FirstRateCrowd's EIRA

As the single most important technology to counter the negative effects of economic inequality, we need to create the demand for its development and use now.
CLICK HERE to learn more about the EIRA and how it will save humanity by stopping inequality.
CLICK HERE to watch a video on the EIRA.

Posted on: » Wed Sep 11, 2019 8:36 am #31

User avatar
Sterling Volunteer
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:15 pm
Contact:
REFERENCING: Doctor A, Post #25, Posted Apr 21, 2019
Here is my list of major factors that can significantly impact and prevent the Economic Inequality Rating App project from working as predicted. Areas of concern include the future of Democracy, time restrictions due to the technological si...
none

Re: FirstRateCrowd's EIRA

Post by Sterling Volunteer » Wed Sep 11, 2019 8:36 am

I can think of only one other hindrance (perhaps?) to the success of the Economic Inequality Rating App (EIRA) and this has to do with consolidations of companies within industries. An example of this is shown in an Oxfam report indicating the interactions between 10 companies that control the food and beverage industry around the world with their inter-meshing subsidiary connections.

(View the link https://www.dropbox.com/s/axdrfohl1jr1t ... 2.png?dl=0 to get the impressive graphic imagery)

This I believe is not a game changer when it comes to economic inequality ratings but it does muddy the water and is something to consider. There are probably other examples of industry consolidation, such as the banking industry, that have been transformed into just a handful of companies controlling their industry.

From People also ask
What companies control the food industry?
Only 10 companies control almost every large food and beverage brand in the world. These companies — Nestlé, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, Unilever, Danone, General Mills, Kellogg's, Mars, Associated British Foods, and Mondelez — each employ thousands and make billions of dollars in revenue every year.Apr 4, 2017

Business Insider
"These 10 companies control everything you buy"
By Kate Taylor, Apr. 4, 2017
https://www.businessinsider.com/10-comp ... try-2017-3

Although the headline of this article is misleading, because it should state, "Only 10 companies control almost every large food and beverage brand in the world," NOT EVERYTHING, the original Oxfam analysis is a real eye opener.

The EIRA creation team of experts will need to determine just how much each of the downstream subsidiaries causes their own distinct economic inequality rating. There are always varying degrees of control between satellite companies and the parent company each with their own unique set of values and distinct freedoms from parental control. But I would think there will be enough of a distinction between these companies to see differences in economic inequality between the various brands. In the larger picture this may be more of a hassle than an actual hindrance.

~SV~
Times Referenced: 1

Posted on: » Thu Oct 24, 2019 10:35 am #32

User avatar
Doctor A
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:30 pm
Contact:
REFERENCING: Sterling Volunteer, Post #22, Posted Mar 6, 2019
POSTS REGARDING "A GUIDE TO HALTING THE EXTINCTION OF THE HUMAN RACE BY STOPPING ECONOMIC INEQUALITY" BEGIN HERE WITH THIS POST #22.

Doctor A prese...
none

Re: FirstRateCrowd's EIRA

Post by Doctor A » Thu Oct 24, 2019 10:35 am

The premise for the Economic Inequality Rating App (EIRA) is summarized in the following seven basic points found in "The Guide To Saving Humanity." This is located on the navigation bar of the Fight Inequality home page. This Summary Preface makes crystal clear why we need to stop the growth of economic inequality and how the EIRA will be developed to accomplished this.

There is abundant literature to show that new technology is a fundamental driver of economic inequality. Among the following seven basic points below, this impact of new technology on equality will be explained and substantiated.

1) Technological singularity is defined as a hypothetical point in the future when technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unfathomable changes to human civilization. Due to the exponential processing power of the coming super computers, a technological singularity will occur. Advancing at inconceivable rates, it will overwhelm our human capacity to understand it. This rapidly approaching future is expected to create one of either two adverse events. The first is a dystopia, an imagined state or society in which there is great suffering or injustice, typically one that is totalitarian or post-apocalyptic. This new reality will be perverted beyond recognition from that of our present-day existence. The second adverse outcome is that it will create an even greater likelihood of a world causing human extinction.

2) This dismal future is being caused by an inherent difference in brain structure between liberals and conservatives. Scientific research clearly shows that conservatives have a larger amygdala—a brain structure grouping of neurons shown to play a key role in the processing of emotions—that is more prominent in conservatives than in those of a liberal persuasion. In conservatives the larger amygdala incorporates an evolutionary survival mechanism that is more fear based. This excessive fear mechanism manifests itself in the thoughts and actions of conservative individuals causing them to act in ways that promote economic inequality. In other words, it is this fear-based aspect of the conservative brain structure that causes them to advance increased economic inequality in our society.

3) Since the 1970s—spurred on by conservative fear-based policies—economic inequality has dramatically increased. Most of the social and health ills of the world are directly caused by this inequality. Historically economic inequality has been the basis for the collapse of many past civilizations. The United States, with an ever-increasing rate of economic inequality, is well on this same path to self-destruction.

4) As stated above, there is abundant literature to show that, new technology is a fundamental driver of economic inequality. Not only will the top 1% mindset not try to regulate this rapidly advancing new technology, but they will want to generate high profits from it so that they can create even newer technology that will further exacerbate economic inequality in favor of their own interests and at the expense of the wellbeing of the general population. This conservative fear-based mentality places a higher value on profit motive than on welfare for all. This means that conservatives will apply little regulatory control to the coming technological singularity; it will run its course unabated in order to maintain a high profit motive for the few at the top. Consequentially, this quest for profits and a lack of regulations will either bring about a dystopian future of inequality-based suffering and lack of the people’s democratic power or human extinction—or, ultimately, both. To prevent these dire events, we must first stop runaway economic inequality.

