It's a case of lots of complaints and circumstantial evidence from people testifying to the media, and the CEO at some point kind of suggesting he might step down because he let it go farther than it should. I think. So much of this shit has come through that I'm not 100% sure which specifics go where anymore, well aside from Uber's CEO mailing out to Corp-all that he's not allowed to have sex with anyone at company parties.
is it worth the detour if the goal is to learn English? Probably not.
The data says Hungarian, Russian, and French people who spend four years studying Esperanto (1 year) and a third language (3 years) all learn the third language to greater proficiency than if they spent all four years studying only the target language.
I would say 110% is more than 100% and thus worth the detour when the total resource (time) investment is the same. In this case, it's more like 210%, because you also picked up Esperanto along the way, for whatever that's worth.
I've always defended Uber against accusations of not having insurance (they documented that every driver is covered by a $1M policy while driving for Uber) and against being treated as a taxi (in the same way GrubHub, Eat24, and Delivery.com aren't restaurants or delivery services, but a service connecting an independent delivery restaurant with an independent customer).
Then, all kinds of bullshit started coming out of Uber.
I still say Uber as a business model is fine and sensible: you're using their service whether you're a driver or passenger. Nobody is trying to drive a stake into Lyft these days for doing the same sort of business (well, almost nobody).
I haven't come out to defend Uber in a long, long time because nobody's been attacking them based on what kind of business they want to pretend Uber is. Uber shit its own pants this time, and it never stopped shitting. Sexual harassment, corporate espionage, invasions of privacy, and now they've taken it all the way up to bona fide organized crime with countermeasures in place to impede investigators. They have a great business model, but they've ruined it with terrible business ethic.
Learning a third language is easier when you know a second language. Hungarian kids somehow learn Esperanto and then English like 40% faster if they learn English only to the same eventual English fluency.
Considering the amount of flying back and forth on official business, this could save the American taxpayer pennies per year.
Also, annoy Washington and Hawaii Congressmen a lot less, and avoid putting everyone in one known coastal location where a conventional strike can take out our entire legislative body.
I bring a lot of new solutions and align pretty tightly with the Democratic Party's philosophy of government. At the same time, I tend to operate in a manner simultaneously more-progressive and more-conservative than my peers, pushing strongly for next-generation poverty relief while maintaining a balanced budget and reducing taxes.
I hope you enjoy reviewing my platform and can help me reach my constituents and earn their votes in 2018!
I'm running to represent Maryland's 7th district. It looks like a dragon coming out of a volcano, so I'd quite like to not see it changed much at all, except maybe to include the Starbucks in Mt. Washington because it's readily-accessible by public transportation and highway.
The point is to represent these particular people in Congress. I've actually left campaign material on Elijah Cummings's door--I'm running for his seat and I used to live on his street, just a few blocks down. Andy Harris may lose his seat because Allison Galbraith is extremely popular in his own community--she lives right in the same neighborhood.
We have local elections for local legislative districts, putting Delegates and State Senators in place to change State law. Congress changes Federal law. My jurisdiction includes the Baltimore Inner Harbor, and my constituents want me to lobby for Federal money to help restore the Chesapeake Bay due to simple environmentalism and its incredible economic value (lots of fishing, tourism, and the like going on there). Representatives of other districts have less focus on the Bay.
I strongly oppose government efforts to weaken our protections. I'm relying on unbreakable encryption in my own campaign, notably in my plans to end identity theft and increase voter participation. The most-powerful encryption ever used has been the spoken word, in closed quarters, with a soft noise generator to prevent electronic surveillance: no record of communications. Written and then pulped notes. Anything that destroys the data.
I haven't translated these plans to my new site yet. I need to, but I've been working alone. My political competitor, Elijah Cummings, has expressed no interest in protecting our privacy from domestic spying.
It's not even that. I have information from a lot of diverse fields--I get bored and stuff new facts into my head. I end up coming up with different solutions to problems than everyone else because the obvious approaches are different in that context--mind you, many of the obvious approaches are wrong, and I usually chew through a few ideas before finding something that actually works.
