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 SCOTUS be a larger nonpartisan court?
BOX SCORE: A Grand Supreme Court
Puzzle Summary:
POLI the AI, asks, "Where can we agree?" Grand juries frequently have 23 jurors and SCOTUS has just nine jurists. The US population is 130x that of 1776. SCOTUS's approval rating is now 40%. SCOTUS has become a "deck to stack" and not the required impartial check and balance of the legislative and executive branches of government.
What if SCOTUS went up to 18 or 23 jurists with evenly staggered term limits of 18 years ending in off-election years, maintain a justices-in-waiting pool of 8 selected by at least 2/3rds of a large balanced nonpartisan independent council (NIC) in the executive branch assisted by AI, 60 Senate votes to confirm a candidate, 67 votes to override a presidential veto, cycle through candidates, if no one is confirmed by a deadline then the selection will be by lottery of the pool members?
ONE PARROT rules that SCOTUS should be as it always has been. THE OTHER PARROT objects that the court has become a game of capture the flag, and decades on the bench loses touch with the people. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?
BOX SCORE for Enlarging a Nonpartisan SCOTUS
:Weighted-Average: Forecast:
:71%: ± 6% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 7/8
Cultural Windows 11/16
Columns of Bias 6/8
Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY
Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of Enlarging a Nonpartisan Supreme Court
Justice should be blind
Seven ways to interpret the Constitution
Constitution requires pragmatic interpretation
SCOTUS still punishes the poor
Top Four Key Reasons Against Enlarging a Nonpartisan Supreme Court
A “republic” biased SCOTUS is needed
A minority should define life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
Lifetime appointments protect against politics
The Constitution is a text cast in stone
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples In-Favor
Planet First Democrats & Major Builders
Underrepresented & Realty
Unions & Managerial
Shopkeepers & E-Retail
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against
Activists & Gun Owners
Federal Payroll & Entrepreneurs
Digital Republicans & The Free Press
Mayors and County Officials & Governors
Four A-hah Moments
(Yes) Judges’ lifespans doubled since 1776
(Yes) More justices could hear more cases
(No) Capturing SCOTUS is an imperative
(No) A fair AI assisted process is still flawed
Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion
We predict an 71% vast super-majority of roles in this country to support Enlarging a Nonpartisan Supreme Court with an average error margin of ± 6%. Thrift (T) types will see less societal wasted time and effort from odd decisions by a too small court. Abundance (A) types will see a fairer court for more people. Commerce (C) types will see a better balance of business interests represented by a larger pool. Governance (G) types will see less decisions made to benefit the few instead of the many.
:: :: :: ::
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 ::
Who Shares the Blame for Prices Rising Faster than Wages?
BOX SCORE: The Inflation Blame Game
Puzzle Summary:
For 20 to 50 years, until the COVID "shutdown" only the costs of higher education, childcare, healthcare, and housing in some markets outgrew wages in the US. Well-paying jobs are great but that doesn't keep the price of goods and services low. Abundant cheap goods and services are great but that doesn't create high paying jobs.
ONE PARROT blames the government for low interest rates and spending too much money causing prices to rise faster than wages. THE OTHER PARROT blames greedy companies for not increasing production and increasing profits causing prices to rise faster than wages. Many industries are either disadvantaged because of foreign competition or because of impending product obsolescence.
Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?
BOX SCORE for the Inflation Blame Game
Weighted-Average Forecast
:62%: ± 5% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 4/8
Cultural Windows 10/16
Columns of Bias 5/8
Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY
Top Four Key Reasons that Roles Share the Blame for Unwanted Inflation
Climate Change and Greening cause price spikes
Tariffs make goods more expensive
US companies aren’t investing in capacity
Small margin industries can’t raise wages
Top Four Key Reasons that Roles Don’t Share Blame for Unwanted Inflation
Offering a living wage with COLA
Importing goods lowers prices
Innovation creates jobs and lowers prices
40% of FT workers are under a living wage
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Sharing Blame
Planet First Democrats & Materials
Entertainment & Gun Owners
Multi/Nationals & International NGOs
Unions & Entrepreneurs
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Not to Blame for Inflation
Activists & Original Equipment Manufacturers
Urban Part Time & Billionaires
Government Unions & Rural Professionals
Students & Seniors
Four A-hah Moments
(Yes) Government payments making work unattractive
(Yes) Sick Care costs and damages are out of control
(No) Robots take low paying jobs so workers can move up the ladder
(No) Planned obsolescence increases wages
Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion
We predict an 62% super-majority of roles in this country are partially to blame for unwanted inflation with a slightly higher error margin of ± 5%. Thrift (T) types are resistant to expanding their capacity. Abundance (A) types want everything to be a commodity. Commerce (C) types search for ways to charge more for the products and services to increase profits. Governance (G) types avoid the most elegant answers because of politcs.
