Hello,

Read again, i correct about more of my philosophy about automation and
globalization and Donald Trump and more..

I am a white arab from Morocco, and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..

I have just explained, read below, that Donald Trump protectionism
is not good, but i think that from year 2000 around 85% of jobs losses
in the manufacturing sector in USA was caused by automation and not by
China or such as were thinking it the people who elected Donald Trump,
and you can look at the following video that talks about it and that
makes you understand that automation also has advantages:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-rd3kW7Bc8

Following are some of the advantages of automation:

1. Automation is the key to the shorter workweek. Automation will allow
the average number of working hours per week to continue to decline,
thereby allowing greater leisure hours and a higher quality life.

2. Automation brings safer working conditions for the worker. Since
there is less direct physical participation by the worker in the
production process, there is less chance of personal injury to the worker.

3. Automated production results in lower prices and better products. It
has been estimated that the cost to machine one unit of product by
conventional general-purpose machine tools requiring human operators may
be 100 times the cost of manufacturing the same unit using automated
mass-production techniques. The electronics industry offers many
examples of improvements in manufacturing technology that have
significantly reduced costs while increasing product value (e.g., colour
TV sets, stereo equipment, calculators, and computers).

4. The growth of the automation industry will itself provide employment
opportunities. This has been especially true in the computer industry,
as the companies in this industry have grown (IBM, Digital Equipment
Corp., Honeywell, etc.), new jobs have been created.
These new jobs include not only workers directly employed by these
companies, but also computer programmers, systems engineers, and other
needed to use and operate the computers.

5. Automation is the only means of increasing standard of living. Only
through productivity increases brought about by new automated methods of
production, it is possible to advance standard of living. Granting wage
increases without a commensurate increase in productivity
will results in inflation. To afford a better society, it is a must to
increase productivity.

And i invite you to read my following thoughts about protectionism
and capitalism etc.

More of my philosophy about Trade Adjustment Assistance and globalization..

I think that protectionism is not good, and i think that Trade
Adjustment Assistance etc. is a better way of solving problems, so
i invite you to read the following article to know more:

https://theconversation.com/international-trade-has-cost-americans-millions-of-jobs-investing-in-communities-might-offset-those-losses-143406

And read more here about Trade Adjustment Assistance:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Adjustment_Assistance

More philosophy about protectionism and USA and more..

I think we have to be careful about protectionism, since read the following:

"Protectionist policies impose an additional cost and loss on all
parties. First of all, domestic consumers must pay a higher price for
goods. At the same time, importers face a decline in demand, so
international jobs are lost. For instance, the US-China trade war meant
that US consumers paid a higher price whilst demand for Chinese workers
is reduced.

So the Chinese unemployment increases and US consumers pay more.
However, the counter-argument is that it saves US jobs and businesses.
Now there is some validity to that claim. If the money sent to China
doesn’t come back in either demand for US goods, or FDI, then the
argument can be validated.

However, the reality of the situation is that when a US consumer buys
cheaper Chinese goods, that money goes to a Chinese exporter. That money
doesn’t stay with them indefinitely. It makes its way back to the US
through either demand for its goods or in FDI.

What we see as a result is that Chinese demand drives employment in
other industries. So jobs that may have been lost in one industry, are
being created in another. At the same time, the FDI inflows also create
employment in the relevant industry.

Although there is disruption, there is a net positive gain in the long
term. Employees will have to shift to new industries, but the average
consumer benefits from lower prices. By contrast, the only winner under
protectionism is specific domestic workers. However, they too are
consumers and consequently lose out too.

Is Protectionism Good For The Economy?

In the long-run, protectionism is not good for the economy. It makes
consumers and businesses pay more. And whilst it may protect jobs in the
short-term, the economy as a whole would be better served in allowing
cheaper imports in. Although this may temporarily destroy some jobs,
consumers benefit from lower prices. In turn, the income that would have
been spent on the goods before can now be spent in other markets. In
turn, employment is stimulated elsewhere in the economy."

Read more here:

https://boycewire.com/protectionism-definition-and-types/

More of my philosophy about closed systems and open systems and
interdependent systems..

I think i am smart, and i will say that we have to have the right spirit
so that to be efficient, and i think that the basis of the right spirit
is also to look at how we are interdependent systems of different
countries etc., so i think that the best way is to know how to be like
the right randomness of the evolutionary algorithms that permits to not
get stuck in a local optimum and be able to ensure the convergence to a
global optimum, i mean that the best way is also to know how to well
balance between cooperation and competition, since so that to not get
stuck in a local optimum of efficiency we have also to know how to buy
products and services from the other countries so that also to encourage
creativity and innovation, since if you are too much competition you can
"monopolize" too much and this can hurt creativity and innovation, so
then we have to become a much more efficient and civilized world. And I
think that Nazism or neo-nazism or white supremacism or communism are
also too rigid, so they don't work correctly, since they also have the
strong tendency to want to like too much homogenize and to too much
monopolize and too much centralize, so they are not efficient systems.

More of my philosophy about correlation and about diversity and more..

I think i am smart, and i will say to look again at what is saying
the Ph.D Katherine W. Phillips that is the Paul Calello Professor of
Leadership and Ethics Management at Columbia Business School(Read about
her here: https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/profile/katherine_phillips):

"Large data-set studies have an obvious limitation: They only show that
diversity is correlated with better performance, not that it causes
better performance."

So i will say that this Ph.D and other researchers are not so smart,
since notice how is speaking the Ph.D Katherine W. Phillips in the
following article:

How Diversity Makes Us Smarter

Read more here:

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/how_diversity_makes_us_smarter

So notice that she is not saying that human diversity is a "mechanism"
that can cause "competition" or more competition between people, and
then competition can be the cause of better performance, so you are
noticing that the above Ph.D and researchers are trying to measure it
empirically, but i think that this kind of measuring is not a correct
measuring, since what i am showing you by my way of thinking is the fact
that there is a "tendency" in human diversity that it causes competition
or more competition, so it causes better performance, so then we can
notice that by not following there way of empirical measuring we can still
know about the process. So as i said, i think this Ph.D and other
researchers are not thinking and abstracting correctly since from my
saying below we can notice that human Diversity in a global world or in
a society or in a group brings more "competition" between people, so it
makes us work harder and better cognitively and socially, but if we are
not being the right human diversity and we are working harder and better
cognitively and socially, then i think being human diversity can still
"keep" or "maintain" the working harder and better cognitively and
socially, also human diversity brings different human perspectives or
views and it brings different human experiences and different human
knowledges and it is good for creativity and innovation since it is also
good for divergent thinking that enhance creativity and innovation.

More of my philosophy about USA and human diversity and more..

I just said the following:

"I think i am understanding rapidly, since i think that human Diversity
in a global world or in a society or in a group brings more
"competition" between people, so it makes us work harder and
better cognitively and socially, also human diversity brings different
human perspectives or views and it brings different human experiences
and different human knowledges and it is good for creativity and
innovation since it is also good for divergent thinking that enhance
creativity and innovation."