Communication Afterburners

(If you haven’t read the Sapiocracy.PDF file, just do it. I want your feedback.)

I’ve written here about how the rules have changed. I believe the human species has entered a phase change. I’d like to dive into one aspect of this change – communication – and guide you through a thought experiment to underscore just how disruptive this communication innovation is. I think you’ll be surprised.

Please consider two factions, naturally at war with each other since slightly less than 13,000 years ago. The events at Gobekli Tepe led to a new era of human behavior – the sedentary life. (Screw Egyptologists; they’re wrong.) These events separate the hunter/gatherer times from modern times. The two factions are those wielding power in large human populations – the elite – and the rest of the population – the masses.

Imagine a chess board. On the left, we have the elite. On the right, we have the masses. The rules of the game have gradually evolved as technological advancements compounded over the millenia. In the last 200 years, the discovery of the use of fossil fuels accelerated these changes radically with the industrial revolution. About 10 years ago, the advent of the wireless smart phone gave communications to the masses in an unprecedented way.

 

Continue reading

Share

Pondering Taxes

Today I had a bit of free time so I thought I’d ponder the concept of taxation. This includes types of taxation, are they necessary, how they may be viewed ethically, etc.

This isn’t about Sapiocracy – these are just my own personal thoughts and I’m happy to revise them if presented with information persuasive enough to do so.

All of this (I hope) is based on rational deduction, so I don’t believe this will be too controversial.

In general, my feeling is that taxation is necessary and should be levied in such a way that those who pay are those responsible for the problem whose solution needs funding.

Taxes should always be levied in the best interest of the collective. In other words, if a tax doesn’t provide a collective net win (or loss prevention), then that tax is unfair. If one demographic gains more or less than another group, then the tax is unfair. It may be impossible to achieve perfection, but it can certainly be done better than the current systems.

Continue reading

Share