Why Vote?

Why vote?

Clearly one individual vote does not influence the outcome of any election, so not voting is rational from that standpoint.

So why vote: To know what you believe and to register that belief with society.  Politicians do keep track of it, and adjust their positions accordingly. 

A big fallacy is that many of us believe (wrongly, see the 1st paragraph above) that we do make a difference, individually, and so vote for a likely candidate, “to make a difference”. Of course this is exactly what politicians want. All they have to do is gain a small advantage in your thinking in order to gain or stay in power. 

So what to do? Vote your beliefs! Vote for any candidate that is proposing and/or voting for what you think is fair and just.    If they are not Republican or Democrat (aka "The Corporate-ocracy”) then vote for another candidate. Your vote shows it is available and sends a message that you don’t approve of the their candidates. Staying home sends the same message, but not as well.

Why should you vote ONLY your conscience!

Because your views count in "public opinion", and can be adopted by others who often take note of how others vote.

The candidate closest to your conscience/beliefs should get your vote. But you must vote to have an impact.

Should you vote Republican or Democratic?  Yes, but only if they are proposing and voting for most all of what you think is fair and just.

What if I don't like either choice?
Then you should vote for neither Republican nor Democrat, but vote your for your closest other candidate.

An "elected representative" form of government is systemically flawed.  Lobbyists and their money control the politicians and the government, and you don’t have a lobbyist.  There is a better way. Google "A Government You Can Love", which is on this blog.

Until we have Hired Representatives, the current flawed system will prevail. All the election tinkering, e.g., electoral college change, new campaign financial rules, etc. won't help. Elected officials serve too many masters, and so serve no one in particular.

Vote now on "Would you like to vote directly on legislation without much effort?"

Is Work Necessary?

Clearly there are not enough high paying jobs to give us the life style that we want and expected.

A vibrant middle class is at risk.

First: What caused this?  Then: What's next?  Then: How do we fix this?

1: Automation replaced  jobs, first the simpler jobs, like manual efforts such as lifting, transporting, assembly, and part manufacturing, then the service jobs like taking orders, copying data, entering data, calculations, system level assembly, etc. The professions are next.

2. Job transfer to low income wage countries, was facilitated by new laws ("free trade"), low cost communication, instant capital transfer, and the ubiquity of knowledge via the internet

3. Capital transfer (banking) to anywhere as the rule of law (property  rights) spread to lower wealth countries and lowered risk.

4.  Specialized Information became instantly transferable through the internet, reduced the number of high paying jobs, managers, technical specialists and professionals. Business could run without many of these people. Not all, but many.

5. Consolidation of smaller corporations into larger ones. Large corporations are difficult to grow from the inside, but can acquire smaller entities easily. The popular business idea that efficiency increases with "scale" accelerates acquisitions of smaller companies/start-ups. Competition, the real force in innovation and progress (low cost), is overlooked in the rush to consolidation.

6. Political system voting on laws, which is controlled by the corporations who have the capital and now the freedom, from the Supreme Court ruling, to massively influence or elect representatives who reduce "regulation" or enforcement of regulation. Ref. Stiglitz books on Inequality.

7. Combinations of highly sophisticated computer programs and machines:  take over more and more functions, (a "Watson" for all of us? and a "Google chip implant"?).

What will be he outcome as we become more jobless? 
Here are a few paths:

Path 1. Since the people on the boards of directors of corporations do in fact control the means of providing products and services, and its immense wealth, they gain control the government to an even greater extent (see the documentary movie: Inside Job). The corporations, with control of the media, generate the issues that come before us, the candidates on the ballots, and the "way to vote".

With further consolidation of the producing and financial corporations, the government is/will be "of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation".  The masses will have a vote, but the candidates and issues will be pre-selected and promoted. Enough wealth trickles down in the corporate hierarchies of the corporations to keep the masses from revolting.  The many become (are?) governed by a few immensely wealthy and powerful people. Consolidations of corporations continues and their boards eventually control  countries, but are essentially nameless. Multinational corporations influence and eventually rule with a "world government". Possible solution: increased corporate taxes, but very unlikely if the corporations control the media/propaganda and thus the voting processes and the laws.

