Message from @Deleted User 57835c2c
Discord ID: 302901238809493515
THE POINT IS: GOOD TO THE GOOD, BAD TO THE BAD
PROMOTE THE EXCELLENT
FINANCE IS ONE WAY, BUT ARISTOCRACY IS BETTER
how is dumping money on geniuses so they have more kids not excellent
THEY ARE UNLIKELY TO HAVE KIDS ANYWAY
"you have 150IQ points, great health and good looks, have kids"
AND
BETTER SYSTEM IS GRANTS FROM ARISTOCRATS
pay them specifically to have kids
GIVE TO THOSE WHO DEMONSTRATE ABILITY
NOT JUST RAW INTELLIGENCE
where will the money for grants come from
ARISTOCRATS OWN LAND AND PROPERTIES
THEY HAVE YEARLY INCOME
AND GIVE SOME OF IT IN GRANTS
MUCH LIKE WAS USED TO FUND CLASSICAL MUSIC
so take what poor people make, redistribute it
AND MUCH OF CLASSICAL LITERATURE
sounds like taxation by another name
POOR PEOPLE MAKE LITTLE
THEY CAN BE USED TO MAKE MONEY
BUT BY THEMSELVES, MAKE LITTLE
CAPITALISM = MARKET ECONOMY VS. COMMAND ECONOMY
ALLOW THE BEST TO RISE
okay
THEN ALLOCATE THAT TO ARISTOCRATS
FOR EXAMPLE
GIVE GOOGLE TO THE DUKE OF EDINBOROUGH
let people have a mostly free market, take away a lot of their money and redistribute it based on genes
BETTER THAN LETTING IT STRUGGLE ON ITS OWN
THAT IS WHAT IT MEANS TO BALANCE CAPITALISM WITH ARISTOCRACY, CASTE AND CULTURE
ALSO
NO CONSUMERISM
LET HIGHER CASTES CHOOSE WHAT SUCCEEDS
MUCH OF THE PROBLEM WITH "CAPITALISM" NOW IS THAT DALITS ARE CHOOSING SUCCESSFUL PRODUCTS
so command economy
TWITTER AT $8BN
NO, THE OPPOSITE
SEE WHAT SUCCEEDS, THEN ALLOCATE
INSTEAD OF COMMANDING WHAT "SHOULD" SUCCEED