My analogical thinking is the same as your analogical thinking; it's just preloaded with more stuff.
how do you feel about the DNCs shenanigans in the last cycle?
Bernie the Democratic Socialist versus Hillary who shall take no personal responsibility? A lot of us new candidates have large disagreements with our current representatives in government at all levels.
A lot of new Democratic candidates think we need more Bernie; but what people want is Social Democracy, not Democratic Socialism. We don't want a nation where the government forces businesses out of business and takes over administration of everything itself; we want a nation where we can get ahead, where there are opportunities. We just don't want to be left behind: we want strong social safety nets, healthcare coverage, pensions that won't go away in 2034.
We have do-nothing Congressmen who are letting Social Security fail, who won't push for workers's rights, and who give excuses when pressed in closed quarters about it. "It's not a good time to push progressive policy," they say, when they have a Senate and House Democratic Majority and Obama in there passing the ACA. When is it a good time?
The 2016 election was a circus; there are, however, bigger systemic problems in the party. It has the right ideals, and needs to be knocked back on track to implementing those ideals.
say how perfect your marriage is and that you'd never stray, then get busted having an affair.
I'm not married and I don't much campaign on family values. I'm more interested in whether people's kids can eat than whether anyone believes America is the land of the stepford family and a few deviants about whom we don't talk. I care about STDs, not abortion of a three-week-old fetus. I care about lowering crime rates and turning people into functional members of society, not flogging them sufficiently to quench our thirst for blood.
I accept that you as one person, in office, would be unable to effect sweeping changes, any thoughts of how to effect small ones?
I don't.
One person, in one office, has influence. I'm not the only one who thinks these are good goals and good approaches; talking to others and gaining their support creates coalitions. If I have 10% of the Democratic Congress in support, I have the capacity to push sweeping change through sheer persistence. If I keep doing what I did to get that 10% support, I've got even better chances of making it happen.
That doesn't even account for other stakeholders. The influence of a Congressman over state and local officers is significant. The Dividend isn't a local issue, but prisons are. Bring that to the governors, mayors, and county executives of Maryland, and you'll see discussion. Convince them, and you'll see change. Point to that change, to those improvements, and you can bring Representatives and Senators on-board. They'll work on their own states, and bring new National proposals to change our Federal prisons.
One man in one office can do a lot.
And, as phantomfive wrote about crime: Sounds great, what are the plans?
How are you going to take on "Big prisons"?
It's not like I won't stumble along the way; but at least I know which direction I'm going. We need new solutions, and I'm the guy to bring those to fruition, if nothing else. In retrospect, major study and a certification in a discipline entirely centered around making change turned out more-useful than I'd expected.
Well, it's been explored in North Dakota and Pennsylvania, so I imagine pulling some expert input would be the first step. These people actually traveled to Norway to see their prison systems, so they started with expert input, too. I actually have a project management certification, so I tend to rely on other people's knowledge a lot--never underestimate the power of bringing in someone smarter than yourself.
Chiefly, I'll need to push policy to work toward new approaches to prison. To accomplish that, we need something like the Second Chance Act, which provides additional funding to states and local governments who create reintegration programs for released inmates. The SCA doesn't go far enough: we need to provide funding when States successfully implement lower-recidivism prisons, not just a half-way house for people who came out of the same old American prisons we've always had.
I'm hesitant to be prescriptive in the new Act (specify that the prisons must be of a certain form) because that stunts exploration of new approaches; yet, at the same time, I understand that requiring front-to-back rehabilitative prisons which integrate inmates into the community where possible, giving additional freedom of movement within the facility, ability to retain employment, and so forth would push them in that direction faster.
At the same time, a Congressman has much influence. I can use that influence to work with Governors, Mayors, and legislative bodies in Maryland to encourage change within my own state. Talking up the gains in Maryland as a model for the United States would have an impact across the Nation, as people will seek to emulate success--especially when it saves money and gets them good political capital. Everyone wants to re-elect the governor who brought a drastic reduction to crime.
