Inequality in the next 20 years?
We next turn to the question why so much inequality in societies, not only now but historically as well. Stratified or unequal societies predominate egalitarian societies. We see here in the United States where a relatively egalitarian society in the 60's has been replaced by the 1% 99% society.
We see how it happened but the question on the table is why has it persisted so often historically, in most societies; and what can be done about it?
Let's have a look. But first some background from the latest research.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110928152058.htm#.UjX2R-BJ0Qo.email
Notice how the above articles eliminates the factor of war and military force imposing upon the poor obedience to the social order established by the rich. That factor is ignored. The poor are poor are because of this social order and more, the rich combine and spread the unequal social order accross societies, often cooperating. NSA comes to mind. There we see that elites around the globe cooperate with one another, and "are all in it together."
See also.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091029141223.htm
Next we look at what can be done to combat unequalizing trends, which I am taking here to mean, what can be do to promote the emergence of a middle class in societies.
9/27/13
The Curse of Unpaid Internships
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/businessdesk/2013/09/will-work-for-free-how-unpaid.html
9/28/13
Cheerleaders too?
http://www.alternet.org/labor/professional-cheerleading-and-low-pay?akid=10985.260128.9RD0zK&rd=1&src=newsletter902537&t=5
9/28/13
We would be remiss if we did not look at technology in the next 20 years and examine them and do the plus and the minus on each.
Here are what has been proposed in this area.
http://www.weforum.org/content/top-10-emerging-technologies-2013
But first some preliminary ideas around these technologies and some criteria, I use, in evaluating them.
First, any new technology must be sustainable and not add to the planet's woes, add to our energy deficit. If not, that technology is just another fad, just another gadget.
Second, any new techonology must help bring back a viable middle class, if not it will be just another scheme, whereby the rich get richer, and these rich, use it against everyone else. That is not an outcome I personnaly seek or approve of.
Third, any new technology must have a future, a second act, susceptible of further development.
Now lets have a look at the first of these-
"OnLine Electric Vehicles (OLEV)
Wireless technology can now deliver electric power to moving vehicles. In next-generation electric cars, pick-up coil sets under the vehicle floor receive power remotely via an electromagnetic field broadcast from cables installed under the road. The current also charges an onboard battery used to power the vehicle when it is out of range. As electricity is supplied externally, these vehicles need only a fifth of the battery capacity of a standard electric car, and can achieve transmission efficiencies of over 80%. Online electric vehicles are currently undergoing road tests in Seoul, South Korea."
This idea has a major flaw, it requires enormous infrastructure costs and enormous amounts of generated electricity. Where will the money come from, what are the final real costs, to the consumer and to the environment and is in effect more of the same things we are doing wrong. What is the payoff? So we can read on our commutes in single passenger traffice and not have to worry about traffic?
Verdict: Not feasible, to expensive, and hurts the planet in the long run. Besides has anyone calculated the impact on the Earth Magneto-sphere of these new magnetic forces? No, probably not.
Thumbs down on this one.
Tomorrow:
"3-D printing and remote manufacturing
Three-dimensional printing allows the creation of solid structures from a digital computer file, potentially revolutionizing the economics of manufacturing if objects can be printed remotely in the home or office. The process involves layers of material being deposited on top of each other in to create free-standing structures from the bottom up. Blueprints from computer-aided design are sliced into cross-section for print templates, allowing virtually created objects to be used as models for “hard copies” made from plastics, metal alloys or other materials."
NASA to use 3-D printers in space
http://www.newsdaily.com/article/ee58aa83e31a4a70f69afae19b79506a/nasa-preparing-to-launch-3-d-printer-into-space
9/30/13
Evaluating the Future of 3-D printing
3-D printing carries with it the dream of Wall Street that it can find a way to totally eliminate the need for labor and thereby get richer. Is this feasible with the advent of 3-D printing?"
First, what is the buzz-buzz about 3-D?
First, some hold that it has the promise of:
1. Making tools for example directly from the printer through a layering process with spools of plastic. That is you don't need metal and your wrench can be made quickly right there at home with strong sturdy plastic. Cheaper, faster, and preservative of metals, and no factory, or worker needed.
2. Scaling up you could 3-D print an entire house, prefab with a difference, tanks, planes etc on the large scale. For those who did not see above, see these items on 3-D housing ideas and projects.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Mlt6kaNjoeI
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/01/tech/wikihouse-build-your-own-house/
From: Aug 3rd entry above
Some see 3-D printing as the elimination of factories altogether and the end of American dependence on cheap Chinese factory goods.
Well, we ask what do we make of all this and the claims made?
First, we note that a 3-D printer must have materials to work with. The idea of trillions, non-biodegradible pieces of plastic rolling around ending up on the Pacific ocean, effectively killing that ocean, does not sound attractive. Nor does dumping it in land-fills around the world sound feasible and susaintable.
