captainamerica

You are projecting. Check what I have posted above again, please. There is a greater point. These people cannot even handle a conversation. When something unexpected happens all they have is an anxious and fear-based rash response. You can see them fidgeting and unable to handle a situation. It just falls apart. Not just in conversations but in numerous other things as well. Yet when they talk about their grand fancy theories they are so confident. We talk to them about History or other ways to see it and where it can go wrong against the greater good they are like "we will handle it" or some other grand theory. They basically say "we will handle it", ""we will find a way when it happens" etc. Yet almost every single time I have seen they cannot even handle one conversation with competence and confidence when something unexpected happens. Why should we trust them and take them on their word that they got it or they can handle the numerous unexpected complexities of the real world? They cannot sense the simple opportunities for Compassion on the fly, how can they manage the real world which is so complex?

Those are not mutually exclusive. Not sure why you say that if you actually understand Psychology. Plus your framing is incorrect. I never said that. I have plenty of productive conversations. You have an attachment to your ideology it is clear. I have analyzed this pattern hundreds of times. Heck I have even chatted up with business leaders and Scientists. It is difficult but I think you are exaggerating for your personal bias because as I have said above that a medium elaboration is given, you can understand it if you really want to. Like Some people want communism, I say why it is not possible. They start blaming my psychology. Happened before. So much for "compassionate people who want the good of all". I don't have much care for the labels. If you answer why are you in American politics I can share my motivation. If you are not interested in talking, just blaming, then please don't talk. Not that hard of a choice.

I have elaborated to a medium degree, it is given above. It is not without elaboration. Not possible to elaborate completely here. Your profile says you live in Poland. May I please ask why are you so interested in American Politics? Do you have any candidates you like? I like Andrew Yang. Poland does not really face the exact same issues. The Gini coefficient or wealth inequality in Poland is 30 whereas in America it is about 50. The difference is not of mere 20 points it is like 30 points since it is non-linear, just to be clear about this. It cannot really go a lot less in Poland as this is about the physical limit.

I do not mean to be condescending, communication is hard for me, my brain is wired that way. I think I am on the spectrum but we did not have the money to see experts have tests, experts and all when I was growing up. It is hard to confirm that exactly now. I also had to try to learn to walk properly after the age of 20. My brain changes the posture, can't show it. Started the training a little bit after 20 I mean, it is time-consuming so not focusing on it to be clear. Are you happy now? I try my best after lots and lots of practice. I am not talking about you friend. I promise. I am stating a couple of things about Systems Thinking unrelated to you. This is a common trend, not saying about you I promise.

The thing about Systems Thinking is that it is not sexy. You cannot get laid by explaining Systems Thinking to a girl or a guy at a bar. You can do that with many stage orange ideals, stage green hippie stuff, zodiac, and whatnot. If someone who is claiming to be doing System Thinking does not understand the core and "dirty" issues of Money Printing, Debt, etc., or at least have respect for them then they are hoodwinking you in all probability. Money Printing for eg. gives rise to like 25 Causes. Not Effects. 25 causes alone are created which then create so many other negative effects. A person who does not know the importance of all these issues is not actually doing Systems Thinking. Systems Thinking is not at all sexy it revolves around a lot of this "dirty" and often tedious work, at times like those boring advanced algebra and statistics classes.

Already done it many times. See my previous posts in this thread and others. Let me know if you need help. (not patronizing, I just love it this way. If you don't like it you are welcome to talk to someone else please)

what do you mean by basic income can you please share? Like everyone earning 100 thousand dollars let's say and Musk doing his work you mean? Edit: I think I got it, no problem. There are variations of the idea but I believe I know what you are referring to.

You know, there is a limit to the amount of patronizing tone I am willing to stomach. Back off. It was not a Patronizing tone btw. What special value can you give to me or others? Why will I patronize you of all the people? You criticize democracy for its latency, the fact that it is possible to leverage the system so that people don't know what is happening, and yet - the exact same argument stands for consumer choice. People stuck in survival mechanisms will choose the most immediate solutions to the most immediate problems. Optimal capital allocation could solve this, if there were incentives to do this, but I still don't think there are. I have not criticized democracy for Latency in the point you quoted. You claim to understand Psychology enough to do Systems Thinking and then conflate what I said with Latency.

@tsuki You just don't get it. I am done reasoning with you.