Recidivism in the United States is 676 per 100,000; in North Dakota, it's now as low as around 250; and Norway hits around 70. While 250 is a good number, we can clearly do better than even that; still, cutting recidivism in half is a good first target.
Actually, rote is useful for setting the baseline. For example, you can memorize a multiplication table by brute force so as to avoid extra time (and short-term memory distortion) when performing rapid mathematics in your head. I find this somewhat more-useful than getting out the calculator on my phone (especially when I'm driving or giving a presentation). Beyond that, most rote memorization occurs by dynamic need: you learn by understanding, and any facts you repeatedly access eventually move into your set of immediate knowledge (the technique of rote memorization is just forcing that migration bluntly).
My experience has been that a firm understanding of how many things work and a large collection of facts readily-available in my own mind allows me to immediately solve large, complex problems. You can't perform surgery safely if you're Dr. Google. On the other hand, the framework of great knowledge also allows me to quickly look up missing knowledge in a highly-selective mode, making my information gathering skills top-notch compared to any contender.
So let's put this into perspective.
I developed the rough framework for the Universal Dividend in two hours one weekend. I was bored. The Universal Dividend, in models up to 2016, is revenue-neutral, reduces tax burdens (progressively), and increases continuously because of technical progress (GDP-per-capita has an increasing trend because we constantly make new technology to cut working hours and thus produce more per worker). The baseline model (15%) pays out $8,790 per person per year in 2016; the strained model (around 13%) pays out nearly $8,000.
This plan pushes a 2-adult, 3-child household with a single minimum wage income over the HUD housing assistance limit in Baltimore city ($27,000) by a few thousand dollars. HUD pays out to 25% of qualified recipients; the other 75% are put on a waiting list (no benefits!). By making everyone less-poor, HUD has fewer qualified recipients, and those who qualify receive less of a subsidy. That means the same HUD money reaches more people, stabilizing more households. Similar happens with SNAP and TANF programs; I didn't account for any other program savings.
So what happens?
People start receiving this, and unstable households become stable. Homeless people start receiving money: a man and his wife living in a tent would get $1,400/month. HUD and SNAP can cover them for a small subsidy (a few hundred dollars). They can now afford an apartment. With all of this extra consumer spending, jobs become available, and so people can not only live under a roof, but get a job and buy cable TV, high-speed Internet service, and XBox games. More wage income means more tax revenue for local governments, thus more school funding and other infrastructure work.
In three months, you see the number of hungry in the United States go from 41 million to approximately zero. The same happens with the number of homeless. Military men in the field have several thousand dollars more coming to them, and more going home to their spouse, stabilizing the household. Veterans come home with some support beneath them.
Social Security is founded on top of this, and becomes immediately solvent. Even with the continuing cost-of-living adjustments, Social Security's burden falls, the payroll tax (paid mostly by the poor and middle-class) goes down, and consumers become capable of buying more (wealthier, more jobs). Other welfare services paid by general funds also lose participation, thanks to people continuously becoming less-poor: those programs keep the same eligibility rules and COLA, yet their Federal and State costs fall. Not only does the net tax burden fall (with the Dividend acting as a continuous tax refund), but the tax rate can come down.
A complete inversion of modern fiscal behaviors in governments, and an end to poverty.
I happened to know a lot about how Social Security's Trusts
Slow. December was fun for door knocking, but everyone is busy and not too many events happening. It's getting time to activate volunteers and try to pull together meetings.
Everyone I talk to likes my platform, and most people seem to dislike Elijah as a congressman. He's well-liked, just not for doing his job. If I get him out of the way, he'll have a full Congressional pension and can be a community leader (and political activist) full-time without worrying himself with fundraising, so win-win I guess.