Path 2: The masses, after experiencing a dramatic drop in lifestyle, come to realize that a corporate controlled government (the "corporate-ocracy") is a good idea gone wrong. The masses use social networking and straw votes among themselves that empower them to "vote" independently for neither of the two "official parties". They eventually vote for "other candidates" who vow to change the government to a real democracy (See "A Government You Can Love" on this blog). Corporations lose control of the legislative process. Democracy emerges.

Path 3: Automation and technology lead to a world where less than 5 % of the population provides basic food, shelter and clothing, what will the other 95% do? Maybe what retired people do: sports, entertainment, education, teaching, travel, volunteerism, and the arts. We live vicariously through spectator activities. Malcolm Gladwell: the super rich ascend to be rock stars, bestowed by the masses. 'One up man ship" is the popular game as is "winner",  "me first" or "America first". 

Path 4: War has been a typical and historical path for uniting the masses. Nationalism and ego are tweaked by propaganda, and become the driver as fear fosters militarism.  "Defense" is used for offense (humanitarian purposes). Conflicts are manufactured. The people unite to fight a common enemy. The victor gets the ravaged spoils, and the obligation to restore the "enemy". Repeat the loop.

Which path will we go on? Which path do you want? How bad do you want it? Would you like a vote?. See the blog "Citizenship Metrics"

Direct Democracy at the Local Level

Each citizen has a direct vote on all proposed laws via his/her own HIRED/lobbyist/proxy representative.

Steps toward a real democracy:

1.     A candidate city council member agrees to vote with the majority of a poll (vote) of the residents.

2.     The voter poll is run by a hired third party with appropriate security and transparency.

3.     Residents may assign their vote in the poll to a proxy (a person who follows the issue, your hired representative).

4.     The resident voter provides a general directive regarding how the proxy is to vote, or may rescind the proxy and vote personally.

5.     A proposed law is generated and approved for polling by the voters (or their proxies) before an enactment vote.

6.     There may be many rejected proposed laws before one is approved to be voted upon.

7.     The electronic poll is protected by password and can be audited by the voter.

8.     A voter can be anonymous or named at the option of the voter 

9.     The Council Member votes according to the results of the poll.

See the other blog: "A Government You Can Love"
 for answers to frequently asked questions about this special form of direct democracy. 

Vote on an example on whether Sunnyvale should dedicate 1 of 3 lanes of El Camino to busses and bikes only. This is just practice, as the issue is dead. Just vote to show you have a pulse :)

I have started developing this system. If you want to contribute or help, please send me an email: tgreg99@yahoo.com Thanks for your attention. 

Edit 11/18/17 and a version of it just started Michael Allman: Congressional candidate for California's 52nd District  Hope it goes viral.

USA Debt Concern

The government debt is a concern, and debt/GDP ratio puts it in proportion.

Here are some points

1. The USA debt to GDP ratio is 0.9, and the Japan debt to GDP ratio is 2.2.

2. Japan has a quite robust economy, albeit with concerns about an aging population.

3. The USA with a deficit of 1.3T$/yr it will take 10 years to reach Japan's debt to GDP ratio.

4. Often the ratio is associated with "unfunded liability" (aka medicare, social security, medicaid, which tolal about 50T$) and is an entirely different debt (we don't pay principal or interest on it now).

5. Technology may provide dramatic reductions in health care costs (self administered tests, monitoring, eMedical visits, etc. Health care is information based and information is becoming dramatically less costly )

6. Inflation, or even hyper inflation, is forecast because of the increasing debt. Inflation can pay off the debt with cheap (inflated) dollars. If the debt "rolls over' in 2,5,10 year US treasury bonds for 10 years, then the bond holders would see their bonds value reduced to .81,  .60, and .35 of their original value, assuming a 10% inflation rate (1 - 0.10)^10=.35). If 1/3 of the total debt were for each kind of bond, then the USA debt of 13T$ would be 13T$ / 3 * ( .81 + .60 + .35) = 7.6T$, or about half after 10 years.

