4.33% vs 2.54% May 31, 2016May 30, 2016 Jim Burt: “You may want to keep this on hand for reference. It is a scholarly paper setting out with elaborate documentation and minute calculation what we’ve both been saying for years: The US economy does much better under Democratic presidents than under Republican ones . . .” . . . During the 64 years that make up the core 16 terms, real GDP growth averaged 3.33% at an annual rate. But the average growth rates under Democratic and Republican presidents were starkly different: 4.33% and 2.54% respectively. This 1.79 percentage point gap (henceforth, the “D-R gap”) is astoundingly large relative to the sample mean.4, It implies that over a typical four year presidency the U.S. economy grew by 18.5% when the president was a Democrat, but only by 10.6% when he was a Republican. And since the standard deviations of quarterly growth rates are roughly equal (3.8% for Democrats, 3.9% for Republicans, annualized), Democratic presidents have presided over growth that was faster but not more volatile. . . . ☞ In fairness, “it appears that the Democratic edge stems mainly from more benign oil shocks, superior [productivity], and perhaps greater defense spending and faster growth abroad.” But it sure seems to me — in the broadest strokes — as though Democrats are inclined to drive toward the future while post-Eisenhower Republicans yearn for the past, throwing all but non-military government investment into reverse. Trump may be a different kind of Republican, but even if he should want to build anything other than the military and his wall, he won’t be able to do anything a Republican Congress opposes; and the Republican Congress seems more focused than ever on blocking investing in the future. Trump: So Wrong . . . In So Many Ways Meanwhile, how old is this presidential historian — two?
Dilbert On Trump May 28, 2016May 28, 2016 Here is Dilbert creator Scott Adams on with Bill Maher explaining how Trump wins. One of you writes: “I no longer believe we Democrats are up to parrying Trump.” I don’t see it as bleakly. Based on competence/temperament — and on the policy positions of the two parties — Democrats should sweep November with 85% of the vote. Instead, we may struggle to get even 52%. But if we have the resources, we will win. So I continue to ask everyone I know for 1% of his or her net worth, because the Court, the country, and (given the role we play in the world and the challenges the world faces, climate change and nuclear proliferation prime among them) the whole world is at stake. Still, I will enthusiastically and appreciatively take less than 1%. Click here. Have a great weekend. A deep bow of respect Monday to those who gave 100%.
Reform the Primary Process! (But Nevada Not Rigged – Politifact) May 26, 2016May 24, 2016 Recently, Samantha Bee explained superdelegates. Today, John Oliver explains the primary process generally — a mess for both parties — in the course of which he notes this Politifact finding: Allegations of fraud and misconduct at Nevada Democratic convention unfounded There’s little disagreement that the convention was chaotic. PolitiFact Nevada was at the convention and saw it firsthand. But does the Sanders campaign’s complaints have merit? . . . [T]here were no last minute rule changes sprung on convention-goers — the rules had been publicly available weeks in advance, largely unchanged for three presidential cycles, and given to both campaigns. . . . Although several videos from the event appear to have louder “nays” than “yeas,” both preliminary and final delegate counts showed that Clinton supporters outnumbered Sanders supporters in the room. . . . The howls of unfairness and corruption by the Sanders campaign during Nevada’s state Democratic Convention can’t change the simple fact that Clinton’s supporters simply turned out in larger numbers and helped her solidify her delegate lead in Nevada. There’s no clear evidence the state party “hijacked” the process or ignored “regular procedure.” We rate this claim False. By all means read it all if you’re unpersuaded or want the details. (E.g., the 58 rejected Sanders delegates? Only eight actually came to the convention, so even if they’d been seated, it wouldn’t have made any difference.) Bernie is terrific. Hillary is terrific. Both have worked a lifetime toward the same goals: a better shake for the middle class and the downtrodden. The primaries have not been rigged to produce three million more votes for one than the other. We should work our little hearts out to elect whichever gets the nomination because, as Bernie so excellently said, on their worst days either one of them is 100 times better than the alternative. But yes: as John Oliver proposes near the end of his piece, let’s set February 2 to sit down and fix the system! In the meantime — as he goes on to urge — let’s all tweet at the President of Chechnya, who has lost his cat.
