August 24, 2019 at 11:10 am #10232etilleyKeymaster
Diversity and Inclusion – are Unsustainable Policies
“Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities, Can Make You Commit Atrocities” – Voltaire
Harvard University is inadvertently asking that students and staff align with unsustainable and socially-irresponsible policy in some of its schools, by requesting Diversity and Inclusion in its Hiring Policy. Many governments and businesses in High-Income nations are making a similar mistake.
This is not a religious article, but I realize that Bibles are textbooks that explain how to build sustainable societies. The Roman Emperor Constantine wasn’t a religious man, but in 325 A.D. he governed a nation that was at war with itself. He recognized the urgent need for a law like Hammurabi’s that could stabilize and govern a society. In 1639, Harvard University’s Puritan philosophers and academic founders took the unusual step of establishing their university based on physics, metaphysics, and also on the bible’s scripture – for this reason. Constructs in this model of a sustainable society included the Head of Household, family values, respect of neighbors (the Golden Rule), living wages, respect of parents, one’s mate, and single-income families as well. Household savings, abundance for all, happiness, avoiding debt, property ownership, and avoiding excessive possessions – are all sustainable lessons explained in the Bible, as is Capital Formation, paying more in tax when you earn more, and even a sophisticated 50th-year Economic Reset and Debt Forgiveness program (see Leviticus 25:26). Essential Good was presented as a God and given “teeth” via an afterlife, and the Golden Rule was the Saviour, the Joshua of others – in Greek, Jesus.
“Si Dieu n’existait pas, il faudrait l’inventer.” – Voltaire
Translation: If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.
These are the requisite USE CASE Actors, Inputs and Outputs of a sophisticated working system for sustainable societies. Not all policies in bibles are sustainable and the violent passages are definitely not, but most can be proven sustainable by empirical analyses of successful societies today. See http://csq1.org/World-at-our-Hands-Report/#bibles for an econometric analysis of ta Biblia’s policies in Section #5.
We should never see a mature capitalism like we do today; mature capitalisms are as expensive, dangerous, and preventable as the Bible explains; in lessons taken from the Torah which took from the Code of Hammurabi. Today, the U.S. loses $37 billion every day to 130 million citizens living in starvation wages and unbalanced low social contracts; because we don’t know to vote for sustainable laws and policies.
Freedom in a monetary society, is having money left over after all costs-of-living. 40% of Americans don’t own anything according to the Federal Reserve Budget, despite a Constitution that insists on the sustainable policy of “Freedom” – or as Henry Ford explained it, living wages.
We were “too smart” for this non-secular and philosophical education, but once you strip away the story-telling literalisms which were needed by a 99.9% illiteracy rate at the time, bibles teach us time-tested solutions to the very great majority of social problems that we see today. The challenge that we failed at, was in recognizing and presenting important 4,000-year old sustainability lessons – in context.
Most of us struggle to understand what is useful context during even in our own news programs today. What news is opinion and unimportant? What advice and policy is harmful? And, which policies are proven to work reliably and to be essential? We don’t have a clue today because our schools don’t teach us what builds sustainable societies any longer. We are not taught which are sustainable versus unsustainable policies.
In international research across 200-countries (see Transition Economics), policies that are unsustainable create collapse-trending economies and dystopic societies reliably in fact – 100% of the time. Policies that are sustainable, create advancing economies and prosperity 100% as well (see the World at our Hands Report Proof library here).
What about Right and Left Policy? Meaningless; if all parties sponsor unsustainable policy, we collapse no matter who you vote for – as a scientific and mathematical certainty. You might want to think about this the next time you slander someone right or left. This is why liberal, socialist, <add derisive slanders here> Europe – has six-week vacations, great schools, great healthcare, lower tax (than our private insurance boondoggle), and advancing economies – the only G7s that do are the FDR-Democracies – Germany, Italy and Japan.
Unsustainable Policy can be accommodated, and there is even a benefit to adopting laissez-faire policies at times when there is a surplus of opportunity in an economy, but a laissez-faire approach is not appropriate in a mature capitalism like today’s. Like any Casino, economies can advance reliably when all policies are confirmed to offer even a small mathematical advantage “to the house”.
To explain concerns with “Diversity” …
Ambiguous terms are undefendable and can also be weaponized. For this reason, it is always recommended to adhere to Socratic Method’s best practice of saying only what you mean. To prove something, one has to dis-ambiguate. “Diversity” is an ambiguous term that can include policies of Immigration, Onshoring, Offshoring, Globalization, and Female Equality. Its implementation in many countries has included clear racism and sexism, and mandated that hiring, lending, and investment be based on race and gender. Diversity is proven in research to have created a long list of Female Equity Policy-inspired social problems as well.
The Golden Rule’s Empathy and Respect are policies proven to be eminently sustainable, but Immigration is not a sustainable nor beneficial policy. Visiting foreigners and students should be afforded every respect and protection; as should legal refugees. However, current policies of immigration (Canada – is the highest G7 immigrant sponsor per capita for 20-years), onshoring, and double-income families policy (Diversity/Female Equality), have driven starvation wages (salaries below the cost of living) nation-wide in many nations now. Ironically, business accounting practices still count that there is a benefit to running unsustainable Globalization and Diversity policies, which stall economies just a few years later. The economy that business relies upon today loses $4.2 billion dollars every day in Canada and $37 billion daily in the U.S. . When you fish a lake unsustainably, everyone goes hungry.
