Hello,
More of my philosophy about capitalism and about productivity and about quality 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 have just read the following web page about capitalism and i invite you to look at it:
https://thecampoclaw.com/opinion/2018/01/30/capitalism-drives-us-beyond-mediocrity/
I think i am highly smart, and I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, and i mean that it is "above" 115 IQ, so i think i am smart, and i am discovering a pattern with my fluid intelligence in the above web page, and it is
the following:
So it is saying the following:
"To achieve the better world that students seek, we must be ambitious and greedy rather than collectivist and selfless."
So notice that it is saying that in capitalism we have to be ambitious
and greedy, but i think it is not smart to say so, since the "ambitious"
can be not the smart way of being "ambitious" and the greedy
can be not the smart way of being "greedy" , so then what we need
in capitalism is the smart way of being capitalism and it is
to be the good adaptation, so for example being specialization
in a job, like said it Adam Smith, so that to higher productivity and quality is not sufficient, since it needs to be the smart or good specialization that knows how to manage the society, and of course it is not the only way that highers productivity ,
since you can also higher productivity by part-time employment, since we know that a 10% increase in the part-time share is associated with 4.8% higher productivity, but as i am saying that the what we need is the smart way of doing part-time employment,
also here are the following other ways that higher productivity:
I think i am highly smart, and I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, and i mean that it is "above" 115 IQ, i think i am discovering other patterns with my fluid intelligence about decentralization and about scalability of
productivity, and it is that you have to take care of the "coherency", and i think that the coherency is quadratic in a complexity of O(n^2), and it is not like contention that is in a complexity of O(n), so it is why you have to know how to
decentralize efficiently so that to lower the complexity of the coherency, so there is not only specialization in a job in what you do better that higher productivity and quality, but there is also the efficient decentralization and the efficiently
lowering the contention and efficiently lowering the coherency.
More of my philosophy about specialization and about efficiency and productivity..
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 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 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 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 automation and about Google and more of my thoughts..
I have just added the thoughts on the effective tax on robots, please read again:
"A study by researchers from MIT and Boston University claims that automation is responsible for more than half of the increase in the income gap between the most educated and the least educated workers in the United States. The study estimates that
automation reduced the wages of men without a high school diploma by 8.8% and of women without a high school diploma by 2.3%. These figures have been adjusted for inflation. According to the study by Acemoglu and Restrepo, growing income inequality could
also stem from, among other things, the decline in the prevalence of unions (a highly sensitive topic today in technology companies), market concentration resulting in a lack of competition for labour, or other types of technological change.
Acemoglu and Restrepo's study comes at a time when the debate over whether or not to tax robots is heating up. More and more voices rise to call for a tax on robots to combat the effects of automation on income inequality. In this regard, a study
published last month by economists at MIT suggests that introducing a tax on robot labor, preferably a modest tax, would incentivize companies to retain workers, while offsetting some of the payroll taxes lost through downsizing. Of course, the
conclusions of the study are not unanimous.
According to economists' calculations, an effective tax on robots would probably be between 1% and 3.7%. The report estimates that if the tax is much higher, it would exaggerate the role that robots play in the operational routines of companies; and if
it is lower, companies would have no incentive to retain human employees at all."
Read more here (and you can translate the web page from french to english):
Study claims automation has caused more than half of US income inequality since 1980
https://embarque.developpez.com/actu/340711/Une-etude-affirme-que-l-automatisation-est-a-l-origine-de-plus-de-la-moitie-de-l-inegalite-des-revenus-aux-Etats-Unis-depuis-1980-les-personnes-les-moins-diplomees-semblent-les-plus-touchees/
And 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 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:
More of my philosophy about IQ tests and more of my thoughts..
I think i am highly smart, and I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored above 115 IQ, but i have just passed more and more IQ tests, and i have just noticed that the manner in wich we test with IQ tests is not correct, since in an IQ test
you can be more specialized and above average in one subtest of intelligence than in another subtest of intelligence inside an IQ test, since IQ tests test for many kind of intelligences such as the spatial and speed and calculations and logical
intelligence etc., so i think that you can be really above average in logical intelligence, as i am really above average in logical intelligence, but at the same time you can be below average in calculations and/or spatial.., so since an IQ test doesn't
test for this kind of specializations of intelligence, so i think it is not good, since testing for this kind specializations in intelligence is really important so that to be efficient by knowing the strong advantages of this or that person in every
types of intelligences.
More of my philosophy about Milton Friedman and the modern monetarist school of economics 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..
As i have just explained, that the modern way is modern monetarist school of economics of Milton Friedman, read about it in my below thoughts, so i think that the way of the modern monetarist school of economics is also the way that we call the
Quantitative easing (QE) that is also a way where for example the U.S. Federal Reserve print more and more money so that to lend money for investment, so i can also say that the borrowing of this money from Quantitative easing (QE) is an indebtedness
that creates wealth, but notice that the Federal Reserve is not crazy since it has to manage it correctly and manage inflation correctly, so we have to make a difference between the responsable way of the U.S. Federal Reserve and of that of the
irresponsibility of the below professor in economics that said that the government can not has a debt problem because it pays its debt by printing more and more money, so read my below thoughts so that to understand my views:
More of my philosophy about the how we have to grow economy 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 i think 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 will also 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 the responsable economics and more of thoughts..