Bonds, Beer, and Beards May 25, 2016May 25, 2016 50-YEAR BONDS Read this: the compelling case for issuing longer-term Treasury bonds at today’s low interest rates. IMPORTANT BEER NEWS! Watch this: edible six-pack rings that feed sea animals rather than killing them, made from the remnants of the brewing process. (And no: cutting up the plastic rings doesn’t solve the problem.) I trust Coke and Pepsi are also working on this. UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME John Seiffer: “I couldn’t stop thinking about two things when I read last Wednesday’s post. First, Universal Basic Income. Second, the correct use of fewer versus less.” ☞ Wednesday’s post was about how we won’t need a lot of folks to provide the world’s basic goods and services — so in theory, we should all have lots more time to relax and enjoy life. But how do we spread the wealth that five thousand generations of striving and sacrifice have put within reach? Fascinating article on Universal Basic Income here. And yes! Fewer, for things you can count — sheep, pencils, beards; less, for stuff you can’t — wool, graphite, facial hair. (Was it clear I was just quoting someone else for most of Wednesday’s post? On the website, excerpts are properly indented and shaded. By email delivery, I’m afraid they are hard to distinguish. I haven’t figured out how best to fix that.)
Sam Bee On Superdelegates May 24, 2016May 22, 2016 As good as I think Tad Davine’s explanation of superdelegates is — posted here Friday — let’s face it: Samantha Bee is the sharpest, funniest human currently breathing . . . and these six minutes, in case you missed them, will get your day off to a wonderful start, whichever candidate you support. (Thanks, Paul.) Enjoy! (Tomorrow: important news about beer.)
Let’s Not And Say We Did May 22, 2016May 22, 2016 You’ve probably seen this by now? An Exhausted Democracy: Donald Trump and the New American Nationalism: Is America capable of preventing Donald Trump from coming to power? Although the candidate is himself no fascist, his campaign has certainly shown plenty of parallels. . . . “The use of ethnic stereotypes and exploitation of fear of foreigners is directly out of the fascist’s recipe book,” fascism expert Robert Paxton recently told the online magazine Slate. According to Paxton, Trump’s campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again,” sounds exactly like the slogans of fascist movements. . . . . . . This aggressive nationalism is paired with an absurd authoritarianism. Indeed, there is something operatic about Trump promising his voters that after he wins the election, his first official act will be to call the CEO of Ford and force him to move his auto plants from Mexico back to the United States within 48 hours . . . Or perhaps you’ve seen Robert Kagan’s piece in the Washington Post: This is how fascism comes to America. . . We’re supposed to believe that Trump’s support stems from economic stagnation or dislocation. Maybe some of it does. But what Trump offers his followers are not economic remedies — his proposals change daily. What he offers is an attitude, an aura of crude strength and machismo, a boasting disrespect for the niceties of the democratic culture that he claims, and his followers believe, has produced national weakness and incompetence. His incoherent and contradictory utterances have one thing in common: They provoke and play on feelings of resentment and disdain, intermingled with bits of fear, hatred and anger. His public discourse consists of attacking or ridiculing a wide range of “others” — Muslims, Hispanics, women, Chinese, Mexicans, Europeans, Arabs, immigrants, refugees — whom he depicts either as threats or as objects of derision. His program, such as it is, consists chiefly of promises to get tough with foreigners and people of nonwhite complexion. He will deport them, bar them, get them to knuckle under, make them pay up or make them shut up. . . . In this context, Trump’s bedside reading may not be completely irrelevant. My fear is that people will vote for him simply out of fascination to see how it will all turn out. We love a good story, even if it’s a disaster film. Maybe a strongman really can come in and just destroy ISIS in a few weeks, as he says he will. (He knows how to do it but hasn’t shared this knowledge with the Pentagon because he doesn’t want ISIS destroyed yet. And he might not share it if we don’t elect him, because why should he if he’s not