5) Almost all economic inequality is initially premised at a subconscious level and occurs with little conscious thought. The proven social psychology of this occurs by placing an individual on a specific tier in the social hierarchy. The gap in social rank between an individual’s lower socio-economic standing and that of those at the top of the hierarchy is what defines economic inequality. Research shows that this inequality manifests itself as toxic to both the individual and society at large. By reducing economic inequality, we can reduce its insidiously progressing poisonous impact upon us all.

6) The proposed Economic Inequality Rating App (EIRA) will rate products, services, and individuals based upon how much economic inequality they produce. A high rating on the EIRA means that the product or service for purchase creates a high amount of economic inequality and should be avoided in favor of a purchase with a lower EIRA rating. This choosing of a company or service with a lower economic inequality rating will transfer wealth from the elite 1% back to those who support the 99% when the product or service is purchased. This reduces economic inequality (without changing any laws or voting anyone into office) simply by giving the consumer accurate information by which to make their purchasing decisions. By having a rating system based solely upon economic inequality parameters, we members of the 99% can make an informed and purposeful decision to reduce economic inequality, which in turn will support all our best interests.

The ratings loaded into the app will be determined by a team of experts based solely upon economic inequality parameters; this differentiates us substantially from other rating systems. The EIRA tells us what product or service to choose solely based upon how much that product or service will reduce economic inequality. Because economic inequality is what causes most of the problems in the world and is at the core of creating many misalignments in other value systems, these other value systems will need to be subordinate to the value of reducing economic inequality.

7) The transfer of wealth from the 1% back to the 99% by use of the EIRA will significantly reduce the nationwide economic inequality experienced in today’s society. This puts power back into the hands of the 99% where it rightfully belongs. Only then will economically based social ills within our society begin to dissipate—including the dire consequences of a realized dystopian reality and ultimate elimination of the human race.

Our future's bleak outcomes are being enhanced by two powerful streams merging together to create the ultimate disaster: the coming technological singularity and increasing economic inequality. Economic inequality creates more new-technology profitability for the 1%, which then creates more uncontrolled economic inequality through further investing in new technology. These two streams—technological singularity and economic inequality—massively feed upon each other. The proposed EIRA can change the trajectory of these negative outcomes for the betterment of all humanity.
Times Referenced: 0

Posted on: » Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:46 pm #33

MaureenCarter
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:19 am
Contact:
REFERENCING: Sterling Volunteer, Post #31, Posted Sep 11, 2019
I can think of only one other hindrance (perhaps?) to the success of the Economic Inequality Rating App (EIRA) and this has to do with consolidations of companies within industries. An example of this is shown in an Oxfam report indicating ...
none

Re: FirstRateCrowd's EIRA

Post by MaureenCarter » Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:46 pm

FIGHT INCOME AND ECONOMIC INEQUALITY: One problem came to mind about the Economic Inequality Rating app but I have already thought of a solution. It may be easier for a team of experts to obtain raw economic inequality rating data from a public rather than a private company. The private organization may be loathe to turn over any such data. In this eventuality the company would be given an extremely high rating such the number 100. This high number would be solely reserved for these types of situations indicating cooperation was not forthcoming and members of the 99% should not use the product or service.
Times Referenced: 1

Posted on: » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:56 pm #34

MaureenCarter
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:19 am
Contact:
REFERENCING: MaureenCarter, Post #33, Posted Nov 16, 2019
FIGHT INCOME AND ECONOMIC INEQUALITY: One problem came to mind about the Economic Inequality Rating app but I have already thought of a solution. It may be easier for a team of experts to obtain raw economic inequality rating data from a ...
none

Re: FirstRateCrowd's EIRA

Post by MaureenCarter » Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:56 pm

An idea crossed my mind regarding the viability of the Economic Inequality Rating App and its role in fighting against income and economic inequality. I foresee educating the public regarding the need to get on board with the EIRA as an impediment. Basically people are reluctant to change their behavior in short order and the project may require a major educational drive in the form of advertisement. I assume this advertisement will need to stress the unity of the 99% over political party line. An alliance between conservatives and liberals will reduce the polarization seen in the USA knowing we have a common cause. We are all in this together and only by being united will we be able to defeat the elite and oligarchs to control our own future. Our forefathers came together to fight the Nazis and politics fell by the wayside. We must do the same. It is a make or break moment to take back our democracy and set the path anew or be crushed beneath the wheels of the new machine.

Doctor A, in his "A Guide To Saving Humanity," estimates the following amount of capital needed to implement the project,
The initial cost to set up this project is high. But in comparison to what the consequences would be due to not setting up the project, this is minuscule. I estimate to set up the app for near full development would cost about $100 million. Out of this amount, creating the database and the advertisement will be the most costly items. The app technology itself for hand held use is already state of the art and can be readily purchased or developed.
Let's suppose 70% of this estimated cost would be needed to create the database leaving $30 million for a national advertisement campaign. Is this enough? I do not know or have expertise in this area. I think a significant amount of donations would be forthcoming if we were to revive the raw energy of the members of the Occupy Wall Street Movement from 2011. This way we could call upon these members of the 99% to kick-start the app providing a quick way to gain traction and donations. From my view, the 2011 OWS movement had an idea as to what they wanted as an end game but did not have a plan to get there. The EIRA would act as a solid bridge as part of a business plan that people can get behind and not just a vague idea that goes nowhere.

I do not want to be misconstrued. A literal resurrection of the OWS movement and bringing it back to life from the ashes is not what we want or need. Instead I am saying there are organizational elements that can be tapped to bring our project forward expeditiously.
Times Referenced: 0

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest