Hello,




More of my philosophy about meritocracy and about objectivity 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, and i have just said , read in my below thoughts, that CNN lacks objectivity, but here is more proof about it:

The new CNN is more opinionated and emotional. Can it still be ‘the most trusted name in news’?

Read more here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/cnn-opinionated-emotional-zucker/2021/05/11/5f32eb38-7f92-11eb-81db-b02f0398f49a_story.html



Also i have just looked at the following video about meritocracy
in USA:

Is Meritocracy a Sham? | Amanpour and Company

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


I think i am highly smart since i have passed two certified IQ tests
and i have scored above 115 IQ, and i think that in the above video the main problematic is the one that i am talking about in my following thoughts that answers the neo-nazis of national vanguard about Capitalism that permits inheritance, so read my
following thoughts carefully:


I have just read again the following article from a white supremacist website called National Vanguard:


Why Capitalism Fails


https://nationalvanguard.org/2015/07/why-capitalism-fails/


And i am not in accordance with the white supremacist views about capitalism on the above webpage, since they are too much pessimistic about capitalism, since i say that we have to be optimistic about capitalism since capitalism is not a zero sum game,
since with a reasonable level of growth, capitalism can both deliver rising living standards for most, and still ensure a relatively high rate of return to the owners of capital, also i am talking below about Progressive Capitalism that explains how to
reform capitalism so that to be efficient, and i am not in accordance with the above white supremacist view about the welfare since i think it is too much strict, since i think we need a level of welfare and here is how i am explaining it:

And today i will talk about Class struggle of Communism and Marxism,
so i will first ask a philosophical question of:

Is Class struggle "valid" and a good thing to have ?

I will say that there is not one type of Class struggle, because
we can have "levels" of Class Struggle, such as the Class Struggle of
Communism and Marxism under Mao Zedong in China, and i think it is
logically inferred in Marxism from the fact that there is antagonistic contradictions that are contradiction between the Chinese communists and Chinese bourgeoisie and between the imperialist camp and the socialist
camp, so we can also consider that this antagonistic contradictions also
comes from the fact that we can be genetically predisposed to being
smart or having a good memory efficiency and such genetical
characteristics, so this gives much more "chance" to those that have
this kind of genetical predispositions to become rich and successful, so
this is why Communism and Marxism says that we have to equalize much
more between people, so this is why i think it is also a kind of
competition that gives this kind of Class Struggle, but i will say that
the fact that we equalize much more between people in a society is not
good for "diversity" inside the society and it is not good for
efficiency, since we have to have a level of diversity that brings
"resilience" to the organization of a society, and even in economy we
have to have a level of diversification of economy that brings
resilience, so this is why i think that the level of Class struggle that
we have to have doesn't look like archaism of Communism or Marxism,
since i think we have to have some kind of Social Assistance and Social Solidarity and we have to have social programs that help the weakest
members of the society or the poors of the society in a kind of way, so
we have also to have a level of Class Struggle that is like a
competition that ensure that those kind of rights of providing some kind
of social programs that helps the weakest members and the poors of the
society are fought for in a civilized way inside such places as the
congress and in Democracy. Now there is also other antagonist
contradictions between the government and the people under Democracy or
the communist regime, and inside two groups or more inside a political
party or within a communist Party, and i think that we have to have
civilized ways and manners like by vigorous criticism and self-criticism
so that to resolve those kind of antagonist contradictions.

More of my philosophy about white supremacism and about Hitler and about neo-nazism and more of my thoughts..