president?) Maybe a strongman really can win a trade war with China and force Apple to pay a million Americans $40,000 a year to replace a million Chinese working for $5,000. (But with the price of Apple products suddenly gone through the roof, why wouldn’t consumers simply buy smart phones for half the price made in China by someone else?) (And instead of $40,000, might Apple pay only the $7.25-an-hour minimum wage Trump thinks is already too high?) We are the victims, living under the boot of terrible deals made with the Mexicans and Chinese, much as Depression-era Germans once suffered under the terrible deals made to end World War I. But if we have someone finally strong enough to stand up to Mexico, we can make America great again. It’s hard not to get carried away with sarcasm, so I’ll stop — with this plea: Hollywood! Studio City! HBO! We need all of you to rush out a slew of imaginative blockbusters through which to live out four years of Trump on screen without having to live them out for real. The ultimate, “Let”s not and say we did.” Scenes of the Mexicans politely declining to pay for the wall, and the Donald turning red in the face as he belitttles Mexico’s president (intercut quick takes of his demeaning nicknames for other world leaders) . . . of Congress blocking imposition of 45% tariffs (or, worse still, acceding to them) . . . of his threatening default on our Debt so convincingly that some short-seller is able to ignite a global panic that sends today’s tepid economy into a true tailspin (how quickly we forget what really bad economic times are) . . . of his vowing to get the 2018 version of Bin Laden “dead or alive” (but failing to do so) . . . of his taking the bait of Islamic terrorists and — with the most patriotic of intentions — leading us into a war even than more disastrous than the one that our last MBA-son-of-a-wealthy-Republican-who-won-the-White-House-without-being-able-to-name-the-president-of-Pakistan-(which-we -kinda-liked-because-we-couldn’t-either) gave us. Bernie and Donald and Hillary — and you and I — are all correct: the country is not where it should be. Its infrastructure is crumbling. The middle class is struggling. Student debt is crushing. Inequality has become obscene. But don’t blame the Mexicans or the Chinese or our “stupid, stupid leaders” for this. It’s much more direct than that. Blame the people who blocked the American Jobs Act that would have created millions of good jobs revitalizing infrastructure. Blame the people who slashed tax rates on billionaires while blocking increases to the minimum wage. Blame the people who refuse to allow federal student debt to be refinanced at today’s low rates. There is a simple solution the other side desperately doesn’t want justifiably frustrated Americans to see: Just tell all those obstructionists November 8: “You’re fired.” And, while you’re at it, elect a well-respected world leader — like our current president or his Democratic predecessor — president. Millions will be employed rebuilding our infrastructure . . . wages will rise . . . college will become more affordable . . . it will be become easier to vote but harder to buy guns without a background check . . . and the world will breathe a huge sign of relief that America is back, broken free from its gridlock, once again leading the world in a steady, rational way.
This is how fascism comes to America. . . We’re supposed to believe that Trump’s support stems from economic stagnation or dislocation. Maybe some of it does. But what Trump offers his followers are not economic remedies — his proposals change daily. What he offers is an attitude, an aura of crude strength and machismo, a boasting disrespect for the niceties of the democratic culture that he claims, and his followers believe, has produced national weakness and incompetence. His incoherent and contradictory utterances have one thing in common: They provoke and play on feelings of resentment and disdain, intermingled with bits of fear, hatred and anger. His public discourse consists of attacking or ridiculing a wide range of “others” — Muslims, Hispanics, women, Chinese, Mexicans, Europeans, Arabs, immigrants, refugees — whom he depicts either as threats or as objects of derision. His program, such as it is, consists chiefly of promises to get tough with foreigners and people of nonwhite complexion. He will deport them, bar them, get them to knuckle under, make them pay up or make them shut up. . . .