A Government You Can Love

Citizens feel powerless and disconnected from their government. 
The government continues to act without the will of the people. 
Grotesque compromises are made in order to get any legislation completed. 
Your representative votes, but is your "vote" counted or considered! 

Currently your representatives have a primary objective: to get elected. This is done by following party rules and not necessarily voting the way you as an individual would prefer.

But citizens can take charge of their government.

A new process is outlined below, and how to get it.
  

The process requires a radical change, and you will have a lot of questions!  Some are answered if you read the FAQ below, after reading this short outline.

The key idea is:

Each citizen has a direct vote on all proposed laws via his/her own Hired Representative (HR). 

Lets call it Hired Representative Democracy  (HRD)

1.    The HR has your voting authority (a legal document with signatures) to vote Yea, Nay or Abstain on proposed laws.

2.     The HR uses your directives/conditions to develop and vote on proposed law.

3.     The HR may be the same person or a different person for each proposed law.

4.     The HR casts the number of votes equal to the number of voters the HR represented (some would be yea, some nay, some abstain)

5.     The HR has US citizenship (can be prosecuted) but is not an elected official.

6.     The HR is hired and/or fired by you (at any time), and based on ability (see below).

7.     The HR is paid by you for each vote, but you are reimbursed with a government tax credit or refund.

8.     The HR is highly informed on the issues surrounding the proposed law.

9.     The HR has your directives/conditions regarding proposed law, and interprets the actual wording in a proposed law and decides whether your directives mean a Yea, Nay or Abstain. (You don’t need to be involved in the details).

10.   The HR alerts you to compromises and exceptions in a bill and how they match your directives. You may also stipulate conditions for compromise ahead of time. Or, you can be on call to decide choices as they come up.

11.    The HR is in contact with you though a secure link, just as you are with your online bank account or stock market account (similar to how you vote on company business issues on stocks).

FAQs

Frequently Asked Questions:

(Sorry for the formatting errors, Blogger/edit won't cooperate)

Understanding all issues and voting is a full time job.  How do I function?

1. You don't need to examine every bill in detail, as your general Directives (see below) have criteria that ensures well crafted legislation before the vote (otherwise your vote is no).

2. You develop your general Directive from examples taken from others, or from ones that you modify or originate. 
3. You select an HR (similar to a medical general practice doctor) who will interpret your directives and cast your vote.
4. In specific areas you could select another HR who covers a specific area (similar to a medical specialist, e.g. a surgeon)

How do I become sufficiently informed? 

1. By reading your HR's summary of how the legislation and your Directives match.  (At first, just a check list)
2. Reading the positions of advocates, neutrals and opponents of the bill.
3. Reading the full text of the bill


What is a Directive to the HRD? 

It would have two parts: 
1.  A Directive Checklist (below) to insure the bill is well posed (or the vote is no) and
2.  Well Being Criteria to decide how the bill compares to other bills.

What is a typical Directive Checklist? 

Vote NO if:

  1. There are insufficient studies (including the assumptions) with costs and benefits.
  2. The study is not available on the web for a sufficient amount of time. 
  3. The bill is ambiguous or lacks specificity (for example; justice, penalties, outcomes).
  4. Risks are not listed or estimated (similar to a prospectus for an investment).
  5. The bill is too long, say 30 pages. 
  6. There are too many exceptions or exclusions.
  7. The recipients of benefits are not identified.
  8. Cost estimates are not provided or referenced. 
  9. The studies, cost estimates and assumptions have no source references. 
  10.  There is no list of advocates or opponents.
  11.  Large compromises are embedded.
  12.  The studies do not allow results with modified assumptions.

What are "Well Being Criteria"?

