Should We Decriminalize Sex Work?
BOX SCORE: Victimless Sex
Puzzle Summary:
POLI the AI asks, "Where can we agree?" Most people go into sex work out of desperation but except for a few counties in Nevada sex work is illegal in the US. If the WELCOME: Employer Living Wage Tax Credit and/or the P50L Earned Income Tax Credits were passed into law then taking a full-time job that nets a living wage eliminates most of that desperation. Until then, law enforcement activity to curtail prostitution is ineffective, takes police away from pursuing violent criminals, and is a constant temptation trap.
ONE PARROT preaches that sex for money is wrong, and the provider and/or the customer should be imprisoned. THE OTHER PARROT solicits that sex between consenting adults is no one else's business, and that sex workers deserve decent working conditions and benefits. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?
BOX SCORE for Decriminalizing Sex Work
:Weighted-Average: Forecast:
:60%: ± 7% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 6/8
Cultural Windows 10/16
Columns of Bias 6/8
Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY
Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of Decriminalizing Sex Work
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness
Reduces the illegal market
Reserves criminal justice resources
Penalizing purchased sex doesn’t work
Top Four Key Reasons Against Decriminalizing Sex Work
Against moral values
Increased adultery rates
Sexual overtones are pervasive—NIMBY
No one should have to do that
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples In-Favor
Activists & Gun Owners
Urban PT & Billionaires
Nonworkers & Entrepreneurs
Liberty Republicans & Suburban Professionals
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against
Federal Payroll & Landlords
Moralist Republicans & Democratic Leadership
Rural Part Time & Urban Investors
Planet First Democrats & Utilities
Four A-hah Moments
(Yes) Gives lonely & disabled folks an option for sex
(Yes) Removes police use of oppressive laws
(No) Competes for other discretionary dollars
(No) Makes the US a sex tourism destination
Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion
We predict an 71% vast super-majority of roles in this country to support Decriminalizing Sex Work with an average error margin of ± 3%. Thrift (T) types will see less public resources spent against an unwinnable cause. Abundance (A) types will see legal options to relieve sexual frustration. Commerce (C) types will see a reduction in the illegal markets. Governance (G) types will see a better reallocation of law and order resources.
:: :: :: ::
You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com
Congress’s approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.
A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.
Finding out Where We Can Agree? takes Guts ::
National Idea Leaderboard 2023 Week 7
Highlight: Death Penalty Reform
The most significant development on the scoreboard and leaderboard this week were two new puzzles being completed on the Death Penalty. Abolishing the Death Penalty only scored a weighted average of all the roles on the game board of :60%: with an above average error margin of ± 8%, with only 3/4 sides of the table, 5/8 walls of information, 9/16 cultural windows, and 5/8 columns of bias. Therefore, it did not make it onto the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard which requires a majority of each of the four sides of the ideologically balanced political table.
However, the puzzle to Reform the Death Penalty did significantly better. While the burden of proof to find a defendant guilty is—beyond a reasonable doubt, the burden for this death penalty reform would be—only with incontrovertible evidence. It scores :71%: with a below average error margin of ± 3%, with 4/4 side of the table, 7/8 walls of information, 12/16 cultural windows, and 7/8 columns of bias. This reform would all but eliminate the possibility of putting an innocent to death. In other words, the sentencing guidelines are a fail-safe against killing innocents, and perhaps the demonstrably repentant and certain mentally ill individuals, however at some point we’ll analyze each of the latter two in separate puzzles.