Rigged? May 20, 2016May 21, 2016 ALL THE WAY Don’t miss “All The Way” with Bryan Cranston as LBJ premiering tomorrow at 8pm on HBO. So good. One of the civil rights leaders portrayed in the film, Bob Moses, was my eighth grade math teacher! NOT RIGGED! On the set of “Morning Joe” recently, everyone was buying into the theme that the Democratic primaries have been rigged, most recently in Nevada. This is distressing because it’s untrue. At least in the sense I understand the term “rigged.” I.e., something currently being done intentionally to affect the outcome — versus rules long-since baked into the system that may be unfair or stupid (like Idaho having as many senators as California) but that was not the result of bad actors today (what were the Founders thinking?!) There are several aspects to this. The debates, specific state-party rules, superdelegates . . . Start with that one — superdelegates — because I know it best. And am one. As I wrote in February, here is Bernie’s own senior adviser, Tad Devine, explaining why we have superdelegates — and why, in his youth, he helped create them. Whether or not you agree they are a good idea — I think they are — surely they were not created, decades ago, intentionally to keep Bernie from getting the nomination. The irony is that, after much decrying of the potential for superdelegates to override the will of the pledged delegates, some Sanders supporters now argue that we should override the popular primary vote and the pledged-delegate count, because Bernie polls better than Hillary against Trump, or because he better represents the will of the people. So the superdelegates should not rig the game for one candidate — unless it’s their candidate. Paul Begala yesterday tweeted: @HillaryClinton has won 56.5% of the vote, but received just 54.2% of pledged delegates. If the system’s rigged, it’s rigged against her. The DNC is neutral. I am an admirer of both candidates. If Bernie wins the a majority of the pledged delegates — although that now seems unlikely — I expect he will be our nominee. My hope is that people will watch Tad’s explanation and recognize that, whatever you may think of superdelegates, they were not created to rig the system against dark horses like Barack Obama or Bernie Sanders — and have thus far never overridden the will of the pledged delegates. I am no expert on state party primaries and caucuses, but here are some facts posted in February by the DNC’s Patrice Taylor about Iowa and New Hampshire. And here is the letter the Nevada party sent the DNC describing, in detail, what happened there. Read it and judge for yourself whether it sounds reasonable. The “data breach” incident that led the DNC to briefly block the Sanders campaign access to its own data was real (as reported here); was not matched by similar O’Malley or Clinton wrongdoing; would presumably have made Sanders supporters crazy if the shoe had been on the other foot; and did not block access to their fundraising data — indeed, proved a fundraising bonanza. That said, it’s important always to note, as the DNC did at the time: Bernie himself was not complicit in any way whatsoever. In any event, the whole thing was resolved in less than a day. Finally, in context, and to my mind, the debate schedule seemed reasonable when it was set. That context changed, and debates were added. In hindsight, the focus may have been too much on defeating the Republicans and shaping the Court (because that was and remains the overriding objective) — I was not party to these discussions. But even if the debate schedule was too limited, the town-halls and forums and Sunday show interviews available to Lincoln Chafee, Hillary Clinton, Martin O’Malley, Bernie Sanders, and Jim Webb were always entirely unlimited — and not limiting each thought to 30 or 60 or 90 seconds may allow each candidate to get his or her message out better anyway. As for the “weekend” and “cable” aspects of the debate schedules, it is my understanding that networks were unwilling to give prime time weekday slots to either party — so all the network debates were done on weekends. The cable debates were all done on week nights. (I haven’t fact-checked this; but I think this is right.) Republicans did schedule far more debates; but they also had more than three times as many candidates to sort through, which arguably required more air time. My point here is not to suggest that every aspect of the process has been perfect. But I do suggest that the idea the whole thing has been rigged is at the very least wildly overdone — and plays into the hands of Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, and the late great Antonin Scalia, among so many others who hope to keep the minimum wage at $7.25, block comprehensive immigration reform, prevent the refinancing of student loans, repeal Obamacare, ignore climate change, eliminate the estate tax on billionheirs, defund Planned Parenthood, block ENDA, and all the rest. Whoever wins the Democratic nomination, we need to remember what Bernie so excellently said: even on their worst days, either one of our candidates is 100 times better than the alternative.
