3 ms·
I don't think it's particularly a "conspiracy theory", in that there's no cabal of people trying to cover this up. It's more an optimization function; we have
by InitialLastName 9y ago
I don't think it's particularly a "conspiracy theory", in that there's no cabal of people trying to cover this up. It's more an optimization function; we have N productivity units, and M humans (where M > N), so we hire from the most productive subsets of M. For the less productive subsets (largely youths, criminals, geriatrics), we encourage institutionalization to minimize the portion of M-productive required to maintain the unproductive ones.
If you look at post-industrialization patterns, the age at which humans become productive has been increasing as the productivity of humans has increased. On a subsistence farm, a 6-year old can be doing useful work to increase the productivity of the farm. In a coal mine or factory, an 8-year-old can do productive work. 16-year olds can do construction, food industry, but for jobs with decision-making responsibilities (as more and more jobs are today), we don't trust anyone under 22.
- tmuir 9y agoSo your saying, like all science that arrives at an answer that controls for time, fourier analysis is our best heuristic. Much of your verbage describes the general concepts at play which tease out the frequency components in fourier transforms. So knowing what you know about 8 year olds working in coal mines, and contrasting that with the general working conditions of a 22 year old knowledge worker, what cohesion can you deduce by controlling for time?