#1 The Great Penny Meltdown :86%: ± 2% Box Score
Time to stop wasting useful metals on useless coins
with a perfect 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 16/16 Windows, and 8/8 Columns
#2 Over the Counter Birth Control :84%: ± 2% Box Score
The progestin pill should be sold over the counter
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 14/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns
#3 SMR Nuclear Reactors :84%: ± 2%
We need to scale new smaller safer nuclear reactors ASAP
with a perfect 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 16/16 Windows, and 8/8 Columns
#4 Voting on Veterans Day :82%: ± 2%
Move Veteran’s Day to Election Day to make it a holiday
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 15/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns
#5 A Fraud-Free Counted Vote :82%: ± 3%
Frictionless IDs, guaranteed voting access, all votes counted
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 13/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns
#6 Parking Lots of Shade :80%: ± 2% Box Score
Solar canopies over most larger parking lots
with a perfect 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 16/16 Windows, and 8/8 Columns
#7 Social Security Force Buys on Dips :80%: ± 2%
The Social Security Fund should invest up to 25% into US stock index funds
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 13/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns
#8 OTC Abortion Pills :79%: ± 2%
Let pharmacists dispense abortion pills in the first 10 weeks
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 14/16 Windows, 7/8 Columns
#9 WELCOME Living Wage Employer Tax Credit :78%: ± 3%
Pay a living wage before corporate tax, crime reduction will more than pay for it
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 14/16 Windows, 7/8 Columns
#10 Two-Lane Healthcare :77%: ± 4% Box Score
Medicare for All with a fast lane for premium services for premium cost
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 15/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns
…
#14 Local TAP Legal Immigration :75%: ± 4% Box Score
Let the States decide their own immigration needs
with 4/4 Sides, 7/8 Walls, 12/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns
…
#21 Death Penalty Reform :71%: ± 3% Box Score
Death Penalty only with incontrovertible evidence to avoid killing innocents
with 4/4 Sides, 7/8 Walls, 12/16 Windows, 7/8 Columns
The rest of the leaderboard can be seen here.
:: :: :: ::
You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com
Congress’s approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.
A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.
Finding out Where We Can Agree? takes Guts ::
:: :: :: ::
PolicyKeys™ has invented a nonpartisan rating system using the four sides of the political table, eight walls of information, sixteen subcultural windows, and eight columns of bias—change to status quo. It’s all based on this ground truth, There’s a time to save and a time to spend, a time for freedom and a time for laws—where can we agree? We call it our Political DNA, A for Abundance, C for Commerce, G for Governance, and T for Thrift, expressed as ACGT just like human DNA.
We are all way more conflicted in our views on public policy solutions than the powers that be want us to believe because it’s in their best interest not ours. You may identify with a dozen or more roles on the PolicyKeys™ Game Board, and each of them may be for or against a solution for a key reason. You can note your own personal score and see why you may or may not agree. Those key reasons are noted in the Weekly Game and Weekly Key for each puzzle. Keep a close eye on the roles and key reasons you most closely identify.
For more on our Mission, Vision, and Values, and the Four Laws of Public Policy Formation click here.
National Idea Leaderboard Week 6 2023
Highlights
PolicyKeys™ has invented a nonpartisan rating system using the four sides of the political table, eight walls of information, sixteen subcultural windows, and eight columns of bias—change to status quo. It’s all based on this ground truth, There’s a time to save and a time to spend, a time for freedom and a time for laws—where can we agree? We call it our Political DNA, A for Abundance, C for Commerce, G for Governance, and T for Thrift, expressed as ACGT just like human DNA.
We are all way more conflicted in our views on public policy solutions than the powers that be want us to believe because it’s in their best interest not ours. You may identify with a dozen or more roles on the PolicyKeys™ Game Board, and each of them may be for or against a solution for a key reason. You can note your own personal score and see why you may or may not agree. Those key reasons are noted in the Weekly Game and Weekly Key for each puzzle. Keep a close eye on the roles and key reasons you most closely identify.
For more on our Mission, Vision, and Values, and the Four Laws of Public Policy Formation click here.
Here are the top ten ideas on the National Idea Leaderboard for 2023 Week #6.
