Assigning scores from 1–10 for each of these aspects made sense as an action needs to be both implemented and impactful for it to adress the problem. By researching to assign these scores and multiplying them, I could get an overall idea of where an action would compare to another one. Below is a graph summarizing my results, followed by the details behind each ranking.

1. Make higher education more easily available to all.

Feasibility: 7

Rates of higher education have doubled worldwide 19 to 38 percent over the last two decades, indicating that increased access is very possible. Although the process of making education truly available will take decades, governments clearly recognize the need for it and are taking steps towards achieving it, with education becoming a larger percent of GDP for most countries.  

Impact: 8

Higher education has been known to increase earnings significantly, thereby reducing poverty. Additionally, education has been known to have various benefits towards poverty like reducing food insecurity and standards of health.

2. Invest in Kickstarter-like crowd sourcing to reduce the concentration of wealth.

Feasibility: 7

Kickstarter projects are already common, but not every country has internet and access to these Kickstarter sites. The industry is however rapidly growing each year.

Impact: 8

Kickstarters allow for a low bar for investing, especially into businesses, as an alternative to traditional stocks. Lack of investing is a large part of the cycle of poverty many experiences. Kickstarters offer an excellent way to fight this void of investing.

3. Poorer regions should be assisted in investing more in developing finished products and “leapfrogging” to more advanced technology for export and extending local value chains instead of relying on income from exporting mineral and other natural resources, commodities

Feasibility: 6

There are existing initiatives and strategies in place, such as the Industrial Development Decade for Africa (IDDA), which aims to promote industrialization and economic diversification in African countries. Additionally, there are examples of countries that have successfully transitioned from relying on natural resources to more advanced value-added products, such as South Korea and Singapore. However, implementation may face challenges due to lack of infrastructure, resources, and technological capabilities in poorer regions.

Impact: 9

Diversifying economies in poorer regions through developing finished products and advanced technologies can lead to sustainable economic growth, increased employment opportunities, and reduced dependence on volatile commodity markets. This can contribute to poverty reduction, improved livelihoods, and long-term economic stability, allowing for more inclusive and equitable development.

5. Establish community centers for access and training for self-employed to use advanced technology like 3D printing, AI/robotics, and AI apps.

Feasibility: 5

There has been talk of transforming libraries to similar centers of learning and would be feasible with enough government funding. However, not every country has the funds to do this, or even the basic libraries.

Impact: 9

Similar to libraries, such learning centers are invaluable resources for everyone, especially people without access to paid resources. This free resource would heavily help people access opportunities in the technological revolution.

6. Increase emphasis on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education and lifelong learning and retraining.

Feasibility: 6

Although the concept of STEM emphasis is simple, implementing it requires teachers with skills and funding from nations, with the idea of a global STEM fund prosed in this article.

Impact: 7

STEM careers have less unemployment and make more money, with or without a degree in STEM. Although the data is from the US, it can be applied globally.

7. Tax next technologies for new income to social support systems and create tax systems that ensure big business and wealthy individuals pay their fair share.

Feasibility: 6

There are ongoing discussions and debates at the global level on how to effectively tax next technologies, such as digital services and automation, to ensure that they contribute their fair share to social support systems. However, implementation may face challenges due to complexities in defining and valuing intangible assets, cross-border transactions, and potential resistance from big business and wealthy individuals.

Impact: 7

Taxing next technologies for new income can generate significant revenue for social support systems, which can be used to address poverty, inequality, and other social challenges. It can also promote a more equitable distribution of the benefits of technological advancements and ensure that big businesses and wealthy individuals contribute their fair share to society.

8. Expand micro-credit and small business credit systems and business training.

Feasibility: 9

Microfinance institutions are established around the world in places like India, Cambodia and Bangladesh. Investors already back these loans and big banks are a part of the movement, making it easy for expansion to occur.

Impact: 4

A study found that microfinance did help people in poverty make better financial decisions but did not increase income. (However, there are some negative effects of micro credit, such as increased stress and pressure from payments.  

9. Conduct training programs on how to use mobile phone Internet access to find and develop markets worldwide instead of looking for non-existent local jobs.

Feasibility: 5

The essential problem with such an idea is the infrastructure needed in developing countries. More than half the world is still offline. Although the market for such jobs is accelerated already from the pandemic, there is still much work to do before such a future is a reality for everybody.

Impact: 7

Allowing access to online jobs circumvents immigration laws and provides a way for people to find work beyond their country. It enables their skills to be applied wherever they are best and opens up opportunities for digital entrepreneurship.