The World Turned Upside Down May 19, 2016 Electricity! Computers! Flight! Genomics! Technology is making it possible — theoretically — for everyone to lead a comfortable life. All 7.5 billion of us. But can we humans — hard-wired to be selfish — find a way to cooperate and make it happen? To spread the wealth modern technology allows? Wealth that’s the product not so much of your work or mine — though you and I work hard — but rather of thousands of generations who suffered and scrimped and struggled and starved and itched and smelled and slaughtered and built — and invented, and experimented, and accreted knowledge — until all of a sudden, in the last couple of seconds, really, it has all come together? We already don’t need a lot of farmers. We soon won’t need cab drivers or truck drivers or tax preparers or . . . well, read this mind-bending piece by Aagam Shah: In 1998, Kodak had 170,000 employees and sold 85% of all photo paper worldwide. Within just a few years, their business model disappeared and they got bankrupt. What happened to Kodak will happen in a lot of industries in the next 10 years – and most people don’t see it coming. Did you think in 1998 that 3 years later you would never take pictures on paper film again? Yet digital cameras were invented in 1975. The first ones only had 10,000 pixels, but followed Moore’s law. So as with all exponential technologies, it was a disappointment for a long time, before it became way superior and got mainstream in only a few short years. It will now happen with Artificial Intelligence, health, autonomous and electric cars, education, 3D printing, agriculture and jobs. Welcome to the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Welcome to the Exponential Age. Software will disrupt most traditional industries in the next 5-10 years. Uber is just a software tool, they don’t own any cars, and are now the biggest taxi company in the world. Airbnb is now the biggest hotel company in the world, although they don’t own any properties. Artificial Intelligence: Computers become exponentially better in understanding the world. This year, a computer beat the best Go player in the world, 10 years earlier than expected. In the US, young lawyers already don’t get jobs. Because of IBM Watson, you can get legal advice (so far for more or less basic stuff) within seconds, with 90% accuracy compared with 70% accuracy when done by humans. So if you study law, stop immediately. There will be 90% less lawyers in the future, only specialists will remain. Watson already helps nurses diagnosing cancer, 4 times more accurate than human nurses. Facebook now has a pattern recognition software that can recognize faces better than humans. In 2030, computers will become more intelligent than humans. Autonomous cars: In 2018 the first self driving cars will appear for the public. Around 2020, the complete industry will start to be disrupted. You don’t want to own a car anymore. You will call a car with your phone, it will show up at your location and drive you to your destination. You will not need to park it, you only pay for the driven distance and can be productive while driving. Our kids will never get a driver’s licence and will never own a car. It will change the cities, because we will need 90-95% less cars for that. We can transform former parking space into parks. 1,2 million people die each year in car accidents worldwide. We now have one accident every 100,000 km, with autonomous driving that will drop to one accident in 10 million km. That will save a million lives each year. Most car companies might become bankrupt. Traditional car companies try the evolutionary approach and just build a better car, while tech companies (Tesla, Apple, Google) will do the revolutionary approach and build a computer on wheels. I spoke to a lot of engineers from Volkswagen and Audi; they are completely terrified of Tesla. Insurance companies will have massive trouble because without accidents, the insurance will become 100x cheaper. Their car insurance business model will disappear. Real estate will change. Because if you can work while you commute, people will move further away to live in a more beautiful neighborhood. Electric cars will become mainstream until 2020. Cities will be less noisy because all cars will run on electric. Electricity will become incredibly cheap and clean: Solar production has been on an exponential curve for 30 years, but you can only now see the