I've had a chance to improve my platform, too. Talking to people has brought more to my attention, and further research is broadening my political horizons. Most folks in and near Baltimore City are concerned with crime, then schools; in Baltimore County, it's schools, then crime. My answer to both has always been primarily to relieve poverty; however, I've recently come into knowledge on better-run prison systems based around restorative justice--my cousin actually wrote a thesis on this because her entire life revolves around social work and obtaining half a dozen college degrees--so I have a more-direct answer for crime as well. If we cut the recidivism rate by more than half, we cut the crime; prisons that develop inmates into working members of society--rehabilitation from day one--will do that.
Web site's still ugly, but I can win this thing if I can engage with enough voters.
Amazon has the advantage: more Prime subscribers (with Prime Video) than Play subscribers buying videos. It's using one monopoly to try to expand power into another market (streaming devices). Using their online sales monopoly to tie to their streaming video product and simultaneously hobble a competitor's ability to sell streaming devices and stream video to their devices is... a complex ball of violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust act.
Didn't Microsoft get bent over for this once or twice?
I was thinking we'd start with basic arithmetic, looking to Japan's use of the soroban as a teaching tool and the method in which students learn basic mathematics. By third grade, these students can perform rapid mental addition and subtraction on large sets of numbers with floating decimal points; and with a memorized single-digit multiplication table, they can perform rapid multi-digit multiplication and subtraction. In the United States, we work up to multi-digit addition and subtraction, with decimal points introduced in third grade, and more-complex radical arithmetic expanded upon in fifth. It's not until the sixth or seventh year that we're barely working on algebra--while still counting numbers on our fingers and scribbling notations on carry in the margins.
It's also notable that memory is associative and visual (although I have doubts about what "visual" means--I can store abstract concepts as non-image visual data). There's a lot of talk about complex mnemonic systems, and those work well for specific tasks; in general, however, a more basic consideration of memory goes very far, both from a personal standpoint and an educational standpoint. We like to divide our subjects and minimize the amount of extraneous information given to our students; yet some have taken to teaching algebra by using geometry, and found that the association greatly-improves understanding of the subject. This ranges from visualization of geometric algebra (size of a truck, etc.) to derivation of algebra from its geometric roots (e.g. parabola, hyperbola, and ellipse are various types of conic sections derived from a 2D plane intersecting a 3D cone).
Our primary education system focuses strongly on memorizing discrete facts. Educators don't like rote memorization, so they try to cover it up by adding pictures or practice and calling it "visual" or "kinesthetic". We focus on teaching a surface of facts with no depth, and on a strict and narrow topic with no clutter. Meanwhile, strong study strategies espouse the need to decorate these facts with questions, broader understanding, or narratives to tie them all together. It seems to me we must re-examine our entire approach.
Merely a procedural issue. We need to import knowledge from all over the world and model America after the state-of-the-art curricula seen in more-successful school systems. Then we can improve on it, becoming the world leader in public education.
Remember when excessive reading was an anti-social type of personality disorder? Books corrupting our children's minds and tearing them away from social lives and good, hard work.
150 years ago, psychologists testified to Congress that a public school system would damage the fragile minds of small children, whose neurons weren't designed to handle that kind of massive data overload. Pulling them away from play time and the development of personal responsibility on the farm around age 10-13 would further stunt their social, emotional, and intellectual development. Medical professionals considered public school the biggest threat to our children's mental health in history.
If they had only understood it's not school that stunts childhood development, but Super Mario...
Yes, "certain kinds of ads" indicates a subset of all ads. It would be imprudent to try and list all possible contingencies without having a firm understanding of all markets and potential discrimination.
I'm not sure what you did aside from repeat the same argument and list some examples.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a case of lots of complaints and circumstantial evidence from people testifying to the media, and the CEO at some point kind of suggesting he might step down because he let it go farther than it should. I think. So much of this shit has come through that I'm not 100% sure which specifics go where anymore, well aside from Uber's CEO mailing out to Corp-all that he's not allowed to have sex with anyone at company parties.
is it worth the detour if the goal is to learn English? Probably not.