10. Consider seriously new progressively equalizing instruments, e.g. wealth tax and revising inheritance laws.

Feasibility: 5

Although a wealth tax is supported by many, even millionares, passing such laws across the world will be slow and difficult. Some governments may simply refuse to pass such laws.

Impact: 7

Wealth taxes and revised inheritance laws have the potential to reduce wealth inequality and generate revenue for governments to fund social programs and services. These measures can help address wealth concentration, promote economic fairness, and contribute to poverty reduction. However, the effect of these measures varies across regions based on governments.

11. Tax carbon and international financial transfers to support global infrastructures and institutions.

Feasibility: 5

Implementing carbon taxes and taxation on international financial transfers has been done in various countries and regions. Many countries have already adopted carbon pricing mechanisms, and international financial transactions can be subject to taxation. However, achieving global consensus and coordination on such measures may pose challenges.

Impact: 7

Taxing carbon emissions can incentivize the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to climate change mitigation. Revenue generated from these taxes can be used to fund global infrastructure projects and support international institutions aimed at addressing global challenges. This can have a positive impact on both the environment and global development. It is estimated that a carbon tax globally could raise 125 billion a year, which could be used to fund thousands of public works projects, which provide jobs.

12. Explore alternative transaction systems like blockchain and cryptocurrencies (over 22,835 cryptocurrencies with $1 trillion (not billion) market capitalization).[2]

Feasibility: 8

Cryptocurrencies are widely known and used and are very easy to set up. Implementing a new currency would not be difficult.

Impact: 4

Although cryptocurrencies have allowed for “banking” for all and allowed easy transactions for everyone, especially in places where currencies are not so stable. However, cryptocurrencies are also inherently volatile leading to crisis when prices rapidly fluctuate, so their effectiveness is limited.

13. Give greater attention to the frontiers for work related to the forthcoming biological revolution, which may be as large as or larger than the industrial or information revolutions.

Feasibility: 4

Governments are limited in their abilities to incentivize certain types of jobs. In prior revolutions, such as the tech revolution, governments added coding to education, starting as early as 6^th grade to prepare students for future jobs. However, this is difficult to actually implement, especially because the biological revolution has not boomed yet, and there is a significant delay in passing legislation for education.

Impact: 8

In any revolution, people who “arrived” early were rewarded greatly. The same would be the case for the biological revolution, and if the incentivization of it was universal, people from lower economic backgrounds and poverty would have the chance to reap these rewards and lift themselves out of their class.

14. Promote Decentralized Autonomous Organizations for an unlimited number of peer-to-peer ad hoc “workers.”

Feasibility: 6

DAO’s have been implemented successfully multiple times, and are easy to setup with a group of voluntary workers. The lack of worldwide internet limits the implementation of DAO’s, however.

Impact: 5

DAO’s act as an alternative to standard corporations, which have a board of directors. DAO’s allow for more control from each participant, and remove many administrative costs involved in standard corporations. This makes it accessible and more efficient for most people, allowing them to participate in ventures they would not have previously been able to.

15. Establish Labor/Business/Government Next Technologies databases.

Feasibility: 5

Creating Labor/Business/Government Next Technologies databases is feasible from a technological perspective. Building and maintaining databases to track and share information about emerging technologies and their impact on labor, businesses, and government policies is technically achievable. However, it may require significant collaboration among these stakeholders and adequate resources for implementation.

Impact: 6

Establishing such databases can have a positive impact on various aspects of the economy. It can facilitate information sharing and collaboration between labor, businesses, and government entities, leading to more informed decision-making. This can help in adapting to technological changes, addressing workforce needs, and developing policies that support economic growth and job creation. While the impact is potentially significant, its realization depends on effective utilization and cooperation among the involved parties.

16. Outlaw tax havens, that collectively cost governments $500 billion to $600 billion a year in lost tax revenue.

Feasibility: 4

Efforts to crack down on tax havens have been ongoing, with international organizations and governments working to improve transparency and cooperation in tax matters. While progress has been made, completely outlawing tax havens may be challenging due to legal and jurisdictional complexities. Some countries may resist such efforts.

Impact: 7

Eliminating tax havens can significantly increase government revenue, especially in developing countries, by preventing tax evasion and avoidance. This additional revenue can be channeled into public services, infrastructure development, and poverty reduction programs. It can have a substantial positive impact on reducing income inequality and promoting economic development globally.