I have just looked at the following video where a professor in economics that is a democrat and that has worked for the democrats is speaking and she is saying something irresponsible in economics and it is the following:
She is saying that the government can not has a debt problem because it pays its debt by printing more and more money, but i think she is irresponsible by saying so, since the US dollar has a price and value
that also follows globally the supply and demand rule, so for example if you are this irresponsibility, so the demand on the the US Dollar can lower and it can cause problems. So here is the video and look at it carefully so that you notice the
irresponsibility:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmuysv17T9M
'
But notice my way of explaining the US debt that is not the above irresponsible way:
So i think that USA will solve its deficit problem efficiently,
and i think that's not the problem, since i also think that USA is
borrowing mostly at a low interest rates, since i think in a long-term the interest rates at wich it is borrowing are low since USA is also a well diversified and powerful economy that is really resilient, so it is why i think that the USA government can
handle a "much" heavier debt load since also USA is a well diversified and powerful economy that is really resilient, so it is why i think that USA debt is not problematic, also I think that USA will still be a super power in the future, since the USA
debt is not problematic as i am explaining it, and i also say that we can not compare USA to China, since China has many defects like the "productivity" of China is not good both qualitatively and quantitatively, and China has a debt problem, so China is
constrained by this factor of its debt problem, so China can not attain the level of productivity both quantitatively and qualitatively of that of USA in the near to medium future. But the productivity of USA is good both qualitatively and quantitatively,
and China has other problems such as the quality of education of its workforce is much less than that of USA, it is why China is also lacking much in productivity both qualitatively and quantitatively. And you can look at the following video so that to
understand more:
Why won't China Surpass the United States? - VisualPolitik EN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqowS-hlZ3M
More of my philosophy about the bad tendency of the shrinking of the middle class in USA and more of my thoughts..
I have to give some statistics so that you understand more
the holistic view of it, and here it is:
"The shrinking of the middle class has been accompanied by an increase in the share of adults in the upper-income tier – from 14% in 1971 to 21% in 2021 – as well as an increase in the share who are in the lower-income tier, from 25% to 29%. These
changes have occurred gradually, as the share of adults in the middle class decreased in each decade from 1971 to 2011, but then held steady through 2021."
Read more here:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/04/20/how-the-american-middle-class-has-changed-in-the-past-five-decades/
So as you are noticing that the lower-income tier has gone from 25% to 29%, so then there is more poor people in USA. So then you have to
understand that we have to solve the "problematic" of this bad tendency
by implementing progressive capitalism as i am explaining it in my
below thoughts, so read all my below previous thoughts so that you understand my views:
More of my philosophy of why americans feel so poor and more of my thoughts..
I invite you to look at the following video:
Why Americans Feel So Poor | CNBC Marathon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCQiywN7pH4
So you have to know that i have just talked about this problematic
of why americans feel so poor, and it is the following, read the
below article of how McKinsey Destroyed the Middle Class and you will understand, and i am also giving the way of how to solve the
problem by being progressive capitalism, so read it in my below thoughts:
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 below 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, so read my below thoughts so that to understand my views:
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/
More of my philosophy about the american dream and more of my thoughts..
The American dream was initially conceived by Thomas Jefferson as each citizen’s right to the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, this american dream is not about guaranteed outcomes, of course, but the pursuit of opportunities, so
notice carefully that i have just spoken more and more about those kind of opportunities
that we have to have and that makes the american dream, like for example
my talking in my below thoughts about Progressive Capitalism of Joseph E. Stiglitz, since Joseph E. Stiglitz is saying in his videos below that he has advised the democratic party about his reforms of his progressive capitalism, so read my below thoughts
carefully so that to understand:
And I have just looked at many videos on youtube of Joseph Stiglitz and
i have just understood him well, but i have just quickly found the following interesting video of him that explains well the reforms that we need so that to be progressive capitalism, and he is saying in this video that he has advised the democratic
party about his reforms of his
progressive capitalism and i think that he is a democrat, so i
invite you to look at his following interesting video so that
to understand:
Joseph Stiglitz on People, Power, and Profit | Munich Security Conference 2020
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sym4UZOjhJc
And more precision about more of my philosophy about progressive capitalism..
I invite you again to look at the following interesting video of Joseph E. Stiglitz that speaks about some thoughts of his interesting book “People, Power, and Profits: Progressive Capitalism for an Age of Discontent.”:
Joseph Stiglitz on People, Power, and Profits: Progressive Capitalism for an Age of Discontent
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLJksgMIDdI
And read his following interesting article in The New York Times so that
to understand:
Joseph E. Stiglitz is a university professor at Columbia, the 2001 recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics, a former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, a former chief economist of the World Bank and the author, most recently, of “
People, Power, and Profits: Progressive Capitalism for an Age of Discontent.”, and i invite you to read his following interesting article in The New York Times:
Progressive capitalism is not an oxymoron
Read more here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/opinion/sunday/progressive-capitalism.html
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)