Thread: Dr Michio Kaku - America Has a secret weapon

I like Michio. But I much more enjoy his "space" related programms.

I have seen this video before(in fact that entire talk its taken from). We are in a lot of trouble here in the US but one of her strengths is our diversity. We have a huge country both population wise and size wise, and a huge mix of different kind of people. So I think there will always be some people in some parts of the countries still doing stuff to improve our country, even if as a whole we are being dragged down by bad education.

Could someone explain to this idiot how the fact that most of our PHDs are foreign born is good for educating Americans?

This kind of reminds me of Bill Gates testifying before Congress back in 2008; where he made the claims that the software industry/Silicon Valley needs more H-1B Visas because technology is analogous to the Olympics and the U.S. needs unparalleled tech-minded people. Of course this was complete b.s. used to rationalize replacing American workers with low-cost foreign labor. People like Gates abused the loopholes of H-1B and perpetuated the myth of "acute deficiencies" of skilled engineers, skilled programmers and skilled IT professionals or domestic college IT graduates in America. Gates would have us believe that H-1B workers are resplendent top-shelf intellectuals holding doctorates, however the reality of this is, the majority of H-1B workers have nothing more than undergraduate training. Employing cheap foreign labor helps big fat corporations make big fat profits, because they like to stay fat like that and my country is filled with a bunch of Fat Jacks.

tommo, do you have a link to the whole talk?

No, just came across it on youtube. I assume that is the only part of the talk about that topic, since it seemed like some sort of debate/talk thing between him and the other guy there.

And the entire cause of this problem, watch this

Originally Posted by Alric

I have seen this video before(in fact that entire talk its taken from). We are in a lot of trouble here in the US but one of her strengths is our diversity. We have a huge country both population wise and size wise, and a huge mix of different kind of people. So I think there will always be some people in some parts of the countries still doing stuff to improve our country, even if as a whole we are being dragged down by bad education.

I've heard this phrase parroted so much, but does anyone actually think about what they are saying? Is diversity really such a great strength that is is more important than having a functioning sanitation system, for example If anything it should be neutral at best, but in practise it is a strong weakness. I think a good thing about europe is that the socialist brainwashing hasn't quite reached the levels seen in the US yet, although that is only a matter of time.

The whole root of the problem is actually in the lack of equality in america, if there was such thing as equality there would be less ghettos, more accesibe college fees, higher standard of basic education, free basic medical costs for everyone. Look at denmark or japan for example were nearly al people earn around the same.

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

This kind of reminds me of Bill Gates testifying before Congress back in 2008; where he made the claims that the software industry/Silicon Valley needs more H-1B Visas because technology is analogous to the Olympics and the U.S. needs unparalleled tech-minded people. Of course this was complete b.s. used to rationalize replacing American workers with low-cost foreign labor. People like Gates abused the loopholes of H-1B and perpetuated the myth of "acute deficiencies" of skilled engineers, skilled programmers and skilled IT professionals or domestic college IT graduates in America. Gates would have us believe that H-1B workers are resplendent top-shelf intellectuals holding doctorates, however the reality of this is, the majority of H-1B workers have nothing more than undergraduate training. Employing cheap foreign labor helps big fat corporations make big fat profits, because they like to stay fat like that and my country is filled with a bunch of Fat Jacks.

This is a problem with your country's minimum wage, not Bill Gates.

It isn't like that is an actual choice, a functioning sanitation system or diversity. It isn't one or the other. If you compare two countries that have the same level of development the US has an edge because of that diversity. It is definitely a major strength, because there are so many different views on things the best will always come up on top. While if everyone is the same, you get only one view and if that view is a poor one, then its tough luck.

Originally Posted by Marvo

This is a problem with your minimum wage, not Bill Gates.

I don't make minimum wage so I don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Originally Posted by Alric

It isn't like that is an actual choice, a functioning sanitation system or diversity. It isn't one or the other. If you compare two countries that have the same level of development the US has an edge because of that diversity. It is definitely a major strength, because there are so many different views on things the best will always come up on top. While if everyone is the same, you get only one view and if that view is a poor one, then its tough luck.

How in any way is it a strength? How is America better than any other country? (spoiler alert: It's worse in almost every aspect)
I highly suggest you watch the video dutchraptor posted if you haven't already.

Of course it is a strength, if it wasn't for that the US would probably be a third world nation by now. If you look at the most popular views of things they often suck horribly, and the average person in the US has some real problems. The fact that there are other smarter people around is the only thing propping up our country. Like Kaku pointed out, if we didn't have smart people coming in from all around the world, a lot of the technological sectors in the US would have collapsed by now.

Right but it's only a positive because the U.S sucks so much.
I may have misunderstood your post. I thought you were saying income inequality is a good thing because it creates diversity.

My duty is now realized: I must study hard and save America.

Originally Posted by tommo

Right but it's only a positive because the U.S sucks so much.
I may have misunderstood your post. I thought you were saying income inequality is a good thing because it creates diversity.

He's saying diversity in general is a good thing and it's one of America's strengths. His post didn't have anything to do with financial inequality. .-.