17. Raise minimum wages and address executive wages.

Feasibility: 5

Controlling executive wages is hard because they are determined by the board of directors of companies, and minimum wage increases are generally done by locality rather than entire nations. Even the US has barely changed minimum wages over the last decade, indicating that governments are reluctant to change them.

Impact: 5

Exec pay has been severely inflated to the point that halving the pay of the top 5 executives of the top 350 companies would approximately increase the profits of the companies by 3 percent on average. These are potential profits that could be going towards shareholders of the company, profits that could be redistributing wealth. However, most shareholders are already wealthy, so this redistribution’s true impact is unknown. Minimum wage increases on the other hand increase the level of earning of the least paying jobs, but also cause people to lose their jobs. However, there are many places where workers are paid less than minimum wage, where enforcing the minimum wage would be helpful in reducing poverty.

18. Create mechanisms to help people invest in automations that replace their job; e.g., truck drivers manage and invest into ownership of driverless trucks.

Feasibility: 4

There are programs where workers work alongside technology, such as truck drivers who act as backups for automated trucks. However, investing is often limited by the capital of workers, which may not be enough to for example, purchase a truck driving unit. However, working together, workers could own a truck together and share the profits. This however, could be limited by the existence of companies who make these trucks, who would much rather work out deals with companies than to sell individual trucks that freelance in this method.  

Impact: 6

Such an opportunity would expand the investment capabilities for individuals with lower paying jobs, but it would be limited by the amount of capital each worker invests into the automation. This would provide passive income but not act as a replacement for a job most likely. Thus, it would not really act as a solution for workers losing their jobs to AI.

19. Explore global workforce sourcing solutions that overcome immigration and migration barriers to allow qualified workers to move where they can meet the vacant skilled labor requirements.

Feasibility: 4

Immigration laws vary across nations, making it hard for workers to travel to where they are needed. However, there have been cases of laborers moving for work, such as the construction of the burj khalifa, during which most workers were migrants, although they were treated poorly. The potential for workers to now find work online allows them to cross borders much easier.

Impact: 6

By introducing workers where they are needed, no unnecessary unemployment exists. However, migrant workers are exploited often, as they are paid less and abused.

20. Create personal AI/Avatars to support self-employment.

Feasibility: 4

The idea of personal AI is limited by the technology required itself. 40% of the world still does not have access to internet, and AI avatars are a developing technology that have not been fully used yet. However the actual creation of the AI avatars already exists so it could be used for the people who do have access to it. The only limit lies in the expansion of the technology and the internet.    

Impact: 6

Although hard to implement, AI avatars have a lot of potential in employment opportunities and learning opportunities. They are already used for marketing videos, but the impact could be limited by its access to povpoverty-strickendividuals. However, if internet access was expanded, these avatars could help individuals find freelance opportunities and ways to profit from hobbies.

21. Business schools should teach synergetic analysis as well as completive analysis.

Feasibility: 4

Introducing synergetic analysis alongside competitive analysis in business school curricula is feasible. It involves updating and expanding the existing curriculum to include a broader perspective on business practices, collaboration, and sustainable development. Many business schools already adapt their programs to reflect changing business paradigms, but the novelty of synergetic analysis may lead to a slow shift.

Impact: 6

Teaching synergetic analysis can help future business leaders understand the importance of collaboration and sustainable practices in a globalized world. It can lead to more responsible and ethical business practices that consider the broader social and environmental impacts. However, the impact may vary depending on the extent to which these concepts are integrated into business education.

22. Explore guaranteed income programs, as next technologies may lead to long-term structural unemployment, and create cash flow projections to explore financial sustainability of universal basic income.

Feasibility: 3

Guaranteed income programs have been proposed in the US before, but are a foreign concept in most countries, because of lack of funding. For a true guaranteed income program, there would need to be a mostly automated society, which is not the case currently. However, the system has been implemented in a few cities for a brief period, and there has never been a true cash flow projection to maintain the system.

Impact: 7

From the testing done so far, people of color with little to no income benefit greatly. Interviews with people receiving this aid show mothers with reduced stress, people able to pay childcare, etc. This shows that these programs have the potential to create societal change for people in poverty by setting a basic standard of living for them.

23. Conduct research for options to counter entrenched privilege.

Feasibility: 2

Countering entrenched privilege is a massive task and vague. People’s perceptions are not changed overnight, and bias persists even after it is legally banned. “Privilege bias” is hard to change and requires a societal shift in thinking, something extremely difficult to do. Ideas like basic income and progressive tax brackets can be tools governments use to fight this privilege.