Please check the above. Feedback loops and Incentives are not analyzed like this. To put it simply without Complexity there is no Systems Thinking. You would need a perspective of 4-5 subjects on avg. before analyzing Feedback Loops and Incentives of one thing alone. Psychology (just become a master of Human Behavior), Technology, Collective Consciousness, Collective Wealth, History, Cybernetics, etc. You can have your own style and subjects but the avg. is like 4-5 per decision, that is a must and you can take from there based on subject, how many good fundamentals you are covering, etc. (Psychology and Technology is a must, depending on the case History is also needed. )

Yup. Also, look at how Progressives brainwash innocent people. Elon Musk is talking about Systems thinking and outcomes and has also highlighted problems like Debt in the past. That goes hand in hand with the Money Printing problem in the US. Yet progressives strawmanned it into he is complaining, manipulating, worrying etc. He is highlighting very correct Systemic problems and phenomenons which will help all. I read one Progressive Journalist/Propagandist he said that "the best part of printing a trillion-dollar coin in America is that it is funny, the worst part is that it is funny so people do not take it seriously". The Progressives on the one hand brainwash people with this nonsense on one hand and on another side a person who is highlighting systemic issues correctly is straw manned as well. If not he then with their narratives like rich people are miserable(TYT) , Rich People are evil etc. majority of the competent people are straw manned, giving progressive politicians the power. They play great games.

