Optimal Allocation of Resources

From Return of Kings: Evidence For Blue Pill Brain Damage Puts Modern Democracy Into Question

Anyone who dares question its legitimacy is usually cast out as a fascist or a moron

Actually I think it’s the opposite, or at least the tide is turning in that more and more people, especially on sites that cater to a high-IQ demographic like Reddit, 4chan and the manopshere – are questioning if democracy is viable, especially in an economy that has an out of control entitlement spending problem. People are realizing that in a democracy, the low-IQ individuals who make up the bulk of the parasitic class vote for benefits, in the process enlarging the welfare state and hurting the most productive members of society. This is not fair as well economically destructive – to punish the most successful so that the barnacles and other crustaceans that make up the underclass (like underneath a dock) can continue to corrode and weigh down the vessel that is the US economy.

On the matter of utilitarianism, consequntialism, and deontology, we need to come to terms with the fact that that some people are intrinsically better (more economically valuable) than others, and policy needs to reflect this reality. Intelligence is a pretty good marker for the ability of being able to figure things out – a skill that lead to the development of the technologies that constitute modern civilization. It’s hard to define morality, whereas intelligence is easier to define and has practical applications. The trolley car thought experiment is an example of the conundrum of trying to define morality. Denialism over IQ involves includes, but is not limited to, the belief that IQ is not important (it measures nothing important) , that IQ is malleable and non hereditary ( costly education programs will boost scores), or that IQ must come at the expense of another skill (smart people are inherently unethical and socially inept, for example). Darwin has become the god of secularism and Galton as Lucifer.

Yes, the economy is strong and can withstand a lot, but the economy would be stronger if we allocated more resources for the best and the brightest. In a rare outburst of much-needed political honesty, Mitt Romney was right that half the country (the takers) doesn’t contribute, and at least he had the temerity to speak out when no one else would even though the subsequent bad press probably doomed his campaign.

Given a finite quantity of resources (time,money, labor) , related to the categorical imperative, the best policy is the one that maximizes utility to benefit society as a whole for the long run. For example, that means we should spend more money on gifted education programs, for example, since smart people tend to create more indirect value, whether it’s through entrepreneurship, public policy and research, than everyone else.

Comments are closed.