The data says Hungarian, Russian, and French people who spend four years studying Esperanto (1 year) and a third language (3 years) all learn the third language to greater proficiency than if they spent all four years studying only the target language.
I would say 110% is more than 100% and thus worth the detour when the total resource (time) investment is the same. In this case, it's more like 210%, because you also picked up Esperanto along the way, for whatever that's worth.
I've always defended Uber against accusations of not having insurance (they documented that every driver is covered by a $1M policy while driving for Uber) and against being treated as a taxi (in the same way GrubHub, Eat24, and Delivery.com aren't restaurants or delivery services, but a service connecting an independent delivery restaurant with an independent customer).
Then, all kinds of bullshit started coming out of Uber.
I still say Uber as a business model is fine and sensible: you're using their service whether you're a driver or passenger. Nobody is trying to drive a stake into Lyft these days for doing the same sort of business (well, almost nobody).
I haven't come out to defend Uber in a long, long time because nobody's been attacking them based on what kind of business they want to pretend Uber is. Uber shit its own pants this time, and it never stopped shitting. Sexual harassment, corporate espionage, invasions of privacy, and now they've taken it all the way up to bona fide organized crime with countermeasures in place to impede investigators. They have a great business model, but they've ruined it with terrible business ethic.
Learning a third language is easier when you know a second language. Hungarian kids somehow learn Esperanto and then English like 40% faster if they learn English only to the same eventual English fluency.
Go figure.
Considering the amount of flying back and forth on official business, this could save the American taxpayer pennies per year.
Also, annoy Washington and Hawaii Congressmen a lot less, and avoid putting everyone in one known coastal location where a conventional strike can take out our entire legislative body.
So Congress just needs local secure facilities in their campaign offices?
Congress has classified hearings regularly. They can't do that over the Internet.
Repealing #17 has merit.
Would you be interested in making a modest contribution to my campaign? I'm working to strengthen our social safety nets in a way which avoids tax increases, and on expanding affordable care and implementing a public healthcare option, which costs a lot less and incurs much-lower risk than single-payer medicare-for-all. I also intend to push real criminal justice reform to reduce recidivism rate and, thus, the amount of crime and the cost of our prison system.
I bring a lot of new solutions and align pretty tightly with the Democratic Party's philosophy of government. At the same time, I tend to operate in a manner simultaneously more-progressive and more-conservative than my peers, pushing strongly for next-generation poverty relief while maintaining a balanced budget and reducing taxes.
I hope you enjoy reviewing my platform and can help me reach my constituents and earn their votes in 2018!
I'm running to represent Maryland's 7th district. It looks like a dragon coming out of a volcano, so I'd quite like to not see it changed much at all, except maybe to include the Starbucks in Mt. Washington because it's readily-accessible by public transportation and highway.
The point is to represent these particular people in Congress. I've actually left campaign material on Elijah Cummings's door--I'm running for his seat and I used to live on his street, just a few blocks down. Andy Harris may lose his seat because Allison Galbraith is extremely popular in his own community--she lives right in the same neighborhood.
We have local elections for local legislative districts, putting Delegates and State Senators in place to change State law. Congress changes Federal law. My jurisdiction includes the Baltimore Inner Harbor, and my constituents want me to lobby for Federal money to help restore the Chesapeake Bay due to simple environmentalism and its incredible economic value (lots of fishing, tourism, and the like going on there). Representatives of other districts have less focus on the Bay.
Seconded.
Can't really say I'm for an expansion of domestic spying. It seems like the disease is a mosquito bite and the cure is to immerse yourself in fire.
Your face is a lie.
I strongly oppose government efforts to weaken our protections. I'm relying on unbreakable encryption in my own campaign, notably in my plans to end identity theft and increase voter participation. The most-powerful encryption ever used has been the spoken word, in closed quarters, with a soft noise generator to prevent electronic surveillance: no record of communications. Written and then pulped notes. Anything that destroys the data.