impact. Last year, more solar energy was installed worldwide than fossil. The price for solar will drop so much that all coal companies will be out of business by 2025. With cheap electricity comes cheap and abundant water. Desalination now only needs 2kWh per cubic meter. We don’t have scarce water in most places, we only have scarce drinking water. Imagine what will be possible if anyone can have as much clean water as he wants, for nearly no cost. Health: The Tricorder X prize will be announced this year. There will be companies who will build a medical device (called the “Tricorder” from Star Trek) that works with your phone, which takes your retina scan, your blood sample and you breath into it. It then analyses 54 biomarkers that will identify nearly any disease. It will be cheap, so in a few years everyone on this planet will have access to world class medicine, nearly for free. 3D printing: The price of the cheapest 3D printer came down from $18,000 to $400 within 10 years. In the same time, it became 100 times faster. All major shoe companies started 3D printing shoes. Spare airplane parts are already 3D printed in remote airports. The space station now has a printer that eliminates the need for the large amount of spare parts they used to have in the past. At the end of this year, new smartphones will have 3D scanning possibilities. You can then 3D scan your feet and print your perfect shoe at home. In China, they already 3D printed a complete 6-storey office building. By 2027, 10% of everything that’s being produced will be 3D printed. Business opportunities: If you think of a niche you want to go in, ask yourself: “in the future, do you think we will have that?” and if the answer is yes, how can you make that happen sooner? If it doesn’t work with your phone, forget the idea. And any idea designed for success in the 20th century is doomed to failure in the 21st century. Work: 70-80% of jobs will disappear in the next 20 years. There will be a lot of new jobs, but it is not clear if there will be enough new jobs in such a small time. Agriculture: There will be a $100 agricultural robot in the future. Farmers in 3rd world countries can then become managers of their field instead of working all days on their fields. Aeroponics will need much less water. The first petri dish produced veal is now available and will be cheaper than cow produced veal in 2018. Right now, 30% of all agricultural surfaces is used for cows. Imagine if we don’t need that space anymore. There are several startups who will bring insect protein to the market shortly. It contains more protein than meat. It will be labeled as “alternative protein source” (because most people still reject the idea of eating insects). There is an app called “moodies” which can already tell in which mood you are. By 2020 there will be apps that can tell by your facial expressions if you are lying. Imagine a political debate where it’s being displayed when they are telling the truth and when not. Bitcoin will become mainstream this year and might even become the default reserve currency. Longevity: Right now, the average lifespan increases by 3 months per year. Four years ago, the life span used to be 79 years, now it’s 80 years. The increase itself is increasing and by 2036, there will be more than one year increase per year. [Ray Kurzweil predicted it would have happened by now. Projections like these are, admittedly, not precise or guaranteed. — AT] So we all might live for a long long time, probably way more than 100. Education: The cheapest smartphones are already at $10 in Africa and Asia. By 2020, 70% of all humans will own a smartphone. That means, everyone has the same access to world class education. This may not all be on the mark — it doubtless won’t be. But “look around, look around, at how lucky we are to be alive right now” — the world turned upside down. Will we be able to find a happy balance between giving people a decent minimum standard of living with lots of time off, if they want it — yet incentives to work hard and imaginatively and the opportunity to acquire fortunes — without making the poets, philosophers, surfers and street mimes feel “less than” because they’re not among the handful of people who may ultimately be required to orchestrate the machines and renewable energy required to provide all our basic goods and services? (And do all this without killing each other or rendering Earth uninhabitable?) Just asking.