Sure brother we in it together. The problem is it is too complex to go into detail here. Systems Thinking is no easy subject to explain. But I will try. Your view does not take into account the various forces of psychology, consciousness and technology. In a society as collective technology improves so does collective consciousness level and this what the Spiral Dynamics model is based on directly or indirectly. This changes the incentives to higher and higher consciousness. This is a general trend. If this was not true there would be no Spiral Dynamics or other such model. People think SD model is about just inner growth but in reality it is mostly about the growth of technology which then changes the incentives and this cycle repeats. Healthy companies do answer to people who buy their product. The incentives of the consumers combines with the incentives of the company. And this creates very complex dynamics. You are predicting the dynamics by missing one key component, the incentives of customers and the people in general. When people are aware that they make different choices, if the people are unaware they are going to vote for that policy anyways if let's say the govt. was given more and more revenue the choice of the people will be reflected anyways but in a greatly inefficient and uninnovative manner. This also combines with a new incentive created for the govt. and politicians which I have highlighted below. People value quality of life, not the amount of money. This can be seen in general trend as well of the quality of life of most people increasing. There have been forces against that by Money Printing for eg.. But if companies and investors and their consumers valued money more than anything the society would be creating truckloads of jewellery with gold, platinum, instead of technology, schools, restaurants. Instead the Society is optimized around people increasing their Quality of Life with time. This is the General Trend. You may say that the Companies brainwash people to pay them or buy their products right. But again after Mobile and Internet revolution people are only becoming more and more aware. Hence the incentives changed again. This is the real General trend. With Technology growth it is impossible for incentives to not change. First it was the printing press, now this. With technology and science growth it becomes inevitable. Another example that Capitalism leads to consciousness growth that I have analysed first hand and was very fascinated by it is that employees in China and India earning 750 Dollars Per month would have earned about 250-300 USD per month if it was not for the OS and Semiconductor revolution. Under capitalism the India's consciousness levels grew and is growing faster than even America in the past if you look at history. When people are going out of poverty they think about the environment, charity etc. That’s what happened in India and China. In fact in China people are more aware then the CCP or their Govt. how about that. In Systems Thinking we do look for General trends but your view of incentives is also very unholistic because Systems Thinking requires an understanding of all these forces combined, consumer incentives, incentives of developing countries, consumer choice combining with company interest, education, increase in education directly or indirectly as technology increases (first it was the Printing Press), technology, understanding costs between alternative paths and very sound understanding of Psychology. The last one is very hard if Systems thinking is the goal. It comes with time. There is also the incentive of Developed Countries to prevent "cutting trees" as the people become more aware. Policies are placed for it. Of Foreign Countries who have escaped dire Poverty, their Govt. have an incentive to prevent the exploitation of its own people. You will see in countries with the most Poverty there is no Govt. and there cannot be. Like Afghanistan for eg. There is Technological growth rendering previous technologies ineffective. The effect of these has to be understood with growth in Technology and Cybernetics. It cannot be done in isolation. Also, the incentives of people who deny this are either fear because they are brainwashed by politicians who in turn have incentives to come to power or there is a second class of people who deny this. They are incentivized by democracy because they want communism. And they cannot either hold this view with wanting communism or they cannot communicate this view because it makes them looks selfish then. All this does not even take into account the 100x inefficiency of govt. in terms of innovation which does not keep up with Global population growth and their demands, separate from that in Tier 1 the concept of a healthy democracy itself is limited, there is so much manipulation that it creates incentives for someone else to take power to propagandize and harm people Stage Green is not that better at this as well, Costs like Global Competition if the US does not grow in certain industries the Developing Countries will take over and that may be fine but not if done unconsciously, The Cost of not being able to control a part of govt. if too much power is given to it, like the Federal Reserve has too much power but it came premature, the people were not ready for it. When a certain Power is given to a part of the Govt. before the people are ready for it the Govt. runs the people and not people the Govt. This is happening with the Federal Reserve it wreaks havoc and poverty and it is unlikely to be solved anytime soon because people are still not ready. The Cost of giving Govt. a power before the people are ready is huge. Here a new incentive is created for politicians to lie and propagandize and somehow get to the Golden Seat which gives them this power, and this cycle continues. Pentagon does a similar thing to deliberately inflate its budget. I won't be going into details of that here. Progressives are doing this as well by playing both sides of the table and telling the public something else. Even before the Power is completely created for Big Govt. to exist see how incentives for it are already created people are already fighting and manipulating over it. On avg. this manipulation by govt. is serval times more than the manipulation by corporations this is the general trend. It also required a good understanding of psychological forces. One phenomenon for eg. if you promise people free 10 K USD per year, incentives for politicians is created to promise 12K USD next year and come to power, next year another politician 15K, 20L,.... . And this never ends because more and more people, even conservative start wanting free money over time. So if we look at UBI from Systems thinking we have to consider this, not that it cannot be done but the consideration is a must. This is an eg. of Psychological forces that you are missing in analyzing incentives. It is impossible to analyze feedback loops at a collective level without taking in account all these various phenomena and forces. Like you ignored 10 forces and phenomenons in Psychology(geopolitics, incentives for govt. power, the interaction of various groups and lost efficiency due to it and the system-wide costs following, how and by what factors the power of coordinated action increases in a society), 10 in Market Systems, 10 forces, and phenomenons in how Technology and Science grow, etc. That is not Systems Thinking. The conclusion is also incorrect hence. Systems thinking is hard to learn. Even if you are somehow able to give few hundred hours of learning to it in one year alone you will still be in the beginner level of it. It takes years and hundreds and hundreds of hours of learning plus a lot more Life Experience to truly grasp it. Personally, I consider the fact that I have failed so many times as the primary cause of me being good at it, I don't even consider thousands of hours learning I have put into it as the primary cause. But someone else may choose to see an investment in learning as the primary cause instead of all the Life Experience, that's alright, in that case as well it is a lot of work as mentioned above.

No problemo.

On top of this, there is a spike of people who are really Stage Blue but with a veneer of Stage Green in the US. It is conflated with Stage Green. Just like Trump was Stage Red with a veneer of Stage Orange. He was conflated with Stage Orange by many, even on this forum. It is curious.

Generally speaking, I have noticed that people in such cultural wars have a Stage Blue understanding of both economics or progress or wealth creation at a collective level and wealth creation at an individual level as well. They may be good people, say they stand for LGBTQ rights, so in that area they are Green. But in this area, they are really Stage Blue. Most of the time I have noticed they have Stage Blue understanding and value/belief system in this area but it is easily conflated with Stage Green.

This is Stage Blue/Green's strawman of Systems Thinking. Including "premature Green" where Stage Orange and Rational capabilities are not integrated. In this, you are just using buzzwords of Systems Thinking. It apparently looks like someone is using Systems Thinking but that is not actually the case. Not your fault, since people judge so much based on Spiral Dynamics on here people on the forum started using these. Minor usage on Memes and Reddit as well due to the culture war.