I haven't translated these plans to my new site yet. I need to, but I've been working alone. My political competitor, Elijah Cummings, has expressed no interest in protecting our privacy from domestic spying.
Thanks, that's extremely helpful!
It's not even that. I have information from a lot of diverse fields--I get bored and stuff new facts into my head. I end up coming up with different solutions to problems than everyone else because the obvious approaches are different in that context--mind you, many of the obvious approaches are wrong, and I usually chew through a few ideas before finding something that actually works.
My analogical thinking is the same as your analogical thinking; it's just preloaded with more stuff.
how do you feel about the DNCs shenanigans in the last cycle?
Bernie the Democratic Socialist versus Hillary who shall take no personal responsibility? A lot of us new candidates have large disagreements with our current representatives in government at all levels.
A lot of new Democratic candidates think we need more Bernie; but what people want is Social Democracy, not Democratic Socialism. We don't want a nation where the government forces businesses out of business and takes over administration of everything itself; we want a nation where we can get ahead, where there are opportunities. We just don't want to be left behind: we want strong social safety nets, healthcare coverage, pensions that won't go away in 2034.
We have do-nothing Congressmen who are letting Social Security fail, who won't push for workers's rights, and who give excuses when pressed in closed quarters about it. "It's not a good time to push progressive policy," they say, when they have a Senate and House Democratic Majority and Obama in there passing the ACA. When is it a good time?
The 2016 election was a circus; there are, however, bigger systemic problems in the party. It has the right ideals, and needs to be knocked back on track to implementing those ideals.
say how perfect your marriage is and that you'd never stray, then get busted having an affair.
I'm not married and I don't much campaign on family values. I'm more interested in whether people's kids can eat than whether anyone believes America is the land of the stepford family and a few deviants about whom we don't talk. I care about STDs, not abortion of a three-week-old fetus. I care about lowering crime rates and turning people into functional members of society, not flogging them sufficiently to quench our thirst for blood.
I accept that you as one person, in office, would be unable to effect sweeping changes, any thoughts of how to effect small ones?
I don't.
One person, in one office, has influence. I'm not the only one who thinks these are good goals and good approaches; talking to others and gaining their support creates coalitions. If I have 10% of the Democratic Congress in support, I have the capacity to push sweeping change through sheer persistence. If I keep doing what I did to get that 10% support, I've got even better chances of making it happen.
That doesn't even account for other stakeholders. The influence of a Congressman over state and local officers is significant. The Dividend isn't a local issue, but prisons are. Bring that to the governors, mayors, and county executives of Maryland, and you'll see discussion. Convince them, and you'll see change. Point to that change, to those improvements, and you can bring Representatives and Senators on-board. They'll work on their own states, and bring new National proposals to change our Federal prisons.
One man in one office can do a lot.
And, as phantomfive wrote about crime: Sounds great, what are the plans? How are you going to take on "Big prisons"?
With expert judgment, influence, and good stakeholder management.
It's not like I won't stumble along the way; but at least I know which direction I'm going. We need new solutions, and I'm the guy to bring those to fruition, if nothing else. In retrospect, major study and a certification in a discipline entirely centered around making change turned out more-useful than I'd expected.
Well, it's been explored in North Dakota and Pennsylvania, so I imagine pulling some expert input would be the first step. These people actually traveled to Norway to see their prison systems, so they started with expert input, too. I actually have a project management certification, so I tend to rely on other people's knowledge a lot--never underestimate the power of bringing in someone smarter than yourself.
Chiefly, I'll need to push policy to work toward new approaches to prison. To accomplish that, we need something like the Second Chance Act, which provides additional funding to states and local governments who create reintegration programs for released inmates. The SCA doesn't go far enough: we need to provide funding when States successfully implement lower-recidivism prisons, not just a half-way house for people who came out of the same old American prisons we've always had.
I'm hesitant to be prescriptive in the new Act (specify that the prisons must be of a certain form) because that stunts exploration of new approaches; yet, at the same time, I understand that requiring front-to-back rehabilitative prisons which integrate inmates into the community where possible, giving additional freedom of movement within the facility, ability to retain employment, and so forth would push them in that direction faster.