Software will disrupt most traditional industries in the next 5-10 years. Uber is just a software tool, they don’t own any cars, and are now the biggest taxi company in the world. Airbnb is now the biggest hotel company in the world, although they don’t own any properties. Artificial Intelligence: Computers become exponentially better in understanding the world. This year, a computer beat the best Go player in the world, 10 years earlier than expected. In the US, young lawyers already don’t get jobs. Because of IBM Watson, you can get legal advice (so far for more or less basic stuff) within seconds, with 90% accuracy compared with 70% accuracy when done by humans. So if you study law, stop immediately. There will be 90% less lawyers in the future, only specialists will remain. Watson already helps nurses diagnosing cancer, 4 times more accurate than human nurses. Facebook now has a pattern recognition software that can recognize faces better than humans. In 2030, computers will become more intelligent than humans. Autonomous cars: In 2018 the first self driving cars will appear for the public. Around 2020, the complete industry will start to be disrupted. You don’t want to own a car anymore. You will call a car with your phone, it will show up at your location and drive you to your destination. You will not need to park it, you only pay for the driven distance and can be productive while driving. Our kids will never get a driver’s licence and will never own a car. It will change the cities, because we will need 90-95% less cars for that. We can transform former parking space into parks. 1,2 million people die each year in car accidents worldwide. We now have one accident every 100,000 km, with autonomous driving that will drop to one accident in 10 million km. That will save a million lives each year. Most car companies might become bankrupt. Traditional car companies try the evolutionary approach and just build a better car, while tech companies (Tesla, Apple, Google) will do the revolutionary approach and build a computer on wheels. I spoke to a lot of engineers from Volkswagen and Audi; they are completely terrified of Tesla. Insurance companies will have massive trouble because without accidents, the insurance will become 100x cheaper. Their car insurance business model will disappear. Real estate will change. Because if you can work while you commute, people will move further away to live in a more beautiful neighborhood. Electric cars will become mainstream until 2020. Cities will be less noisy because all cars will run on electric. Electricity will become incredibly cheap and clean: Solar production has been on an exponential curve for 30 years, but you can only now see the impact. Last year, more solar energy was installed worldwide than fossil. The price for solar will drop so much that all coal companies will be out of business by 2025. With cheap electricity comes cheap and abundant water. Desalination now only needs 2kWh per cubic meter. We don’t have scarce water in most places, we only have scarce drinking water. Imagine what will be possible if anyone can have as much clean water as he wants, for nearly no cost. Health: The Tricorder X prize will be announced this year. There will be companies who will build a medical device (called the “Tricorder” from Star Trek) that works with your phone, which takes your retina scan, your blood sample and you breath into it. It then analyses 54 biomarkers that will identify nearly any disease. It will be cheap, so in a few years everyone on this planet will have access to world class medicine, nearly for free. 3D printing: The price of the cheapest 3D printer came down from $18,000 to $400 within 10 years. In the same time, it became 100 times faster. All major shoe companies started 3D printing shoes. Spare airplane parts are already 3D printed in remote airports. The space station now has a printer that eliminates the need for the large amount of spare parts they used to have in the past. At the end of this year, new smartphones will have 3D scanning possibilities. You can then 3D scan your feet and print your perfect shoe at home. In China, they already 3D printed a complete 6-storey office building. By 2027, 10% of everything that’s being produced will be 3D printed. Business opportunities: If you think of a niche you want to go in, ask yourself: “in the future, do you think we will have that?” and if the answer is yes, how can you make that happen sooner? If it doesn’t work with your phone, forget the idea. And any idea designed for success in the 20th century is doomed to failure in the 21st century. Work: 70-80% of jobs will disappear in the next 20 years. There will be a lot of new jobs, but it is not clear if there will be enough new jobs in such a small time. Agriculture: There will be a $100 agricultural robot in the future. Farmers in 3rd world countries can then become managers of their field instead of working all days on their fields. Aeroponics will need much less water. The first petri dish produced veal is now available and will be cheaper than cow produced veal in 2018. Right now, 30% of all agricultural surfaces is used for cows. Imagine if we don’t need that space anymore. There are several startups who will bring insect protein to the market shortly. It contains more protein than meat. It will be labeled as “alternative protein source” (because most people still reject the idea of eating insects). There is an app called “moodies” which can already tell in which mood you are. By 2020 there will be apps that can tell by your facial expressions if you are lying. Imagine a political debate where it’s being displayed when they are telling the truth and when not. Bitcoin will become mainstream this year and might even become the default reserve currency. Longevity: Right now, the average lifespan increases by 3 months per year. Four years ago, the life span used to be 79 years, now it’s 80 years. The increase itself is increasing and by 2036, there will be more than one year increase per year. [Ray Kurzweil predicted it would have happened by now. Projections like these are, admittedly, not precise or guaranteed. — AT] So we all might live for a long long time, probably way more than 100. Education: The cheapest smartphones are already at $10 in Africa and Asia. By 2020, 70% of all humans will own a smartphone. That means, everyone has the same access to world class education.
