important and how it is lacking in other western countries such as France, so here it is,
and read it carefully:

Silicon Valley: a cluster of venture capitalists?

http://www.parisinnovationreview.com/articles-en/silicon-valley-a-cluster-of-venture-capitalists


And Let's look for example at USA, so read the following from Jonathan Wai that is a Ph.D., it says:

"Heiner Rindermann and James Thompson uncovered that the “smart fraction” of a country is quite influential in impacting the performance of that country, for example, its GDP."

And it also says the following:

"“According to recent population estimates, there are about eight Chinese and Indians for every American in the top 1 percent in brains.” But consider that the U.S. benefits from the smart fractions of every other country in the world because it
continues to serve as a magnet for brainpower, something that is not even factored into these rankings.

What these rankings clearly show is America is likely still in the lead in terms of brainpower. And this is despite the fact federal funding for educating our smart fraction is currently zero. Everyone seems worried Americans are falling behind, but this
is because everyone is focusing on average and below average people. Maybe it’s time we started taking a closer look at the smartest people of our own country."

Read more here:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/finding-the-next-einstein/201312/whats-the-smartest-country-in-the-world

So as you are noticing it's immigrants(and there are about eight Chinese and Indians for every American in the top 1 percent in brains) that are making USA a rich country.


And read also the following so that to understand more:

"Why Silicon Valley Wouldn’t Work Without Immigrants

There are many theories for why immigrants find so much success in tech. Many American-born tech workers point out that there is no shortage of American-born employees to fill the roles at many tech companies. Researchers have found that more than enough
students graduate from American colleges to fill available tech jobs. Critics of the industry’s friendliness toward immigrants say it comes down to money — that technology companies take advantage of visa programs, like the H-1B system, to get
foreign workers at lower prices than they would pay American-born ones.

But if that criticism rings true in some parts of the tech industry, it misses the picture among Silicon Valley’s top companies. One common misperception of Silicon Valley is that it operates like a factory; in that view, tech companies can hire just
about anyone from anywhere in the world to fill a particular role.

But today’s most ambitious tech companies are not like factories. They’re more like athletic teams. They’re looking for the LeBrons and Bradys — the best people in the world to come up with some brand-new, never-before-seen widget, to completely
reimagine what widgets should do in the first place.

“It’s not about adding tens or hundreds of thousands of people into manufacturing plants,” said Aaron Levie, the co-founder and chief executive of the cloud-storage company Box. “It’s about the couple ideas that are going to be invented that
are going to change everything.”

Why do tech honchos believe that immigrants are better at coming up with those inventions? It’s partly a numbers thing. As the tech venture capitalist Paul Graham has pointed out, the United States has only 5 percent of the world’s population; it
stands to reason that most of the world’s best new ideas will be thought up by people who weren’t born here.

If you look at some of the most consequential ideas in tech, you find an unusual number that were developed by immigrants. For instance, Google’s entire advertising business — that is, the basis for the vast majority of its revenues and profits, the
engine that allows it to hire thousands of people in the United States — was created by three immigrants: Salar Kamangar and Omid Kordestani, who came to the United States from Iran, and Eric Veach, from Canada.

But it’s not just a numbers thing. Another reason immigrants do so well in tech is that people from outside bring new perspectives that lead to new ideas."

Read more here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/technology/personaltech/why-silicon-valley-wouldnt-work-without-immigrants.html



Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.








--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)