Businesses sponsor Female Equality and Diversity Non-profit groups and programs, as they release male staff (and their pension commitments) – saving themselves up to $1 million per employee/family, and then they offer lower wages and pensions to female and minority/onshored workers under the guise of Diversity. The Canadian Government has ignored these unsustainable practices and even endorsed Diversity at every level as well.
Unsustainable Policy drives economic stall in any nation. Canada’s growth is planned at just .1% this year, despite its vast undeveloped resource potential. China is smaller in area, yet its growth is planned at 39%.
Diversity by respect and empathy is sustainable, but Diversity by racism, sexism, ageism, and exclusion of family values, heads of households, single income family and living wage policy in hiring – is unsustainable, stalls economies reliably – as we see today, and is not “impact” as sustainable investors or anyone else would want to understand the term.
Click on an image to expand it
Immigration is a neutral-benefit policy in High-income nations
20-year G20 Immigration Leaders Collapse-trend
% Immigrants has no influence on economy
Double Income Families Policy creates Unsustainable Birthrates – 1.5 to 1.7
Female:Male Ratios Rise, Birthrates Fall, and labour participation rates fall as a trend today
To explain concerns with “Female Equity” …
Fertility Rates in the U.S. are 1.8 and dropping (sustainable fertility is 2.2) – and in Canada, were diversity policies are in law now, fertility is at a suicidal 1.5 and plummeting. China after 30-years of 1-child family policy is 1.4.
There are thirty significant social problems raised by “Female Equity” policy in research – see http://csq1.org/forums/topic/the-gender-inequality-problem-in-canada/
New Zealand was the first nation to permit the female vote and Iceland was the first to elect a female President. Iceland has since had to implement laws to cap female employment at 60% – in offices. Why? Because, perhaps not surprisingly, people hire themselves; men were being denied access to incomes so laws had to be installed to prevent this. Also, females won’t tend to keep a non-contributing husband and second family in many cultures, where a male will consider it his responsibility as the Head of a Household. Women’s one-family lower-salary needs, gave companies who adopted this “Double Income Family” policy, a substantial salary, pension, and insurance-cost reduction (a substantial social cost externalization). Iceland is dying; in culture, people, and language, with a fertility rate of 1.8. Its population of just 338,000 is survived today by immigration which has been a considerable challenge for Icelandic culture.
Government and business policy in Canada, a country with similar Diversity policies to Iceland, demands open sexism and co-incidental ageism, as it embraces Female Equality programs today. Sexism is encouraged in hiring, and in-home and business lending, economic development investment, and in other programs.
Politicians here are opportunistic – and hope to garner more votes by targeting the country’s largest demographic groups – genders, middle income, working-class, etc.,
Businesses are opportunistic – and see a chance to reduce their pension costs by as much as $1 million per employee. The wholesale practice of firing men before they reach prime pension years is now the norm in Canada.
Whatever their motives, fertility rates here are 1.5 and falling rapidly. Men have stopped offering marriage, women in their twenties don’t own homes, none have families of their own, nor children. Women can find starvation wage jobs more easily than males – just like in the 1930s all over again. Single Family Income Policies were enacted in the 1930s in an effort to recast the obliterated nuclear family and the poverty, starvation, and homelessness that dystopic conditions brought with it.
This birthrate loss to Canada’s population is offset today by unsustainable immigration policies – at rates for which there is insufficient infrastructure. Housing bubbles are runaway created now in major urban cities, in most towns, and also in rural areas across the country.
To explain the problem with “Inclusion” …
Respect and Empathy – are essential policies in any sustainable society, but Diversity and Inclusion – are provably not. Consider that when a consensus agrees that unsustainable policies are important to Harvard University, Harvard is made cliché, unscientific and irrelevant.
Remember that hundreds of generations called themselves “modern”, and yet none of those once-great civilizations survived. Clearly, both the opinion of experts – and the needs of sustainability, must be weighted higher than an inexperienced consensus-opinion. I think the statistic that 40% of Americans believe in Angels is appropriate to recall here. Does consensus in thought contributions make a thing “true” or “best” – of course it does not – and it has a greater chance of dumbing down and embarrassing any group as well.
Canada, the United States and 93% of High-Income nations, share a leadership problem today. Men and women are right and left legs – equally indispensable to one another, and only viable by the other as well. Respect and Empathy – are essential policies in any sustainable society, but Immigration and Diversity is not. No civilization survives without socially responsible policy similarly.
As an aside, policies that are unsustainable can be accommodated when there is a surplus of opportunity and prosperity in a nation, but that is not the case in a mature capitalism as we see today. This is worth repeating because Mature Capitalisms are expensive, dangerous, and preventable – and we have not prevented one today precisely because we don’t adhere to the sage advice of voting for sustainable policy only.
About the Author:
Edward Tilley is a researcher in the field of Sustainable Societies, and the founder of the econometric science of Transition Economics. Find quantitative metrics for Sustainable and Unsustainable Policy at the World at our Hands Report and a thesis-driven correction for voting irresponsibly at ACT-American.com.
An explanation of the sustainable policies proven to turn-around mature capitalisms are explained in ACT Parties
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.