Originally Posted by dutchraptor

And the entire cause of this problem, watch this

Hmm, but how do you think Japan's and Denmark's (most equal countries) very homogeneous society influences equality compared to the UK's and USA's (two of the most inequal) very heterogeneous society? In fact, all those Nordic countries are very homogeneous, no? And happen to be the most equal. Contrast that with New Zealand, USA, UK, and Australia - heterogeneous and inequal.

Originally Posted by Wolfwood

Hmm, but how do you think Japan's and Denmark's very homogeneous society influences equality compared to the UK's and USA's very heterogeneous society?

Is it mere coincidence that the former two are regarded as most equal and the latter two as inequal? :/

Well I believe that whether a society is homogeneous or heterogeneous is largely determined by income inequality. Along with equality comes equal rights, now in the UK and U.S.A there has always been a huge income inequality because they started out this way. Unlike in denmark and japan were over time a natural communism has developed.

You still have to ask:

Would income equality in a heterogeneous society lead to social cohesion, less crime, more trust, and equality in general (from the bottom-up)? Those are some of the factors he was addressing.

In such societies, people are divided by political beliefs, ethnicity, culture, religion etc... and so political stability and social integration seems like wishful thinking -- full of in-group/out-group conflict, manifesting as acts of crime and distrust, for instance. Contrast that with a homogeneous society like Japan where everyone is basically in the 'in-group'.

Not sure where I'm going with this.... I'm just noting that it's easy to look at a homogeneous society, like Japan, and go: ''oh they're equal, trustful, have less crime etc, we can do that too -- what's going on?'', without realising that it's far more complex than mere income equality/inequality in a heterogeneous society.

But all of this is caused by have a poor system in place to begin with. In america companies have way to much control, people with an average income cannot afford to go to anything more than community school, they can't afford much required medicine, they have a poor understanding of healthy eating. If the millions of people in america just earned a little more, or the extreme prices went down things would straighten themselves out. Conflicts between race and religion mainly begin because these people have a poor quality of life. Currently the situation is kinda locked, the rich are very rich and unwilling to help the poor who are too poor to help themselves. They are so poor in fact that they never got a good education which makes it even harder for them to escape the ghettos etc

I agree that income equality would have far-reaching positive effects on society as a whole, and that it would alter the inequality in general. However, those other factors inherent in a heterogeneous society will prevent it from reaching a level of equality found in Japan and the Nordic countries. That is to say, income equality will have great, but 'limited' effects (by limited, I mean I don't believe it'll affect all those factors shown in that video) -- simply because differing religions, political beliefs, and cultures are enough to muddy that.

It is certainly a step in the right direction; however, changing the system (top-down) won't change the in-group/out-group conflict rooted in diverse political beliefs, ethnicities, religions and cultures (that needs a lot of bottom-up work). If changing a system could cure this.... I'd call it magic and be truly amazed. I just think that we can't ignore the apparent correlation between homogeneity and equality, and heterogeneity and inequality. If there is no correlation in what I'm saying, then all what I've said can be considered bollocks, but it seems like there is...

I'm basically focusing on how to cure it.... and it seems the biggest hurdle is how we could get everyone of different kinds within a heterogeneous society into the same 'in-group'. I think, naturally, it'll happen extremely slowly (bottom-up) through generations and generations of young people with minds not coloured by a particular belief system and racial interbreeding (leading to societal stability), and that societies like Japan.... will fall behind (destabilize) when immigration starts to become more widespread there.

Anyway, I'm taking this thread off-topic, so I'll stop.

Originally Posted by GavinGill

He's saying diversity in general is a good thing and it's one of America's strengths. His post didn't have anything to do with financial inequality. .-.

Well obviously I realise that.

Wolfwood - You're arguing from a point which has not been shown to be true.
Do you have proof that countries with more diverse cultures or races have higher inequality or higher rates of homicide, mental illness etc.?

I don't think it has as much of an effect as you think.

With proper education allowed to everyone through income equality, they will learn other people are still in the "in group" as you call it.
We are all in the human group. We learn this through the internet, mostly, even though we have high income inequality.
But lots of people don't use it or don't have access to it. Sort of besides the point; my point is just that education will prevent that problem from arising in future generations.

I was just talking with someone the other day who thought similarly, that people of diverse cultures in one place can never achieve peace or equality.

Naa, no direct evidence.

The video shows that countries with low income inequality (Japan, Denmark, Finland, etc) have lower rates of mental illness, homocides, distrust etc than countries with high income inequality (USA, UK, Australia, New Zealand). I'm simply pointing out, speculatively, that those countries with low income inequality also happen to be largely homogeneous societies (Japan, Denmark, Finland, etc) and those with high income inequality also happen to be largely heterogeneous societies (USA, UK, Australia, New Zealand).

That observation seems to be the case at the polars (the middle is a bit fuzzy); however, whether that means anything, I've no real idea.





This is pure opinion: I don't believe people of diverse cultures can't achieve peace and equality, but I'm also not naïve enough to believe it's an immediate possibility. Diversifying causes necessary conflict -- how can it not? I think this is an important stage (adaptation) along the road to peace and equality. Societies that avoid going through this process, failing to evolve, will remain xenophobic (e.g., Japan). At the moment, I believe we're in the middle of adaptation -- that is all. Equality will eventually follow.