Impact: 8

Although a large goal, the impact of changing entrenched privilege would be large. Entrenched privilege leads to cycles of poverty through generations, and its end would be significant in giving people the opportunity to escape this cycle. It would “even” the plane in many areas of people’s lives like the workplace.

Learn more about other actions for other global problems at the Millenium Project.

1. Will ecological thinking eventuate in an instrumentalization of life? Generally speaking, biology – especially when a nervous system is involved — is more energy efficient when it comes to storing, accessing and processing information than even the best silicon-based computers. While we still don’t quite know why this is the case, we are nevertheless acquiring greater powers of ‘informing’ biological processes through strategic interventions, ranging from correcting ‘genetic errors’ to growing purpose-made organs, including neurons, from stem-cells. In that case, might we not ‘grow’ some organs to function in largely the same capacity as silicon-based computers – especially if it helps to reduce the overall burden that human activity places on the planet?  (E.g. the brains in the vats in the film The Minority Report which engage in the precognition of crime.) In other words, this new ‘instrumentalization of life’ may be the most environmentally friendly way to prolong our own survival. But is this a good enough reason?  Would these specially created organic thought-beings require legal protection or even rights? The environmental movement has been, generally speaking, against the multiplication of artificial life forms (e.g. the controversies surrounding genetically modified organisms), but in this scenario these life forms would potentially provide a means to achieve ecologically friendly goals.

2. Will concerns for social justice force us to enhance animals? We are becoming more capable of recognizing and decoding animal thoughts and feelings, a fact which has helped to bolster those concerned with animal welfare, not to mention ‘animal rights’. At the same time, we are also developing prosthetic devices (of the sort already worn by Steven Hawking) which can enhance the powers of disabled humans so their thoughts and feelings are can be communicated to a wider audience and hence enable them to participate in society more effectively. Might we not wish to apply similar prosthetics to animals – and perhaps even ourselves — in order to facilitate the transaction of thoughts and feelings between humans and animals? This proposal might aim ultimately to secure some mutually agreeable ‘social contract’, whereby animals are incorporated more explicitly in the human life-world — not as merely wards but as something closer to citizens. (See, e.g., Donaldson and Kymlicka’s Zoopolis.) However, would this set of policy initiatives constitute a violation of the animals’ species integrity and simply be a more insidious form of human domination?

3. Will human longevity stifle the prospects for social renewal? For the past 150 years, medicine has been preoccupied with the defeat of death, starting from reducing infant mortality to extending the human lifespan indefinitely. However, we also see that as people live longer, healthier lives, they also tend to have fewer children. This has already created a pensions crisis in welfare states, in which the diminishing ranks of the next generation work to sustain people who live long beyond the retirement age. How do we prevent this impending intergenerational conflict? Moreover, precisely because each successive generation enters the world without the burden of the previous generations’ memories, it is better disposed to strike in new directions. All told then, then, should death become discretionary in the future, with a positive revaluation of suicide and euthanasia? Moreover, should people be incentivized to have children as part of a societal innovation strategy?

4. Will the end of death trivialize life? A set of trends taken together call into question the finality of death, which is significant because strong normative attitudes against murder and extinction are due largely to the putative irreversibility of these states. Indeed, some have argued that the sanctity – if not the very meaning — of human life itself is intimately related to the finality of death. However, there is a concerted effort to change all this – including cryonics, digital emulations of the brain, DNA-driven ‘de-extinction’ of past species, etc. Should these technologies be allowed to flourish, in effect, to ‘resurrect’ the deceased? As it happens, ‘rights of the dead’ are not recognized in human rights legislation and environmentalists generally oppose introducing new species to the ecology, which would seem to include not only brand new organisms but also those which once roamed the earth.

5. Will political systems be capable of delivering on visions of future human income? There are two general visions of how humans will earn their keep in the future, especially in light of what is projected to be mass technologically induced unemployment, which will include many ordinary professional jobs. One would be to provide humans with a ‘universal basic income’ funded by some tax on the producers of labour redundancy in both the industrial and the professional classes. The other vision is that people would be provided regular ‘micropayments’ based on the information they routinely provide over the internet, which is becoming the universal interface for human expression. The first vision cuts against the general ‘lower tax’ and ‘anti-redistributive’ mindset of the post-Cold War era, whereas the latter vision cuts against perceived public preference for the maintenance of privacy in the face of government surveillance. In effect, both visions of future human income demand that the state reinvents its modern role as guarantor of, respectively, welfare and security – yet now against the backdrop of rapid technological change and laissez faire cultural tendencies.

