🚀 go-pugleaf

>Sure there are many smart children remaining, but they are becoming a
>smaller percentage of the population everyday.

But far worse are the rising and more comprehensive decentives to
being smart, especially those who are multigenerationally refined to
be and do so.  We're losing a lot of our hardest best carefully built
which was built on those very foundations, and thus losing those
foundations as well.  The Powells are a symbol of who is taking over
USA, but there are symbols all over the place, many apt and
depressing.

Of course, pressures in this direction have always existed, but they
have been winning for a long time recently, and not the least because
of World War II, but that's mostly history.  What do we do now?
That's where I look now.

The poorness of my writing here is an example; I can't flourish in
this environment, and thus I attrify.


>This magical idea we can always innovative better than anyone else
>forever is too naive for my taste.

That too.

But the question is:  if a cave man hits you in the head with a stick,
then while you're getting brain damage or dead, he innovates better
than you while you're having brain damage or dead, are you better?
No.  They probably even aren't any better than you would have been.


The primary problem is allowing low class to flourish.  Sure, we need
to take care of the Earth with all its people on it, but that doesn't
extend to supporting the least planning and hurting the most planning.
It's time we start to look at birth as a serious matter that is not
owned by those who chose (or even don't chose) to wage war by frequent
pregnancy.

There is room in the universe for a great many things, and not all of
them are great.  We should take what we have and do the best we can
with it, not spoil it by polluting the world with more low class
people.  We are to raise the class of the population as a whole, not
lower it!  Being compassionate to those who steal from us is not
raising it; it is lowering it.

The non-zero-sum comparative advantage of having everyone, indeed
here, in India, China, and Japan, & everywhere else, plan resources
and people better, is a much nicer world with fewer people on it.
That doesn't mean we can't have a world that is much less nice with a
lot more people on it.  We can even discuss careful engineering to
achieve other values of those variables, such as few people and a
horrible world, or a lot of people and a really nice world, but
pressures naturally work against those for real reasons.  We have to
understand the pressures out there and be mature, civilized,
intelligent people to create and nuture good society, or we could
never hope to do anything but lots of people in a horrible world.
"Free economics" itself doesn't make the world (and now finally the
Universe), as we experience it, nice.

When designing welfare, look not at the color of a person's skin or
genes, but to the true outcome of what they will be as a whole person
as their true effect on the world as a whole, compared to anyone else,
e.g., yourself, your family, your friends, and everyone else.  You'll
realize a lot of silly false stereotypes and feelings, e.g., equality,
karma, revenge, guilt (false guilt), will fall to the ground like
waste.