Example1: OECD Report http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/#/23233411343
Example2: GallupHealthWays: http://www.healthways.com/solution/default.aspx?id=1125


Here are typical factors for yourself, your family, your friends and your communities.
You decide how much each item is effected in deciding how to vote on legislation. Sufficient:

1. safety, from abuse, violence, coercion, threats, etc.
2. health care
3. nutrition, including variety and quantity
4. housing
5. employment/jobs/income
6. wealth
7. education ... accessibility, quality, quantity
8. liberty/freedom/limits ... to do things, have things (property).
9. democracy ... to participate in making policy and laws.
10. justice (laws/rules) ... "fairness"
11. mobility ... to travel, move about, get to places, meet
12. environment ... beauty, art, air, water, scenery, open space
13. entertainment and community, for socializing and fun
14. 
    

How does the HR decide how to vote my vote? 

1. Given that all conditions of the Directive Checklist (above) are satisfied, then
2. An overall metric is formed from the Well Being Criteria and their weightings.
3. The metric for the bill is compared with other proposed legislation
4. The voter decides where to spend government resources or not to spend.

What is an example of a direct vote decision?
  1. The  California High Speed Rail initiative.
  2. The benefits were an alternate transportation mode from LA to SF.
  3. The costs were estimated to be lower than an airplane and the travel times shorter than with a car.
  4. Another benefit was lower energy.
  5. The costs were based on studies with arguable assumptions especially about costs and traffic demand.
  6. After approval by 52% of the voters. the costs estimates increased and made the cost benefit ratio higher. 
  7. The proposed train is now slower than an airplane and more costly.
  8. The system is not fully funded by the politicians.
  9. This example shows that the voters did not use the type of evaluation outlined here, probably because they had no Hired Representative who would insist on following voter directives.  

What if a bill is too big?
  1. One of the first things to accomplish is to divide huge bills into separate bills, so that nasty compromises are not required.
  2. Suggestion: Vote NO an any large bill

What are the qualifications for an HR in a given subject area? 

The HR should:

1. Be a subject matter expert or highly informed.
2. Demonstrate knowledge of both sides of the issue. 
3. Interpret and match your criteria with the substance of the bill. 
4. Identify benefits, beneficiaries, and costs. 
5. State study assumptions, implications and their importance. 
6. Provide sample weighting of your criteria that could be altered/suggested by the voter.

What happens to Congress?

1. They become HRs, in competition for your voting authority
2. They actually work for you.

Do we still elect a President?

1. Yes, he executes the laws, but does not make them
2. He operates with the budget that is voted upon by you
3. He is evaluated as an executive/administrator, not as a politician.
4. He/she will have presidential powers for emergencies.

Why is there an Abstain vote?

1. An intention to abstain during negotiations encourages changes in the bill. 
2. Typically, straw votes are tallied continuously as the bill is amended, and the abstains are watched closely.
3. Abstains can be the swing votes if their conditions are met

How is a bill drafted and do I have an input?

1. The most democratic way to draft a bill is to use a “wiki” with restrictions.
2. A wiki starts with a proposed law by an HR who has general instructions from several of the HR's citizens.
3. Other HRs modify the bill by wording changes.
4. Votes are taken to accept the changes or not (all transparently).
5. HRs are restricted from participation if repetition or subversion is attempted. 
6. The bill is ready for a final vote when no more changes are allowed (by a vote) and there are a sufficient number of voters (say 30% of the electorate. In a close vote that would be 15% yea and 15% nay)
7. Wiki voting allows minorities to register their position (make their point and see the voted result), even though the bill may or may not pass.
8. Private polls (biased?) would be less influential. Private polls are often a form of propaganda, which is a threat to democracy.
9. There is some history on wiki voting

Where, When and How is the vote?

1. The vote is electronic and on a predefined schedule.
2. Approval of bill wording is voted upon prior to votes to enact the legislation.
3. There is time between votes for amendments. 
4. Your encrypted authorization (to your HR) to vote is from any secure Internet device.       

Is bribery or coercion of voters possible?

1. Yes, as it is now with voting by mail. (A briber could watch you vote and/or mail your ballot.)
2. Bribery would carry penalties.
3. Your vote would be online with a serial number, known only by you and secured by encryption. 
4. A voter could change his vote if the briber were not present. (not the case with US mail type voting)
5. See the security for Bitcoin for a very secure process.

Will voters vote themselves money/privileges?