At the same time, a Congressman has much influence. I can use that influence to work with Governors, Mayors, and legislative bodies in Maryland to encourage change within my own state. Talking up the gains in Maryland as a model for the United States would have an impact across the Nation, as people will seek to emulate success--especially when it saves money and gets them good political capital. Everyone wants to re-elect the governor who brought a drastic reduction to crime.
Recidivism in the United States is 676 per 100,000; in North Dakota, it's now as low as around 250; and Norway hits around 70. While 250 is a good number, we can clearly do better than even that; still, cutting recidivism in half is a good first target.
Actually, rote is useful for setting the baseline. For example, you can memorize a multiplication table by brute force so as to avoid extra time (and short-term memory distortion) when performing rapid mathematics in your head. I find this somewhat more-useful than getting out the calculator on my phone (especially when I'm driving or giving a presentation). Beyond that, most rote memorization occurs by dynamic need: you learn by understanding, and any facts you repeatedly access eventually move into your set of immediate knowledge (the technique of rote memorization is just forcing that migration bluntly).
My experience has been that a firm understanding of how many things work and a large collection of facts readily-available in my own mind allows me to immediately solve large, complex problems. You can't perform surgery safely if you're Dr. Google. On the other hand, the framework of great knowledge also allows me to quickly look up missing knowledge in a highly-selective mode, making my information gathering skills top-notch compared to any contender.
So let's put this into perspective.
I developed the rough framework for the Universal Dividend in two hours one weekend. I was bored. The Universal Dividend, in models up to 2016, is revenue-neutral, reduces tax burdens (progressively), and increases continuously because of technical progress (GDP-per-capita has an increasing trend because we constantly make new technology to cut working hours and thus produce more per worker). The baseline model (15%) pays out $8,790 per person per year in 2016; the strained model (around 13%) pays out nearly $8,000.
This plan pushes a 2-adult, 3-child household with a single minimum wage income over the HUD housing assistance limit in Baltimore city ($27,000) by a few thousand dollars. HUD pays out to 25% of qualified recipients; the other 75% are put on a waiting list (no benefits!). By making everyone less-poor, HUD has fewer qualified recipients, and those who qualify receive less of a subsidy. That means the same HUD money reaches more people, stabilizing more households. Similar happens with SNAP and TANF programs; I didn't account for any other program savings.
So what happens?
People start receiving this, and unstable households become stable. Homeless people start receiving money: a man and his wife living in a tent would get $1,400/month. HUD and SNAP can cover them for a small subsidy (a few hundred dollars). They can now afford an apartment. With all of this extra consumer spending, jobs become available, and so people can not only live under a roof, but get a job and buy cable TV, high-speed Internet service, and XBox games. More wage income means more tax revenue for local governments, thus more school funding and other infrastructure work.
In three months, you see the number of hungry in the United States go from 41 million to approximately zero. The same happens with the number of homeless. Military men in the field have several thousand dollars more coming to them, and more going home to their spouse, stabilizing the household. Veterans come home with some support beneath them.
Social Security is founded on top of this, and becomes immediately solvent. Even with the continuing cost-of-living adjustments, Social Security's burden falls, the payroll tax (paid mostly by the poor and middle-class) goes down, and consumers become capable of buying more (wealthier, more jobs). Other welfare services paid by general funds also lose participation, thanks to people continuously becoming less-poor: those programs keep the same eligibility rules and COLA, yet their Federal and State costs fall. Not only does the net tax burden fall (with the Dividend acting as a continuous tax refund), but the tax rate can come down.
A complete inversion of modern fiscal behaviors in governments, and an end to poverty.
I happened to know a lot about how Social Security's Trusts
Slow. December was fun for door knocking, but everyone is busy and not too many events happening. It's getting time to activate volunteers and try to pull together meetings.