#1 The Great Penny Meltdown :86%: ± 2% Box Score
Time to stop wasting useful metals on useless coins
with a perfect 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 16/16 Windows, and 8/8 Columns
#2 Over the Counter Birth Control :84%: ± 2% Box Score
The progestin pill should be sold over the counter
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 14/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns
#3 SMR Nuclear Reactors :84%: ± 2%
We need to scale new smaller safer nuclear reactors ASAP
with a perfect 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 16/16 Windows, and 8/8 Columns
#4 Voting on Veterans Day :82%: ± 2%
Move Veteran’s Day to Election Day to make it a holiday
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 15/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns
#5 A Fraud-Free Counted Vote :82%: ± 3%
Frictionless IDs, guaranteed voting access, all votes counted
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 13/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns
#6 Parking Lots of Shade :80%: ± 2% Box Score
Solar canopies over most larger parking lots
with a perfect 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 16/16 Windows, and 8/8 Columns
#7 Social Security Force Buys on Dips :80%: ± 2%
The Social Security Fund should invest up to 25% into US stock index funds
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 13/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns
#8 OTC Abortion Pills :79%: ± 2%
Let pharmacists dispense abortion pills in the first 10 weeks
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 14/16 Windows, 7/8 Columns
#9 WELCOME Living Wage Employer Tax Credit :78%: ± 3%
Pay a living wage before corporate tax, crime reduction will more than pay for it
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 14/16 Windows, 7/8 Columns
#10 Two-Lane Healthcare :77%: ± 4% Box Score
Medicare for All with a fast lane for premium services for premium cost
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 15/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns
The rest of the leaderboard can be seen here.
:: :: :: ::
You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com
Congress’s approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.
A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.
Finding out Where We Can Agree? takes Guts ::
Should we get rid of first past the post voting?
BOX SCORE: Last, First Past the Post Voting
Puzzle Summary:
POLI the AI, asks, "Where can we agree?" First-past-the-post (FPTP) all but assures that the two-party system stays in power because, well, it almost assures no serious third-party candidates can get elected. It also keeps all that campaign money flowing through reliable well-greased channels and away from third-party candidates.
ONE PARROT posts that whoever gets the most votes should win even if no candidate gets a majority of the votes. THE OTHER PARROT approves of either approval-voting (AV) or ranked-choice-voting (RCV) to assure that the winner is the one that the largest majority approves of or ranks highest. Many people dislike voting against who they hate the most rather wanting to vote for who they like the most.
Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?
BOX SCORE for switching to Approval, Score, Ranked Choice, or STAR Voting
:Weighted-Average: Forecast
:67%: ± 5% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 6/8
Cultural Windows 10/16
Columns of Bias 6/8
Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY
Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of Switching to Approval, Score, Ranked Choice, or STAR Voting
The most approved of candidate wins
No more run-off elections
Platform over personality or party
FPTP is a third-party blocking tool
Top Four Key Reasons Against Switching to Approval, Score, Ranked Choice, or STAR Voting
FPTP is the classic way to vote
Any computer can be hacked
FPTP is a barrier against unneeded change
Voters are confused by other methods
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples In-Favor
Activists & Gun Owners
Ethicist Democrats & Digital Republicans
Judiciary & Exporters
USA Made & International NGOs
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against
Moralist Republicans & Rank and File Democrats
Social Media & Landlords
Biz Groups & Corporate Lobby
Rural PT & Billionaires
Four A-hah Moments
(Yes) Strategic voting is eliminated
(Yes) Government policy will be easier to forecast
(No) Less chance of a reformer being elected
(No) Voters are confused by too many candidates
Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion
We predict an 67% vast super-majority of roles in this country to support switching to Approval, Score, Ranked Choice, or STAR Voting with an average error margin of ± 5%. Thrift (T) types will see better ideas rather than just throwing money around. Abundance (A) types will like a greater choice of candidates. Commerce (C) types will see more businesspeople running for office. Governance (G) types will see less disruption from useful idiots.
:: :: :: ::
You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com
Congress’s approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.
A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.
Finding out Where We Can Agree? takes Guts ::
Should candidates falsifying their backgrounds be barred from office?
BOX SCORE: Candidate Employment Fraud
Puzzle Summary:
POLI the AI asks, "Where can we agree?" It's one thing for a candidate to be conflicted in their views and play up whatever the audiences wants to hear, it's another thing to bald-face lie about basic qualifications for office.
ONE PARROT boasts all's fair in love, war, and politics. If the party, election officials and the media don't care enough to vet candidates for office then it's up to the voters to decide. THE OTHER PARROT roasts those who think lying to get what they want is acceptable, it sets a bad example for children, and encourages our enemies to distrust the US even more. Almost all job applications are subject to background checks, and the people essentially hire their elected officials. Candidates should have to file a public record background affidavit.
Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?