1. Voters are unlikely to vote for money for other people.
2. The majority probably will not vote for excessive funding, or property grabs, outrageous proposals, etc.
3. The Constitution and Bill of Rights still rule. 
4. The courts are used to process law suits. 
5. Tax reform and other gridlocked areas could be addressed.

Are voters too dumb for Hired Representative Democracy?

1. If voters know that they have an actual say in what happens to them and theirs, most will take it seriously, as in Estonia.
2. The voters' directives and their HRs can easily detect pork, exceptions, special interest wording, etc. and will not vote for them.
3. Also, each issue will have a pro con list that can quickly inform anyone who wishes to be more knowledgeable.

Are voters too impulsive for Hired Representative Democracy?

1. Impulsive voting would have to be deliberate, since legislation will take time to prepare, especially if done with a wiki, which allows voting on the wording of the bill.
2. There will be time consuming contention in drafting a bill. The actual vote on the bill occurs only after a bill is satisfactory to a significant part of the electorate, say 30%, Only then will a vote for passage take place.
3.  Note that the HRs will do the “wording” work/negotiation, not the voters.

How and why will Congress approve this?

1. By a seeing a mock version that works. See "How does it start on the Internet?" (below)
2. By a voter referendum 
3. By elections of supporting candidates (Third party candidates).
4. By copying success at the local level (See below)

Violates the constitution?

Not if written and enacted under the rules.

Corruption possible?

1.   Encryption is pretty standard now  (e.g. banking, broker accounts) and getting safer. See the encryption of Bitcoin. 

2.   Your name would be on a public register of voters (as your name and address is now)

3.   Your vote would by identifiable only by you via encryption.

4.   Your vote would have a serial number, known only by you.

5.   You could see your vote and change it.  The total would change to verify it.

6.   Hacker defense would be needed. (like banks have)

7.   If the HR intentionally voted not in accord with your directives (fraud), your diligence would be needed.

8.   HR fraud would be transparent to you and reportable to a District Attorney.
9.    Fraud would be punishable, as the HR is a US citizen and eligible for prosecution by a District Attorney.
10.   HRs make their living off of success as a HR, so would avoid fraudulent behavior. 

11.   Voters could switch HRs, who compete for voters and are paid by voters.

12.   Coalitions are minimized (again, avoiding nasty compromises and parties, very important!)

Why do I need an HR if I specify the conditions for a vote?

1.   Because the wording in the bill will not be a perfect match with your conditions. Therefore, you would always vote no. Your objective is have negotiations that get the words close to what you want. This is the main job of the HR, to interpret your words and decide if your words and the bills words are close enough. Your vote has some power to influence  the wording. So your HR can negotiate on the words to get the final bill close to your wishes. 

Can we omit the HR and use an algorithm? 

Yes, and here is the plan.

1. Develop a secure voting system to collect the will of the people (use Bitcoin encryption, security, and blockchain). 
2. Collect each voters' "well being"(WB, a list of items: safety, health, wealth, justice, ...) and each item's normalized importance (weighting) to the voter. 
3. Collect each voter's desired change in well being ("well-being change", WBC, as a %change of weightings of WB). Some may be negative since, you may feel a cut is in order, e.g., Defense Dept. which is part of Safety. 
4. Sum all voter's #3 responses to get a priortiy of what change is needed most in the country, i.e. the voters. 
5. Use the highest priority WBCs to draft laws that improve the desired well-being of the country. 
6. Develop projected outcomes from enacting the law, i.e., costs and benefits to groups and individuals, and the details behind the projections. (Use IBM's Watson + Wikipedia + Wolfram Alfa ?) 
7. Use the expected outcomes to project each voter's personal "well being change" (from the costs and benefits). 
8. Use the same information to project the change in well-being on the voter's self and his/her family, friends, and community (WBCE, well being change extended, e.g., to include helping your childrens', etal, future). 
9. Use the voter's WBCE to assess the law's impact on the voter (%WBCE = WBCE / WBE x 100 ) 
10. Develop an algorithm that adjusts the wording of the laws until a sufficiently large percentage of voters (say 51%?) is attained(or not) for enactment. Else loop back to #3 a few times) 
11. A lot of laws may be drafted that don't get enacted, .e.g., "go to war", give me "pork", etc.