:: :: :: ::
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 ::
Should the Federal Reserve Deposit Trillion Dollar Coins at the Fed?
BOX SCORE: Mint Trillion Dollar Coins
Puzzle Summary:
Congress has granted the right for the US Treasury to mint coins, which is also known as seigniorage. Congress still solely decides what is to be spent. President Nixon took us off the gold standard, now the US dollar's only backing is the full faith and credit that if the US government owes a debt in dollars, it will be paid in dollars.
ONE PARROT spends but caps government debt and threatens bond defaults on loan payments to limit the other parrot's spending. THE OTHER PARROT spends and increases taxes and/or borrowing to pay for the things it feels the US needs. As a compromise the Treasury could mint $1 Trillion coins, deposit them at the Federal Reserve Bank, and prevent the US from ever defaulting on its obligations.
Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?
BOX SCORE for Trillion Dollar Coins?
Weighted-Average Forecast
:65%: ± 7% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 7/8
Cultural Windows 12/16
Columns of Bias 7/8
Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY
Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of Trillion Dollar Coins
With our armies, who’s going to stop us?
Bakes a bigger apple pie to share
A way to pay for the green revolution
Could spur economic development zones
Top Four Key Reasons Against Trillion Dollar Coins
May destabilize the $ on foreign markets
May cause trade wars
Speeds obsolescence
The debt is worrisome
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples In-Favor
Activists & Realty
Digital Republicans & Urban Investors
Ethicist Democrats & 401K and IRAs
Caregivers & Gun Owners
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against
Liberty Independents & Urban Part-Time
Moralist Republicans & Free Press
Core Republicans & Party Favor Democrats
Urban PT & Rural Investors
Four A-hah Moments
(Yes) It’s just digits on a computer
(Yes) China heavily supports their industries
(No) May cause real wars over resources
(No) Yuan or Euro could dethrone the dollar as the world’s reserve currency
Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion
We predict a 65% super-majority of roles in this country to support Trillion Dollar Coins, with an above average error margin of ± 7%. Thrift (T) types point out that the US full faith and credit will never be violated. Abundance (A) types see the possibility of funding transitions to better health and getting climate change under control. Commerce (C) types see continued stimulus to keep our economy vibrant. Governance (G) types less crime and disruption of government operations and services.
:: :: :: ::
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 Congress have the same retirement investments as Social Security recipients?
BOX SCORE: Shared FATE STOCK Act
Puzzle Summary:
POLI the AI asks, "Where can we agree?" Federal Actors Trading Equities with Social Security Tied to Opportunistic Congressional Knowledge: Members of Congress (MoC) and Federal Employees (FE) have access to legislation that affects industries that the general public does not. Insider trading is illegal in the private sector but not for MoC and FE.
ONE PARROT calls that government employees are paid less than the private sector and trading stocks is the only way to maintain a lifestyle becoming their positions. THE OTHER PARROT puts that getting rich on stocks eclipses elected officials’ duties in a representative government. These stock trades would be limited to their retirement accounts and serve as an index for a 25% share of the Social Security (SS) Funds' stock investments—so all retirees benefit.
Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?
BOX SCORE for the Shared FATE STOCK Act
Weighted-Average Forecast
:69%: ± 5% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 7/8
Cultural Windows 10/16
Columns of Bias 7/8
Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY
Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of the Shared FATE STOCK Act
Congress needs a longer-term mindset
Flush seniors will increase GDP
Commerce just needs to know the rules
A mix of stocks and bonds is prudent
Top Four Key Reasons Against the Shared FATE STOCK Act
MoC/FE shouldn’t be trading stocks, period
Will cause even more bubbles to pop
May speed obsolescence
Congress picking winners and losers is magnified
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples In-Favor
Urban Part-time & Reality
Deep Reader Independents & Core Republicans
Rural Full-Time & Entrepreneurs
Underrepresented & CPAs and FP
Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against
Activists & Private Equity
Moralist Republicans & Free Press
Multi/Nationals & International NGOs
Social Media & Justice Independents
Four A-hah Moments
(Yes) Will put a floor under the stock market
(Yes) Gerrymandered incumbents are lazy and arrogant
(No) Industries could be extorted for favors
(No) Congresses may back the wrong horses
Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion
We predict a 69% strong super-majority of roles in this country to support the Shared FATE STOCK Act with a slightly higher error margin of ± 5%. Thrift (T) types will like that the Social Security Fund will be less volatile. Abundance (A) types will see seniors not have to skimp so much in their dotage. Commerce (C) types will see more stable long-term trends of which to manage. Governance (G) types will see less animosity about their privileged behaviors.
:: :: :: ::
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 ::