$1 Billion In Hot Chocolate? May 18, 2016May 18, 2016 I would like to argue as follows: I am not a complete idiot. I feel compelled to make this case because a business-school classmate recently sent me this link, from the conservative group Judicial Watch, with a friendly mocking snicker. The snicker, in fairness, was appropriate. given Judicial Watch’s summary of an email I had written to the incoming Secretary of State years before (apparently one of the 55,000 pages now being pored over): Tobias recommended serving a billion dollars a year of “complementary hot chocolate, iced tea, and lemonade” to international tourists standing in line at U.S. airports. According to Tobias, the refreshments would generate “substantial international goodwill.” The State Department records indicate Abedin printed out and forwarded the emails. When I read this, I panicked — had I really misspelled “complimentary”? Agh! But also, how colossally dumb! Bush had handed the new administration a world teetering on the brink of depression and I was recommending . . . hot chocolate??? I clicked the hyperlink — a billion dollars — and there, exposed to the light of 2016, was my private little suggestion. (Click it again to read without strain.) I still think it was a good idea. So there! (And no, I had not misspelled “complimentary.” That was Judicial Watch’s contribution.) (And yes, now I’m thinking: iced tea and blue grass bands for TSA lines longer than 20 minutes?)
Cuban On Trump May 17, 2016May 16, 2016 This is great. (And I ran it by a Trump golfing buddy. His one-word response? “Yep.”) From Business Insider, by my pal Josh Barro: MARK CUBAN: Trump is guy in bar who will say anything to get laid Billionaire investor and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban isn’t holding back his opinion about his frenemy, Donald Trump. “There’s that guy who’ll walk into the bar and say anything to get laid. That’s Donald Trump right now to a T. But it’s all of us who are going to get f—–,” Cuban said during an interview at the SkyBridge Alternatives (SALT) Conference in Las Vegas on Thursday night. “We go way back, and it’s a love-hate relationship,” he said when conference organizer Anthony Scaramucci asked Cuban about the Republican presidential candidate. He continued: “Everybody’s got that friend that you just shake your head at. He’s that guy who’d get drunk and fall over all the time, or just says dumb s— all the time, but he’s your friend.” To be clear, this is not a literal description: Trump can be embarrassing, but he famously doesn’t drink alcohol, so he’s not likely to fall over drunk. Cuban also offered Hillary Clinton some advice on how to run against Trump: Get a running mate like Mark Cuban. “I would get a vice-presidential candidate who’s someone like me who would just throw bombs at Donald,” he said. “And I would be like, ‘Donald, I like you. We’re friends, but you’re a goddamn airhead.'” Cuban praised Trump for tapping into the concerns of many ordinary Americans, but said that he did not have solutions for the problems he’s identified. “Being empathetic is one thing, and that’s good,” he said. “But given the office he’s running for, trying to come up with a solution is even more important. And I don’t think he’s there yet.”