BOX SCORE for the Candidate (Employment) Fraud
:Weighted-Average: Forecast
:68%: ± 7% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 7/8
Cultural Windows 11/16
Columns of Bias 7/8
Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY
Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of Ending Candidate Employment Fraud
The people have lost trust in government
Bearing false witness is a sin
Quality lying is a sign of a sociopath
Discourages inauthentic primary challenges
Top Four Key Reasons Against Ending Candidate Employment Fraud
Invasion of the candidate’s privacy
Enables yellow journalism
Win at all costs
Great leaders have serious quirks
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples In-Favor
Activists & Gun Owners
Urban Part Time & Ag States
Moralist Republicans & Ethicist Democrats
Planet First Democrats & Core Republicans
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against
Digital Republicans & Rank & File Democrats
Underrepresented & Landlords
Pro-Immigration & Borders and Orders Republicans
Party Favor Democrats & Party Favor Republicans
Four A-hah Moments
(Yes) Leadership and Honesty go together
(Yes) Discourage civil unrest
(No) Lying is a job pre-requisite
(No) Governor’s replacement discretion may conflict with voter’s will
Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion
We predict an 68% vast super-majority of roles in this country to support Ending Candidate Employment Fraud with a slightly higher error margin of ± 7%. Thrift (T) types will that we won’t waste money on failed candidacies. Abundance (A) types will like quality candidates forcing out pretenders. Commerce (C) types will see business people with better resumes running. Governance (G) types will see less disruption from useful idiots.
:: :: :: ::
You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com
Congress’s approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.
A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.
Finding out Where We Can Agree? takes Guts ::
Should parking lots be required to have solar roofs?
BOX SCORE: Solar Covered Parking Lots
Puzzle Summary:
France recently passed a law that would require all parking lots of 80 slots or more to put solar arrays over them. France expects that to generate the equivalent of 11 nuclear reactors. The United States land mass is 18x bigger than France, and the US population is about 5x larger. Therefore, if the US also did solar-over-rovers parking lots, it would generate between the equivalent of 55 to 200 nuclear power plants.
ONE PARROT spotlights that solar only works on sunny days, there has to be backup electric generating capacity, and it will be decades if ever for fossil fuels to become obsolete. THE OTHER PARROT throws shade that we're already decades behind protecting the planet from climate disasters and this is an easy solution.
Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?
BOX SCORE for Solar Over Car Parks
Weighted-Average Forecast
:80%: ± 2% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 8/8
Cultural Windows 16/16
Columns of Bias 8/8
Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY
Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of Solar Over Car Parks
Climate change is bad for business
Helps reduce urban heat islands
Less snow to brush off
Competitive advantage for US businesses
Top Four Key Reasons Against Solar Over Car Parks
Demand will stress raw materials
Solar & Wind need backup capacity
My industry may be decimated next
Green collar jobs compete with blue collar jobs
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples In-Favor
Planet First Democrats & Raw Material
Activists & Billionaires
Ethicist Democrats & Moralist Republicans
Non Union Workers & Nonworkers
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against
Social Media & Sanitation
Free Press & Republican Leadership
Wholesale & E-Retail
Investment Banks & Restaurants
Four A-hah Moments
(Yes) Solar profits help businesses
(Yes) Good green collar jobs & profits
(No) Fossil fuels still need federal support for affordable fuel
(No) We can’t afford solar subsidies
Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion
We predict a 80% super-majority of roles in this country to support Solar Over Car Parks, with a very low error margin of ± 2%. Thrift (T) types see the cost of energy going down. Abundance (A) types see almost unlimited sel-sufficient green energy. Commerce (C) types see increased profit from lower input costs. Governance (G) types see less extreme weather and having to manage climate disasters.
:: :: :: ::
Congress’s approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.
A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.
Finding out where we can agree takes guts ::
PolicyKeys™ Mission, Vision, Values & Four Laws of Public Policy Formation
based on the theory & methodology of Politics 4.0
Mission:
To forecast and measure nonpartisanship
Vision:
To narrate, rate, create, and curate public policy solutions on leaderboards
Values (#1*)
To be neutral to public and/or private sector solutions
::
Purpose
To score and rank public policy solutions with a nonpartisan rating
Goal
To have an AI that can pre-rate all public policy solutions
Strategy
To first find the best solutions that solve 80% of the problem in the shortest time
:: ::
*Our Values
#1 We are neutral to public and/or private sector solutions
Passing a new law or trashing an old one is all the same to us.