I have just looked at the quotes of Hitler here:

https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/30691.Adolf_Hitler

So then i think i am highly smart and notice the following saying of Hitler:

“The stronger must dominate and not mate with the weaker, which would signify the sacrifice of its own higher nature. Only the born weakling can look upon this principle as cruel, and if he does so it is merely because he is of a feebler nature and
narrower mind; for if such a law did not direct the process of evolution then the higher development of organic life would not be conceivable at all.”
― Adolf Hitler

Read the saying of Hitler here so that to notice:

https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/30691.Adolf_Hitler

I think i am highly smart and i say that Hitler is not at all smart in his above saying, since we have first to define what is "stronger" , so for example the stronger is not the smarter and/or the wiser, since you can be the stronger by having the most
powerful military or the most stronger will to fight without being the smarter and wiser and this can cause that you win the competition or the fight, so when Hitler says in the above saying: "the stronger must dominate", i think from my explanation
above that it is stupid to say so, since also the being stronger is also not the being the smarter and wiser . And i also think this strictness of Hitler is not correct, since he was not understanding the disadvantage of when the genetic algorithm can be
more elitist in the crossover steps, since this kind of Elitism in a genetic algorithm can has the tendency to not efficiently higher the average best of the average members of the population, and you can read more about my below thoughts of the
following web links about the genetic algorithm.

Also Hitler says the following:

“Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice.”
― Adolf Hitler

So i think that this strictness of Hitler is not correct,
since we need a level of humanitarianism that also soften morals
and that makes us less violent.


So i think that Hitler is too much strict and too much violent.


And now more of my thoughts about capitalism and about National Vanguard..


I have just read the following article from a white supremacist website called National Vanguard:


Why Capitalism Fails


https://nationalvanguard.org/2015/07/why-capitalism-fails/


And it is saying the following about why capitalism fails:


"Capitalism permits inheritance, the command transfer of private property to a designated new owner upon the death of the previous owner. And therein is the flaw: inherited wealth isn’t earned by its owner, yet it leads to a class segregation of men
that has nothing to do with how much wealth they have earned; i.e., nothing to do with how much or how well or how significantly they have worked."


I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have invented many scalable algorithms, and i will answer with my fluid intelligence: I think the above article is not taking into account the risk factor and and the smartness factor, so there have to be
mechanisms, that are like engines, that "encourage" to or/and "make" a part of the people work by taking risks or great risks and by doing there best (so that to become rich) or/and that "encourage" to or/and "make" the smartest to give there best with
there smartness (so that to become rich), so i think capitalism has those mechanisms in form of rewards by allowing to become "rich" and in form of rewards by allowing inheritance, the command transfer of private property to a designated new owner upon
the death of the previous owner: Since it "encourages" to or/and "makes" a part of the people work by taking risks and by doing there best (so that to become rich) or/and it encourages to or/and makes the smartest give there best with there smartness (so
that to become rich).


And notice that i am also defining taking a "risk" as working "hard".


And the above article is saying the following:


"Capitalism constantly looks for ways to reduce labor costs. Automation made human labor less necessary than it had been when capitalism first appeared. When automation did appear, people who had the talent, the skills, and the motivation to make
contributions began to find no jobs, or to become uncompetitive with mass-production if they tried to employ themselves."


I think it is not true, because read the following:


https://singularityhub.com/2019/01/01/ai-will-create-millions-more-jobs-than-it-will-destroy-heres-how/


And read the following:


Here is the advantages and disadvantages of automation:


Following are some of the advantages of automation:


1. Automation is the key to the shorter workweek. Automation will allow
the average number of working hours per week to continue to decline,
thereby allowing greater leisure hours and a higher quality life.


2. Automation brings safer working conditions for the worker. Since
there is less direct physical participation by the worker in the
production process, there is less chance of personal injury to the worker.


3. Automated production results in lower prices and better products. It
has been estimated that the cost to machine one unit of product by
conventional general-purpose machine tools requiring human operators may
be 100 times the cost of manufacturing the same unit using automated mass-production techniques. The electronics industry offers many
examples of improvements in manufacturing technology that have
significantly reduced costs while increasing product value (e.g., colour
TV sets, stereo equipment, calculators, and computers).


