third-world california

It occurs to me that when the geriatric white leadership of California's Democratic Party (Brown, 79; Pelosi, 77; Feinstein, 84) finally shuffles off the scene, the state will quickly descend into third-world status run by the likes of Maxine Waters and Kamala Harris. There are already cities in California that are basically third-world-- think Stockton, San Bernardino. Unless something is done, that will be the future of most of the state. The Bay area and Silicon Valley may continue to prosper, plus a few enclaves in southern California, but basically the rest will become a third-world state.

intelligence, again

Low-intelligence people should stop reproducing. We don't need them. High-intelligence people should have more children; low-intelligence people should have fewer children. In particular, we want people with high levels of mathematical-logical ability.

The problem with low-intelligence people is that they may be basically ineducable and unemployable, particularly in the high-tech world of today. So these are the people who become the underclass, the welfare recipients and criminals. We don't need it.

intelligence

The future belongs to the intelligent, not to the stupid and violent.

health care

Now that we're dealing with health care again, it brings to mind a question: What do the productive people owe to the unproductive people in this area? I feel there should be a 'floor' of social services for everybody, and that includes health care. The problem is, what level of care should be afforded lower-class people who simply don't take care of themselves-- who eat crappy food and too much of it, who smoke, drink too much, do drugs, and don't exercise? What do we owe them on a spectrum between carte blanche and enough morphine so they're not in too much pain as they're dying from the diseases they totally predictably bring on themselves?

In the first place, with people like this, the emphasis should be on prevention-- to try to get them to stop doing all the bad things they do to themselves. So they would get lectured to a lot, and there would be various carrots and sticks to try to get them to change. Beyond that, part of the tit-for-tat of giving them basic health care should be that the taxpayer should be able to control their reproduction. Single women should be limited to one child, married couples to two.

natural selection

The question is, who will survive and reproduce? For starters, people shouldn’t have children they can’t support; they shouldn’t expect the government—i.e., the taxpayer—to pick up the slack. This way, the population of this country—and this planet—will get back down to a sustainable level, which it certainly isn’t at now.

Beyond that, what kind of people can support children? The one characteristic that you definitely will need in the modern world is a decent level of mathematical-logical ability. That’s what the modern world of science and technology is based on, after all. This is where the decent jobs are, and it’s only going to become more that way. But over time you will get a human population with a high level of mathematical-logical ability if people just don’t have children they can’t support.

intelligence

In general, more intelligent people should have more children, and less intelligent people should have fewer children. Mathematical-logical ability is particularly important. People shouldn't have children they can't support.

jost

JOST: Justice, Order, Science, and Technology. These are the basic elements of a First World America.