We need a way to recycle that amount of plastic and currently we do not-not to mention the toxic chemicals the printer and the manufacture of the special plastics would entail. We would simply be duplicating the toxic chemicals which are already a problem with computers, (computer by-products are very toxic and end up in the ground water and in land-fills in South America and China-not to mention the rare, scarce rare metals an I-Phone needs.
So no. This idea,on the one hand, does not meet our criteria stated above. A plastic wrench or tans component do not seem worth it.
The pre-fabricated house could be 3-D printed and is and has been, if you view the video above. But is this social need worth the costs to cutting more trees in the Amazon, more plastic pollutants and the like even though the social end-housing- is clearly needed.
The answer for 3-D printing therefore lies developing, non-toxic, environmental friendly, sustainable materials. What would those materials be?
That tomorrow?
We evaluate this one tomorrow.
10/3/13
Self Healing Materials. What is that?
"Self-healing materials
One of the defining characteristics of living organisms is their inherent ability to repair physical damage. A growing trend in biomimicry is the creation of non-living structural materials that also have the capacity to heal themselves when cut, torn or cracked. Self-healing materials which can repair damage without external human intervention could give manufactured goods longer lifetimes and reduce the demand for raw materials, as well as improving the inherent safety of materials used in construction or to form the bodies of aircraft."
More information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-healing_material
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/166656-terminator-polymer-can-spontaneously-self-heal-in-just-two-hours
http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/22/tech/self-healing-materials/index.html
Media pattrerns. What do people want on line, one study.
http://mediapatterns.enm.bris.ac.uk/WhatReadersWant
10/5/13
The Millennials and Older Workers: What is the contrast. Great Charts.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/businessdesk/2013/10/why-millennials-are-struggling.html
10/7/13
The Increasing Diversity of America.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131002185720.htm
10/15/15
More on 3D printing, problems, promises, pros and cons.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24528306
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23727229
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22464360
Retirement Woes
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131015103941.htm
10/19/13
The Financial System of the Future: What will it look like?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=sbqvvNiIfVs
The Fukushima Disaster is worst than the world knows.
http://rt.com/news/fukushima-apocalypse-fuel-removal-598/
10/21/13
What are the Millennials Doing?
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/10/nearly-6-million-young-americans-dont-work-or-go-to-school.html
10/26/13
What if the grid failed?
http://energyblog.nationalgeographic.com/2013/10/25/american-blackout-four-major-real-life-threats-to-the-electric-grid/
We next turn to the question why so much inequality in societies, not only now but historically as well. Stratified or unequal societies predominate egalitarian societies. We see here in the United States where a relatively egalitarian society in the 60's has been replaced by the 1% 99% society.
We see how it happened but the question on the table is why has it persisted so often historically, in most societies; and what can be done about it?
Let's have a look. But first some background from the latest research.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110928152058.htm#.UjX2R-BJ0Qo.email
Notice how the above articles eliminates the factor of war and military force imposing upon the poor obedience to the social order established by the rich. That factor is ignored. The poor are poor are because of this social order and more, the rich combine and spread the unequal social order accross societies, often cooperating. NSA comes to mind. There we see that elites around the globe cooperate with one another, and "are all in it together."
See also.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091029141223.htm
Next we look at what can be done to combat unequalizing trends, which I am taking here to mean, what can be do to promote the emergence of a middle class in societies.
9/27/13
The Curse of Unpaid Internships
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/businessdesk/2013/09/will-work-for-free-how-unpaid.html
9/28/13
Cheerleaders too?
http://www.alternet.org/labor/professional-cheerleading-and-low-pay?akid=10985.260128.9RD0zK&rd=1&src=newsletter902537&t=5
9/28/13
We would be remiss if we did not look at technology in the next 20 years and examine them and do the plus and the minus on each.
Here are what has been proposed in this area.
http://www.weforum.org/content/top-10-emerging-technologies-2013
But first some preliminary ideas around these technologies and some criteria, I use, in evaluating them.
First, any new technology must be sustainable and not add to the planet's woes, add to our energy deficit. If not, that technology is just another fad, just another gadget.
Second, any new techonology must help bring back a viable middle class, if not it will be just another scheme, whereby the rich get richer, and these rich, use it against everyone else. That is not an outcome I personnaly seek or approve of.
Third, any new technology must have a future, a second act, susceptible of further development.
Now lets have a look at the first of these-
"OnLine Electric Vehicles (OLEV)
Wireless technology can now deliver electric power to moving vehicles. In next-generation electric cars, pick-up coil sets under the vehicle floor receive power remotely via an electromagnetic field broadcast from cables installed under the road. The current also charges an onboard battery used to power the vehicle when it is out of range. As electricity is supplied externally, these vehicles need only a fifth of the battery capacity of a standard electric car, and can achieve transmission efficiencies of over 80%. Online electric vehicles are currently undergoing road tests in Seoul, South Korea."