How can this help get fiscal order?

  1.   Suggestion: Your HR Directive could generally vote NO on all earmarks or "riders" (aka special interests amendments).
  2.  Note that “coalitions” (aka “parties”) are not needed to get legislation completed (extremely important).  Independents would have a real vote.

  3.  Suggestion: Your instructions to your HR could be to generally vote for 90% of last year’s appropriation to Government Departments /Agencies.  This reduces the size of government in a minimally traumatic way. 

Where does it start?

   1.        At local level

   2.        On the Internet

What is the process at the Local Level?

  1.  Local is the most likely place to start, and would show feasibility.

  2.   Candidates run for election on a single item: To vote the way the voters direct them to vote.

  3.   Voters join a web site that directs the elected official’s vote

  4.   Elected officials are now the HRs and vote only the proxy votes that they have from the web vote results. 

  5.  Voters are registered publicly by US Mail address, signature, email account, etc.

  6.   Web log in is protected by password.

  7.   HRs operate as described above
  8.   See details at the blog here "Direct Democracy at the Local Level" 

How does it start on the Internet?

  1. Voting websites exist now and could form the basis for the needed software.
  2. People would sign up and cast a mock vote on current legislation.
  3. Alternative bills could be introduced and mock voted upon.
4. When a web site had enough “mock voters”, it would draw advertising and be self sustaining.
5. When the web site had enough voters it would become a force in politics.
6. When people saw that it worked, it would evolve to "official"
7. This is actually a business model that could be a good “start up" company.
8. Or, just email this to Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook. 

Should there be “voter qualifications for voting on an issue”, not just “one person, one vote”?

1. The founding fathers debated this one, and there were various criteria (property owner, gender, slave, etc.)
2. Qualifications might make better citizens, but what are the criteria? 

What if we don’t do this?

1. Government representatives want to stay in power, and do so by raising money for re-election.
2. Substantial funds come from lobbyists, and the funds are used in advertising, which can be termed propaganda.
3. This effective process is divisive, distracting, dishonest and filled with innuendo and slander.
4. The influence of money will be more severe since the Supreme Court has removed political funding limits on Corporations and Unions.
5. The influence of money in politics is systemic, increasing, causing harm and will not change without this radical change to the governing process.

What will happen if we adopt HRD?
HRD will eliminate:

• Elections of people with enormous power, and whose power can be corrupted. 
• Partisan politics and loyalty, that sustains party power and that trumps common sense and plurality voting on legislation. 
• Gridlock and minority control of government (through filibuster and extortion which has paralyzed government and held it for ransom ... the sequester/shutdown). 
• Bloated taxes and unfairness that most all voters agree should be changed. 
• Mammoth funding bills that cannot be analyzed or debated, because that might alienate some voters. 
• Grotesque compromises, special exceptions, and pork that are inserted by lobbyists, who are funded by special interests 
• Campaign financing and lobbyists money that causes most our representatives to chase funding, and can be construed as corruption. 
• Reduced democracy that doesn't allow a direct vote on issues.

What can I do?

1. Develop your Directive now. Get to know what you really believe. See examples above.
2. Do not vote Republican or Democrat. The system is broken.
3. Your vote for any other candidate will send a message that your vote is available, but you are fed up and want real change. 
4. Improve your citizenship ... see my blog on Citizenship Metrics
5.  Take on some of those actions! (Especially on those where you have a special talent)
6.  Help develop the system by emailing me tgreg99@yahoo.com, or leaving a comment and/or checking the box for updates to this blog. 

"Oversight" ... Not, "Audit" ... Maybe, "Transparency" ... YES.