4. The growth of the automation industry will itself provide employment opportunities. This has been especially true in the computer industry,
as the companies in this industry have grown (IBM, Digital Equipment
Corp., Honeywell, etc.), new jobs have been created.
These new jobs include not only workers directly employed by these
companies, but also computer programmers, systems engineers, and other
needed to use and operate the computers.


5. Automation is the only means of increasing standard of living. Only
through productivity increases brought about by new automated methods of production, it is possible to advance standard of living. Granting wage increases without a commensurate increase in productivity
will results in inflation. To afford a better society, it is a must to
increase productivity.


More of my philosophy about morality and about Islam 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 a so important subject by asking the following philosophical question:

Why have we to value morality ?


So i think that i have to discover the patterns with my fluid intelligence that answers the question, and here they are:


So i think we can better see the answer by noticing that
our today world is wanting to be a kind of human diversity that is not correctly wise, since i am also noticing it in the diversity of the medias in USA, so take for example CNN, we can easily notice that CNN is part of the diversity of the medias , but
even if it is a so important media, i have noticed that CNN lacks on objectivity, so i think that this objectivity has to be part of a sane morality, and the sane morality is also the fact that we can not consider beauty not universal or subjective, so
we can not accept this kind of unwise diversity, since the wise smartness has to guide , so we can say that beauty can appear to us like subjective, but when we analyse it with the wise smartness we can say that beauty is not a subjective thing, so then
we can not let the unwise humans dictate to the wise humans by saying that beauty is subjective, since it has to be measured not by the looking or the appearance or such, but it has to be measured by the wise smartness that has to dictate. So as you
notice we can say that we can not accept fully human diversity, and hence i can also say that it is why Islam has wanted to lesser the differences between humans, that are also human diversity, by also telling to muslims that they have to be "decency",
since i think this morality of being decency of Islam avoids a kind of disorder and violence, so hence even Islam has not accepted this kind of diversity of the not being a kind of decency.

More about the wise man and foolish man and more of my thoughts..


I think i am highly smart, and now i will talk about an important
subject, so i invite you to look at the following web page
about the Wise Man and the Foolish Man from the Church of
Jesus Christ:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/music/library/childrens-songbook/the-wise-man-and-the-foolish-man?lang=eng


I think i am highly smart since i have passed two certified IQ tests
and i have scored above 115 IQ, so notice in the above web page of
the Church of Jesus Christ that it is saying the following about
the Wise Man and the Foolish Man:

"1. The wise man built his house upon the rock,
The wise man built his house upon the rock,
The wise man built his house upon the rock,
And the rains came tumbling down.

2. The rains came down, and the floods came up,
The rains came down, and the floods came up,
The rains came down, and the floods came up,
And the house on the rock stood still.

3. The foolish man built his house upon the sand,
The foolish man built his house upon the sand,
The foolish man built his house upon the sand,
And the rains came tumbling down.
etc."


But i think that the above abstraction of what is the Wise Man
and the Foolish Man is not correct, since even the building the house depends on the environment that is like the context, so then a bad environment can make you build the house upon the sand, so then the Wise Man is then the one who tune correctly
morality and follows it, so then as i have just said, that even if the Wise Man Tune correctly morality and follows it, this morality still depends on the environment that can make morality fails, or , by logical analogy, make you build the house upon
the sand, so then we have to be wise and take really care of the environment of morality too.


More of my philosophy about the merit and more of my thoughts..

I have just said the following:

"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."



But i have to be more precise:

So the definition of "merit" and "worthy" in the english dictionary is:


Merit is the quality of being particularly good or worthy, especially so as to deserve praise or reward.


Worthy is having or showing the qualities or abilities that merit recognition in a specified way.


So i think that when you are genetically smart , you can, by being genetically smart, have and show qualities and abilities that merit recognition and that merit success even if your genetical smartness makes smartness "easy" for you and even without
hard work.

So read my previous thoughts:

More of my philosophy of can the not smart creative humans be competitive 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, 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..


[continued in next message]

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