#2 Talk public policy not public figures
No President Tyler this or President Buchanan that, you can find that on social media.
#3 We’re all on the same team
Good Key “Yes” reasons and good Key “No” reasons help make the puzzles believable and the scoring trustworthy. No ever-so-clever cherry-picking.
#4 Participate in policy huddles
Introverts should strive to share, and Extroverts should strive for restraint.
#5 EMIT helps find the signal in the noise
Consider the Four Key Reason Types: Emotions, Momentum, Interest, and Timespan, by referring to the Four Laws of Public Policy Formation.
#6 We’ll eventually score all solutions
But for now, score the solutions with the highest probable rank. When the AI is fully functional it will help by auto pre-scoring solutions. Each puzzle deserves respect.
#7 When in doubt about calling a role for or against—research the role
E.g. Part-time workers are 2/3rds under 25 and over 50, and 2/3 female. Does that help clarify the call? Is there existing polling data?
#8 Noisy Guests are interesting
When a role is difficult to call, we call those noisy guests, and working carefully through the EMIT model will usually yield a clear call. And the AI is a good second reliability filter.
#9 Each country's gameboard is a working model
While we seek continuous improvement, our gameboards need to be standardized like electrical sockets to be useful. We’ll review suggested improvements once a year, but only modify significant and substantive changes in roles. Keeping level playing fields is paramount.
#10 Compare forecasts to realities
Through polling, commentary, competing forecasts, mean reversion, wisdom of the crowds, candidates’ platforms we can measure how well the models are functioning.
:: :: ::
THE FOUR LAWS OF PUBLIC POLICY FORMATION
The First Law of Public Policy Formation is that people with short-term focus will naturally protect their wages, jobs, status, profits, and wealth. (Hopefully not with violence: Politics 1.0)
The Second Law of Public Policy Formation is that people with longer-term focus will naturally place bets to make life better, longer, easier, or different. (Politics 2.0 is usually the two -party system)
The Third Law of Public Policy Formation is that the conflict between short-term focus and long-term-focus naturally causes noise, angst, conflict, and harm. (Politics 3.0 is noise)
The Fourth Law of Public Policy Formation is that policy solutions can now be ranked with a standardized nonpartisan score derived from a level playing field. (Politics 4.0 finds the signal in the noise).
:: :: :: ::
You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com
Congress’ approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.
A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.
Finding out where we can agree takes guts ::
Immigration Facts
Four by Four
by Immigration Editor Samantha “Sami” Corkern.
You can view the Local TAP Legal Immigration Box Score here.
Abundance:
The United States admits nearly 1 million immigrants into the country each year under a variety of programs, however, the number of new immigrants each year is decreasing.
Commerce:
For every H1-B visa holder admitted into the country, 1.8 new jobs are created.
Governance:
An additional 370,000 immigrants are needed each year to sustain social security by 2060.
Thrift :
Industries such as Agriculture, Logistics, and Hospitality rely heavily on an immigrant workforce. The Logistics industry alone is predicted to have a need for more than 1 million new employees from 2016 to 2026.
:: Conclusion ::
The United States depends on immigration for economic growth and security.
X
Abundance:
Individuals living in the United States under Temporary Protected Status alone contribute more than $4.5 billion to the economy pretax in addition to $6.9 billion to medicare and social security over 10 year period.
Commerce:
International students permitted in the United States, who do not have a direct path to citizenship, support more than 458,000 jobs.
Governance:
Immigrants are far less likely to commit crimes than native-born citizens, this is the case for property and violent crimes.
Thrift:
Individuals with Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) contributed $23.6 billion in 2015 without the benefit of receiving Federally funded programs, such as the CAREs Act stimulus checks in 2020.
:: Conclusion ::
Immigrants regularly contribute more to the United States economy than they receive, and commit crimes at lower rates than native born citizens.
[::]
:: :: :: ::
You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com
Congress’ approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.
A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.
Seeing things from all four sides of the political table takes Guts ::
Should States determine their own immigration needs?