This idea has a major flaw, it requires enormous infrastructure costs and enormous amounts of generated electricity. Where will the money come from, what are the final real costs, to the consumer and to the environment and is in effect more of the same things we are doing wrong. What is the payoff? So we can read on our commutes in single passenger traffice and not have to worry about traffic?
Verdict: Not feasible, to expensive, and hurts the planet in the long run. Besides has anyone calculated the impact on the Earth Magneto-sphere of these new magnetic forces? No, probably not.
Thumbs down on this one.
Tomorrow:
"3-D printing and remote manufacturing
Three-dimensional printing allows the creation of solid structures from a digital computer file, potentially revolutionizing the economics of manufacturing if objects can be printed remotely in the home or office. The process involves layers of material being deposited on top of each other in to create free-standing structures from the bottom up. Blueprints from computer-aided design are sliced into cross-section for print templates, allowing virtually created objects to be used as models for “hard copies” made from plastics, metal alloys or other materials."
NASA to use 3-D printers in space
http://www.newsdaily.com/article/ee58aa83e31a4a70f69afae19b79506a/nasa-preparing-to-launch-3-d-printer-into-space
9/30/13
Evaluating the Future of 3-D printing
3-D printing carries with it the dream of Wall Street that it can find a way to totally eliminate the need for labor and thereby get richer. Is this feasible with the advent of 3-D printing?"
First, what is the buzz-buzz about 3-D?
First, some hold that it has the promise of:
1. Making tools for example directly from the printer through a layering process with spools of plastic. That is you don't need metal and your wrench can be made quickly right there at home with strong sturdy plastic. Cheaper, faster, and preservative of metals, and no factory, or worker needed.
2. Scaling up you could 3-D print an entire house, prefab with a difference, tanks, planes etc on the large scale. For those who did not see above, see these items on 3-D housing ideas and projects.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Mlt6kaNjoeI
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/01/tech/wikihouse-build-your-own-house/
From: Aug 3rd entry above
Some see 3-D printing as the elimination of factories altogether and the end of American dependence on cheap Chinese factory goods.
Well, we ask what do we make of all this and the claims made?
First, we note that a 3-D printer must have materials to work with. The idea of trillions, non-biodegradible pieces of plastic rolling around ending up on the Pacific ocean, effectively killing that ocean, does not sound attractive. Nor does dumping it in land-fills around the world sound feasible and susaintable.
We need a way to recycle that amount of plastic and currently we do not-not to mention the toxic chemicals the printer and the manufacture of the special plastics would entail. We would simply be duplicating the toxic chemicals which are already a problem with computers, (computer by-products are very toxic and end up in the ground water and in land-fills in South America and China-not to mention the rare, scarce rare metals an I-Phone needs.
So no. This idea,on the one hand, does not meet our criteria stated above. A plastic wrench or tans component do not seem worth it.
The pre-fabricated house could be 3-D printed and is and has been, if you view the video above. But is this social need worth the costs to cutting more trees in the Amazon, more plastic pollutants and the like even though the social end-housing- is clearly needed.
The answer for 3-D printing therefore lies developing, non-toxic, environmental friendly, sustainable materials. What would those materials be?
That tomorrow?
We evaluate this one tomorrow.
10/3/13
Self Healing Materials. What is that?
"Self-healing materials
One of the defining characteristics of living organisms is their inherent ability to repair physical damage. A growing trend in biomimicry is the creation of non-living structural materials that also have the capacity to heal themselves when cut, torn or cracked. Self-healing materials which can repair damage without external human intervention could give manufactured goods longer lifetimes and reduce the demand for raw materials, as well as improving the inherent safety of materials used in construction or to form the bodies of aircraft."
More information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-healing_material
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/166656-terminator-polymer-can-spontaneously-self-heal-in-just-two-hours
http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/22/tech/self-healing-materials/index.html
Media pattrerns. What do people want on line, one study.
http://mediapatterns.enm.bris.ac.uk/WhatReadersWant
10/5/13
The Millennials and Older Workers: What is the contrast. Great Charts.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/businessdesk/2013/10/why-millennials-are-struggling.html
10/7/13
The Increasing Diversity of America.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131002185720.htm
10/15/15
More on 3D printing, problems, promises, pros and cons.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24528306
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23727229
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22464360
Retirement Woes
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131015103941.htm
10/19/13
The Financial System of the Future: What will it look like?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=sbqvvNiIfVs
The Fukushima Disaster is worst than the world knows.
http://rt.com/news/fukushima-apocalypse-fuel-removal-598/
10/21/13
What are the Millennials Doing?
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/10/nearly-6-million-young-americans-dont-work-or-go-to-school.html
10/26/13
What if the grid failed?
http://energyblog.nationalgeographic.com/2013/10/25/american-blackout-four-major-real-life-threats-to-the-electric-grid/