How Middle-of-the-Road solutions are like for the Collective in reality: How Progressives in America paint Middle-of the-Road solutions (or simply technically balanced approach to complex systems):

There are many others like Elon Musk who are not popular with the general public. You would have to make an in-depth study to understand this. At least a majority of them have information publicly accessible. In fact, such people are a majority in the wealthier sections of society. If you are an insider you will find that majority of them are working in some or other positive and harmonious manner. This is another strawman of the progressives to say all rich people are evil or they don't care or something along those lines. Some will consider me an "insider" on these trends. I can tell with confidence that in most industries people are not like this. The majority of the rich people are not like this. Very few people know this but most of the evil and corrupted things people talk about are done by a small group of people on in Management Consultancy and Wall St. Most people don't know a single thing about them, and they are not tech entrepreneurs or some other revolutionary in some other field. I am almost an insider on this trend and can confirm that majority of such people are millionaires not even Billionaires. And you know what practically all of these things are enabled by systemic loopholes and mismanagement. Not wealth. Banning Billionaires will create a minuscule difference in corruption for those who truly understand this. You would have to ban most millionaires too if go by such an unnuanced approach, but that will hurt people again. So there are two options now. You have to ban any wealth at all and hurt many people or make proper systemic changes. The latter seems much more reasonable. The real evil people are so smart you cannot even know their names even if you tried with the common approaches, let alone anything else about them. The information is not publicly accessbile. You would have to be in the field basically. Naive people here fighting with the public figures because of propaganda, I almost smile at times it is so naive.

In the year 2021 alone the govt. spent 6.8 Trillion dollars. https://datalab.usaspending.gov/americas-finance-guide/spending/#:~:text=In Fiscal Year 2021%2C federal,that year (%2422.39 trillion). In their selfishness to survive, they don't get that with their narrative the middle-class and the workers will be hurt the most. Tell that to so-called progressives and see the different creative ways they will strawman this.

It is also a strawman to say that it makes no difference if the money is a personal expenditure or not. It is also a strawman to say Bezo's company is a personal expenditure when it created 100 million dollars in revenue in the first year alone by serving its customers and when this industry will create a new set of trillions of dollars for all of us. But now good luck explaining to them who don't really understand how trillions of dollars are created for all because self-proclaimed progressives have straw manned wealth creation into a zero-sum game. It is also a strawman to say that Billionaires with a combined net worth 4 trillion dollars can be taxed 100 percent and the financial problems of all the people will be solved when in reality 4 trillion dollars is a trifle amount for the US govt which it spends in just 1 year. I saw another progressive "economist" in the USA who counted all the Billioniers in the world to make calculations in order to inflate the numbers, even then the calculations failed to give a meaningful result for the people. It is also a strawman .... x100. But good luck explaining that to the pawns of self-proclaimed progressive politicians and their propagandists. This is not the first time progressives have manipulated their way and straw manned the other side of the reasoning. Recently I learned how through decades it was wisdom to control immigration to the US for the sake of Workers who are making minimum wage as it affects them negatively.The likes of Barack Obama agreed with this view. Now, progressives with their propaganda straw manned that into "this idea is by white supremacists, at least the group of right-wing if not far-right, who hate you, hate progress, etc. ". You talk to a person of far-left about it they perceive you as a white supremacist or "just a conservative". This is just one occasion, it has become a recurring theme for the progressives to just strawman the other side's reasoning and fulfill their own agenda. They don't get if taxes are increased without fixing the fundamentals how it will backfire so much for the middle class and the workers. They would be the ones paying most of the costs, not Billionaires as they are strawmanning again. There are proper and realistic frameworks for tax increases that the Progressive voters ignore because of pure sentimental ad nauseam brainwashing.

For starters on understanding the Wealth Inequality in the US you may see this:

Elon Musk did not say that "Billionaires should not be taxed". The title of the video is misleading. You can watch the whole interview by WSJ on YT. In the past, he has said that his taxes are 53 percent, and this year it would be about 60 percent. The point was that the "progressive" ideas are not only fairy tales and unrealistic but have a cost to people as a whole and the fundamentals regarding that need to be understood well. In this fight only these politicians win in long term, even the people they claim to stand for will only lose, not gain. And Wealth Inequality in the US is because of reckless money printing, the need for sound economic policy cannot be replaced by taxation. That's foolishness.

Make Saving Money Great Again! I am yet to meet a genius who can list all the negative effects and struggles that people in the US are going through because saving money is practically disincentivized.