I would try to ensure that there is a period of relative equality of opportunity where everyone has a chance of achieving their life’s goals. My personal preference would be a georgist policy of land taxation which is used to fund government and any surplus after that is redistributed to all adults. Extensive studies of pedagogical and other interventions that work might have to happen over there.
This would ensure the answering of one important question—under a relatively fair scenario, what can people produce and what niches could be filled?
After that, if studies show that the sustainable limit to the population is approaching and we need a eugenics policy, then my policy follows below.
I would have tradeable child credits distributed to all fertile women. The number of credits would be pegged to the latest estimates of the sustainable population and the birth rate required to achieve the same.
I will try to ensure as much research as necessary goes into making fertility as digital as possible (ON/OFF switches). I would try to extend women’s fertile years as much as possible (if some other life extension side-effects occur, they are welcome, but not the goal). This will cross the biggest bottleneck to eugenics in today’s world—educated women not having enough children.
If the above research yields good results, then just the child credits will be provided and they will be tradeable. Those who want children will have them. Those who don’t, won’t. They will benefit by selling their credits.
Mandatory genetic testing at birth. No fault , no obligation divorce can be obtained by the man on the spot if it is found that the child is not his. This is to offset the fact that women get the credits and deploy them.
For those who can’t provide the child credits to justify birth, they will have to give away the child to foster parents and they will be sterilized.
I am hoping that the ability to have more children becomes a status symbol and this naturally leads to a eugenic outcome.
If the price of the credit is approaching zero (more sellers than buyers), while the sustainable population estimate has not increased, my policy is not working and other interventions might be needed, like the eugenic subsidies mentioned in the above post.
This will cross the biggest bottleneck to eugenics in today’s world—educated women not having enough children.
This may be the biggest bottleneck for eugenics. But decreasing the birthrate among the poor who lack the support network to raise children is a bigger problem for improving the average outcome, and is much lower hanging fruit.
In short, lowering the birthrate among the underclass while holding the upper class birthrate constant has much more payoff and is easier to implement than raising the upper class birthrate while leaving the underclass birthrate constant.
Well, I was thinking in terms of increasing the numbers of the smart fraction, not strictly from the perspective of increasing the average. Increasing the average is in the long run. eg. A few geniuses who can crack nano tech can increase the earth’s holding capacity for humans by an order of magnitude. A few more who can crack permanent intelligence/executive function amplification of homo sapiens can render the eugenics question completely irrelevant.
Perhaps the solution is “rent-a-wombs”, whereby wealthy would-be genetic dominators pay lower class women to be surrogate mothers for their in-vitro embryos.
None of this is likely to fly until there has been a dramatic memetic reordering of the Western world away from its current slave religion-based ideologies. If this doesn’t happen, I expect Asian countries like Singapore to lead the way into the brave new techno-fascist future. It is encouraging to see interest in these ideas among the high-IQ set, who have been strangely submissive to the dictates of slave religionists for far too long. All of the slave religion-based ideologies, from Christianity to secular humanism to modern leftism, must be DISARMED, DISMANTLED, AND ANNIHILATED if this sort of thing is to once again become acceptable. This is the real revolution that the LessWrong crowd should be working toward, not some tepid and toothless rationality worship. In the immortal words of arch-eugenicist Colonel Green, I say this to the most intelligent 1% of humanity: “Overwhelm and devastate.”
I am fairly confident that this is a troll who has been banned at least twice before, under the usernames SeanTheSorcerer and SeanTheMystic.
Can you please include in the parent which user you are referring to? While reading your comment I assumed it meant the author of the (now) grandparent. Broader context suggests you mean DarthImperius.
Cheating a little bit on the original question.
I would try to ensure that there is a period of relative equality of opportunity where everyone has a chance of achieving their life’s goals. My personal preference would be a georgist policy of land taxation which is used to fund government and any surplus after that is redistributed to all adults. Extensive studies of pedagogical and other interventions that work might have to happen over there.
This would ensure the answering of one important question—under a relatively fair scenario, what can people produce and what niches could be filled?
After that, if studies show that the sustainable limit to the population is approaching and we need a eugenics policy, then my policy follows below.
I would have tradeable child credits distributed to all fertile women. The number of credits would be pegged to the latest estimates of the sustainable population and the birth rate required to achieve the same.
I will try to ensure as much research as necessary goes into making fertility as digital as possible (ON/OFF switches). I would try to extend women’s fertile years as much as possible (if some other life extension side-effects occur, they are welcome, but not the goal). This will cross the biggest bottleneck to eugenics in today’s world—educated women not having enough children.
If the above research yields good results, then just the child credits will be provided and they will be tradeable. Those who want children will have them. Those who don’t, won’t. They will benefit by selling their credits.
Mandatory genetic testing at birth. No fault , no obligation divorce can be obtained by the man on the spot if it is found that the child is not his. This is to offset the fact that women get the credits and deploy them.
For those who can’t provide the child credits to justify birth, they will have to give away the child to foster parents and they will be sterilized.
I am hoping that the ability to have more children becomes a status symbol and this naturally leads to a eugenic outcome.
If the price of the credit is approaching zero (more sellers than buyers), while the sustainable population estimate has not increased, my policy is not working and other interventions might be needed, like the eugenic subsidies mentioned in the above post.
This may be the biggest bottleneck for eugenics. But decreasing the birthrate among the poor who lack the support network to raise children is a bigger problem for improving the average outcome, and is much lower hanging fruit.
In short, lowering the birthrate among the underclass while holding the upper class birthrate constant has much more payoff and is easier to implement than raising the upper class birthrate while leaving the underclass birthrate constant.
Well, I was thinking in terms of increasing the numbers of the smart fraction, not strictly from the perspective of increasing the average. Increasing the average is in the long run. eg. A few geniuses who can crack nano tech can increase the earth’s holding capacity for humans by an order of magnitude. A few more who can crack permanent intelligence/executive function amplification of homo sapiens can render the eugenics question completely irrelevant.
Perhaps the solution is “rent-a-wombs”, whereby wealthy would-be genetic dominators pay lower class women to be surrogate mothers for their in-vitro embryos.
None of this is likely to fly until there has been a dramatic memetic reordering of the Western world away from its current slave religion-based ideologies. If this doesn’t happen, I expect Asian countries like Singapore to lead the way into the brave new techno-fascist future. It is encouraging to see interest in these ideas among the high-IQ set, who have been strangely submissive to the dictates of slave religionists for far too long. All of the slave religion-based ideologies, from Christianity to secular humanism to modern leftism, must be DISARMED, DISMANTLED, AND ANNIHILATED if this sort of thing is to once again become acceptable. This is the real revolution that the LessWrong crowd should be working toward, not some tepid and toothless rationality worship. In the immortal words of arch-eugenicist Colonel Green, I say this to the most intelligent 1% of humanity: “Overwhelm and devastate.”
Could a moderator please delete this idiocy?
I suspect he retracted his own comment so that it couldn’t be downvoted.
I am fairly confident that this is a troll who has been banned at least twice before, under the usernames SeanTheSorcerer and SeanTheMystic.
(Clarifying edit: I mean the grandparent commenter, DarthImperius)
Can you please include in the parent which user you are referring to? While reading your comment I assumed it meant the author of the (now) grandparent. Broader context suggests you mean DarthImperius.
I would like to point out that it was the Western world with its “slave religion” that created modern technology.