The government is on an "oversight" kick. Congress wanted "oversight" of GM, BP, etc. until they realized how much work is involved. So they opted for "an agency" to provide oversight. But oversight means a "second boss" who has no stake in the matter, and is not accountable. We don't need that! 
Perhaps what is needed is a third party "auditor" who attests to "usual and customary practices". And that is all. 
What if the practices are not "usual and customary"? That begs the question: Is it legal? If not there must be "justice".  And it is the job of the Justice Department or District Attorney. We don't need oversight, but we may need an auditor to "attest". 

Actually we don't need an auditor if we have "transparency". There is enough natural oversight by employees and others who can "blow the whistle" if there are "unusual and non customary" practices. Of course, a prize for whistle blowing makes sure that it occurs. 

One final cog to make it all work. There must be clear laws that define "legal". Otherwise we have endless litigation. We need a legislative body that can provide "clear laws" with "clear teeth" and a Justice Department that acts!! To get that we need a voting system that gets clear and unambiguous laws, not the lobby written, loophole filed monster laws that we now pass. Please see "A Government You Can Love" on this blog . 

Free Information and the Impact on Employment

What will be the impact on employment of an internet that is providing "free information"? What is to become of employment by people with special "information" or "knowledge", such as a Teacher,  Doctor or Engineer?

Perhaps history and the impact of tools can suggest an outcome. First, most all people were hunter/gatherers, but their tools continued to improve until a small fraction of the population (farmers ~1-2%) could supply all the food needed by the whole population. Next, in the industrial age, people found employment by use of their physical dexterity, ability to learn, and to a lessor extent, their strength.  In the latter stages, machines started to replace these workers. (The process was delayed by the emergence of the undeveloped countries that could supply labor at lower cost than the machines.)  Many people became employed as "knowledge workers" and used their brains for business practices such as transactions of all types, including sales, record keeping, and planning. Part of this "knowledge base" population practiced law, medicine, engineering, science. etc.  All of these functions are now being automated rapidly, as  machines coupled with computers take over both the production and services job base. What will be the outcome?

The usual measure of an economy is GDP and growth of GDP. In other words, transactions as measured by the cost of goods and services. What if  machines with computers take over the creation of goods and services? The cost of these goods, services and the machines/computers are likely to decrease rapidly.  This is deflation. It means we may live with low cost goods and services and with minimal employment. Really?

Probably not, because we naturally strive for a higher standard of living. That means new goods and services, and NEW types of employment to provide these NEW things. New things require Research and; Development, R&D. So the economy will depend largely on new and improved products and services.

Product life time is reducing exponentially (See Kurzweill).  A prescient public policy would be to recognize this and strongly support an R&D economy. This means providing an environment for innovation, including patent protection, tax incentives, capital, and human skill development for the R&D processes.

Andy Grove (Intel founder) noted a warning to nurture manufacturing: He suggests that R&D is a small part  of supplying new products and services. Manufacturing requires major investment and produces the most jobs The machines to make the machines are often in the "manufacturing sector". My inclination is to include them in R&D. Each new round of manufacturing technology is R&D driven. So production and manufacturing can also be called R&D in this view. For the purpose of increasing employment, perhaps we should add a M, and call it RD&M,  for research, development, and manufacturing. OK, lets add marketing and sales and call it "business".

So to provide new jobs, we need an environment that provides:
  Stable and fair laws for businesses and workers,
  Incentives for the corporations and the workforce.
     (especially Tax policy)
  Incentives by direct government spending (maybe? and prizes?)\
  Regulated competition

Free market?

The next time you hear someone hawking a free market, remind them of the eventual outcome. ... like the free market in ... Somalia.  There the rule is by thugs with AK-47s, not by "rule of law" (aka regulations).

The "Free" idea needs to balanced with "Rule of Law", also known as "regulation". All enterprize has rules and regulations. The question should be are the rules "fair" or beneficial to society in general or on the whole. Or do they favor a select group? 

Too Big To Fail ... NOT!

" Too Big To Fail" doesn't make sense. If "it" is screwed up, "it" needs to be fixed or discontinued. The easiet way to fix it is to break it up, so the consequences of failure are not significant.

When you hear that term, think or say:

"Too big to fail means that the consequences of failure are too big to endure. So please break it into smaller parts, or fix or dissolve whatever it is you are talking about"