6. Will greater information access turn ‘poverty’ into a lifestyle prejudice? Mobile phone penetration is greater in some impoverished parts of Africa and Asia than in the United States and some other developed countries. While this has made the developed world more informationally available to the developing world, the impact of this technology on the latter’s living conditions has been decidedly mixed. Meanwhile as we come to a greater understanding of the physiology of impoverished people, we realize that their nervous systems are well adapted to conditions of extreme stress, as are their cultures more generally. (See e.g. Banerjee and Duflo’s Poor Economics.) In that case, there may come a point when the rationale for ‘development aid’ might disappear, and ‘poverty’ itself may be seen as a prejudicial term. Of course, the developing world may continue to require external assistance in dealing with wars and other (by their standards) extreme conditions, just as any other society might. But otherwise, we might decide in an anti-paternalistic spirit that they should be seen as sufficiently knowledgeable of their own interests to be able to lead what people in the developed world might generally regard as a suboptimal existence – one in which, say, the life expectancies between those in the developing and developed worlds remain significant and quite possibly increase over time.

https://youtu.be/CecpCepnkAU

While watching the occupy wall street movement gain momentum and challenge the status quo, we in the transhumanist and technoprogressive community should be taking notes at the differences between this movement and those of the 20^th century in direct opposition to some set of conservative policies.

This movement is not in direct opposition to anything. It is however, in opposition to any kind of conservative solutions being recommended to the systemic economic ailments of today. This movement attacks fascism while often improperly referencing the term, it attacks crony capitalism which is culturally vague, and corporatism which is a new word. While an academic or linguist might find them difficult to understand, it is quite simple to judge them as defending themselves as a part of society that is being depleted, as a direct result of our inability to allocate tangible value to them. They are angry. This growing mass of people across the United States is not looking to return to a socio-economic model that influences similar politics of the last century.

Watch the reference video. This is the same group of people (young and old) that are technologically transparent as Peter Singer identifies. They would likely take, but are not looking for traditional jobs, as I and so many others have talked/written about frequently. This vast majority of human potential, while looking at the numbers, can’t be satisfied their odds to compete successfully. Of course, democratic culture has a venue to argue the abstraction of political and even economic rifts in society, but there are none that allow the relatively untrained to argue root causes of the problems preventing their previously comfortable existence.

Movements that aren’t rigidly against some establishment, have a difficult time forming a set of solutions to seek. While the core argument may be “revolting against capitalism”, there is no replacement in site. Having stated that, the Smithian theories aren’t ill prepared; they do however, fail to address the very primitive ability of humans to gauge competition and allocate assets (tangible value); even in a vast market of millions of participants with relatively modest self-interest.

Those opposed, find five congruent contradictions (Ecology, Inequality, Poverty, Property, Systemic Risk) when considering the modern manifestation of what Aristotle, Adam, and Ayn elaborated on in the modern era. These contradictions are not in fact intrinsic to capitalism. They are intrinsic to the animal. In the human pursuit for ecological prudence, egalitarianism, distribution of wealth, shared property, and managed risks; we regularly reject the idea that it is impossible to achieve our goals without our technological extensions…without transparency of information, without distribution of education, without allocation of technologies based on need, as a result of our understandings through transparency. Courting technoprogressivism onto the American political stage may have been a viewed as radical in the last decade, even as its consistent economic recession ensued. But it may not be today, amongst the somewhat informed activists of virtual social networkers and physical street walkers.

In order to be rendered valuable, entities (people in this case) have to be represented well under some agreed upon or legal model. In the case of liberal desperation I think people are willing to consider the potential of living-out the interconnected scenario painted in my voting public or more vividly by Hank Pellissier‘s “representative democracy” in Invent Utopia Now. The transhuman rhetoric based around fundamentally transforming the human condition is not farfetched for the leftist movements of today. One would be naïve to think that tax reform or austerity or redistribution of wealth alone, could cure my aforementioned contradictions. There are no conservative means to remedy the problems of today, only to return to those of the past. Movements like occupy wall street are unlikely to reject transhumanist conversation because of their spiritual or educational or morally conservative roots. Further, we are witnessing an opportunity to empower activist’s discomfort with H+ solutions, to occupy all streets.