BOX SCORE: Local TAP Legal Immigration
Puzzle Summary:
TAP allows States to Terminate (close the tap), Accelerate (tap world markets), or Pause (tap the brakes) on Local Legal Immigration. Counties will funnel immigration requests up to the State. State politics will decide what numbers to approve.
There is controversy around immigrant crime rates but legal immigration crime rates appear actually lower than US citizens'. States will work in two-year requests in off-election years to de-politicize immigration. Immigrants must stay in their host State or reciprocating State until reaching full citizenship.
ONE PARROT openly thinks national immigration policy has stopped serving our needs. THE OTHER PARROT closes with immigration should stay in the hands of the federal government.
Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?
BOX SCORE for Local TAP Legal Immigration
Weighted-Average Forecast
:75%: ± 4% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 7/8
Cultural Windows 12/16
Columns of Bias 8/8
Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY
Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of Local TAP Legal Immigration
10 million open jobs Americans don’t want
Labor supply shortages are causing inflation
Keeps US companies from offshoring
Social Security needs people paying in
Top Four Key Reasons Against Local TAP Legal Immigration
May lower wage growth
Immigrants will start competing businesses
Some States may take too many
Many immigrants don’t share our values
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples In-Favor
Activists & Private Equity
Federal Payroll & Landlords
Sciences & Materials
Nonprofit Independents & Corporate Lobby
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against
Planet First Democrats & Big Agriculture
Moralist Republicans & Civil Servants
Core Republicans & Democratic Leadership
Republican Leadership & Party Favor Democrats
Four A-hah Moments
(Yes) Labor shortages are causing product shortages hence inflation
(Yes) Helps keep companies from offshoring jobs
(No) Increased demand for housing
(No) Immigrants start competing businesses
Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion
We predict an 75% vast super-majority of roles in this country to support Local TAP Legal Immigration with a typical error margin of ± 4%. Thrift (T) types point out that it will help save the Social Security fund. Abundance (A) types see more productivity for all industries. Commerce (C) types see a ready supply of labor. Governance (G) types see increased tax revenues from increased commerce.
More
:: :: :: ::
You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com
Congress’ approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.
A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.
Finding out where we can agree takes guts ::
Are the Golden Rule(s) Still Golden?
BOX SCORE: Doing Unto Others
Puzzle Summary:
"Do unto others as you would have them do onto you" is the most widely known version of the Golden Rule. However, there is an inverted version that is also thousands of years old which goes, "Don't do onto others as you wouldn't have them do onto you."
ONE PARROT hopes that people would just treat other people better out of the kindness of their hearts. THE OTHER PARROT fears that other people will treat them unfairly so it's best to treat them unfairly first.
It's impossible to live a life that doesn't inevitably have friction in human interactions, family, friends, acquaintances, strangers, perceived enemies, real enemies. How we deal with those frictions defines our culture, norms, humanity, and how we get along with each other. Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?
BOX SCORE for the Golden Rule(s)?
Weighted-Average Forecast
:67%: ± 8% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 6/8
Cultural Windows 11/16
Columns of Bias 6/8
Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY
Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of the Golden Rule(s)
Don’t be rude
Live and Let Live
Service is an honorable profession
Strive to offer a living wage
Top Four Key Reasons Against the Golden Rule(s)
Young adults need automatic weapons
Discretionary late term abortions
Planetary and climate indifference
Public or private sector red tape
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples In-Favor
Ethicists Democrats & Materials
Exporters & Importers
Underrepresented & Ag States
Rural PT & Deep Reader Independents
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against
Planet First Democrats & Hawk Republicans
Activists & Corporate Lobby
Federal Payroll & Landlords
Free Press & Border and Order Republicans
Four A-hah Moments
(Yes) Don’t cut corners at work or on the road
(Yes) Creating good paying jobs
(No) Not giving service people common courtesy
(No) Not treating immigrants with respect
Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion
We predict a 67% strong super-majority of roles in this country to support the Golden Rule(s), with a an above average error margin of ± 8%. Thrift (T) types point out that being nice doesn’t cost anything. Abundance (A) types see a more fulfilling life. Commerce (C) types see a more productive workplace with happier teams. Governance (G) types see less civil unrest and mass shootings.
:: :: :: ::
You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com
Congress’ approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.
A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.
Finding out where we can agree takes guts ::