Everyone I talk to likes my platform, and most people seem to dislike Elijah as a congressman. He's well-liked, just not for doing his job. If I get him out of the way, he'll have a full Congressional pension and can be a community leader (and political activist) full-time without worrying himself with fundraising, so win-win I guess.
I've had a chance to improve my platform, too. Talking to people has brought more to my attention, and further research is broadening my political horizons. Most folks in and near Baltimore City are concerned with crime, then schools; in Baltimore County, it's schools, then crime. My answer to both has always been primarily to relieve poverty; however, I've recently come into knowledge on better-run prison systems based around restorative justice--my cousin actually wrote a thesis on this because her entire life revolves around social work and obtaining half a dozen college degrees--so I have a more-direct answer for crime as well. If we cut the recidivism rate by more than half, we cut the crime; prisons that develop inmates into working members of society--rehabilitation from day one--will do that.
Web site's still ugly, but I can win this thing if I can engage with enough voters.
Yet you're not contributing to mine? ;)
Amazon has the advantage: more Prime subscribers (with Prime Video) than Play subscribers buying videos. It's using one monopoly to try to expand power into another market (streaming devices). Using their online sales monopoly to tie to their streaming video product and simultaneously hobble a competitor's ability to sell streaming devices and stream video to their devices is ... a complex ball of violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust act.
Didn't Microsoft get bent over for this once or twice?
I was thinking we'd start with basic arithmetic, looking to Japan's use of the soroban as a teaching tool and the method in which students learn basic mathematics. By third grade, these students can perform rapid mental addition and subtraction on large sets of numbers with floating decimal points; and with a memorized single-digit multiplication table, they can perform rapid multi-digit multiplication and subtraction. In the United States, we work up to multi-digit addition and subtraction, with decimal points introduced in third grade, and more-complex radical arithmetic expanded upon in fifth. It's not until the sixth or seventh year that we're barely working on algebra--while still counting numbers on our fingers and scribbling notations on carry in the margins.
It's also notable that memory is associative and visual (although I have doubts about what "visual" means--I can store abstract concepts as non-image visual data). There's a lot of talk about complex mnemonic systems, and those work well for specific tasks; in general, however, a more basic consideration of memory goes very far, both from a personal standpoint and an educational standpoint. We like to divide our subjects and minimize the amount of extraneous information given to our students; yet some have taken to teaching algebra by using geometry, and found that the association greatly-improves understanding of the subject. This ranges from visualization of geometric algebra (size of a truck, etc.) to derivation of algebra from its geometric roots (e.g. parabola, hyperbola, and ellipse are various types of conic sections derived from a 2D plane intersecting a 3D cone).
Our primary education system focuses strongly on memorizing discrete facts. Educators don't like rote memorization, so they try to cover it up by adding pictures or practice and calling it "visual" or "kinesthetic". We focus on teaching a surface of facts with no depth, and on a strict and narrow topic with no clutter. Meanwhile, strong study strategies espouse the need to decorate these facts with questions, broader understanding, or narratives to tie them all together. It seems to me we must re-examine our entire approach.
Merely a procedural issue. We need to import knowledge from all over the world and model America after the state-of-the-art curricula seen in more-successful school systems. Then we can improve on it, becoming the world leader in public education.
Remember when excessive reading was an anti-social type of personality disorder? Books corrupting our children's minds and tearing them away from social lives and good, hard work.
150 years ago, psychologists testified to Congress that a public school system would damage the fragile minds of small children, whose neurons weren't designed to handle that kind of massive data overload. Pulling them away from play time and the development of personal responsibility on the farm around age 10-13 would further stunt their social, emotional, and intellectual development. Medical professionals considered public school the biggest threat to our children's mental health in history.
If they had only understood it's not school that stunts childhood development, but Super Mario...
Yes, "certain kinds of ads" indicates a subset of all ads. It would be imprudent to try and list all possible contingencies without having a firm understanding of all markets and potential discrimination.
I'm not sure what you did aside from repeat the same argument and list some examples.