US action is needed to counter China's influence in Asia to protect allies, stability, and America

✅ Reasons to agree:

1.   Asia’s Future Economic Dominance
1. Asia is projected to account for over 50% of global GDP by 2050 (McKinsey Global Institute). A Chinese-dominated Asia could reshape trade norms, intellectual property rules, and technology standards, potentially sidelining U.S. industries like tech (e.g., semiconductors), manufacturing, and finance. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is already redirecting global trade routes.
2. Scores: Validity: 9/10 | Linkage: 10/10 | Importance: 10/10
2. Support for Democratic Allies
1. Allies like Japan (U.S. mutual defense treaty) and Taiwan (63% of global semiconductor production, TrendForce 2023) are critical to U.S. security and economic stability. Their fall to authoritarian influence could destabilize the region, triggering a domino effect on South Korea, the Philippines, and Australia.
2. Scores: Validity: 9/10 | Linkage: 9/10 | Importance: 9/10
3. Regional Security & Trade Stability
1. The Indo-Pacific handles 60% of global maritime trade (UNCTAD). China’s militarization of the South China Sea threatens freedom of navigation, risking disruptions to U.S. supply chains for semiconductors and rare earth minerals (China controls 80% of global supply). Stability here is vital for U.S. economic resilience.
2. Scores: Validity: 8/10 | Linkage: 9/10 | Importance: 9/10
4. Defending the Rules-Based International Order
1. China’s artificial islands in the South China Sea violate UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea), challenging norms that have ensured decades of peace and open trade. U.S. deterrence reinforces these standards, benefiting itself and its allies.
2. Scores: Validity: 8/10 | Linkage: 8/10 | Importance: 9/10

❌ Reasons to disagree: 

1.  Domestic Fragility First
1. The U.S. faces internal challenges like political polarization and economic inequality (Gini coefficient rose from 0.43 in 1990 to 0.49 in 2022, World Bank). Aggressive foreign policy may seem hypocritical when democratic norms are strained at home.
2. Scores: Validity: 9/10 | Linkage: 8/10 | Importance: 8/10
2. Escalation Risks
1. Confrontation over Taiwan risks military conflict. RAND simulations estimate a U.S.-China war could cost trillions and risk nuclear escalation. The U.S. lacks a formal defense treaty with Taiwan, clouding its obligations.
2. Scores: Validity: 8/10 | Linkage: 9/10 | Importance: 9/10
3. Economic Blowback
1. Escalation could disrupt global markets. China holds over $800 billion in U.S. Treasury bonds (2023) and could retaliate by dumping them or restricting rare earth exports, raising U.S. consumer prices via tariffs or supply chain shocks.
2. Scores: Validity: 7/10 | Linkage: 8/10 | Importance: 8/10
4. Perceived U.S. Hypocrisy
1. Critics highlight U.S. domestic issues like racial justice and democratic backsliding (Freedom House downgraded U.S. scores in 2021). “Exporting” democracy abroad may lack credibility without addressing these first.
2. Scores: Validity: 8/10 | Linkage: 6/10 | Importance: 7/10 

Arguments are ranked using scores that evaluate three key dimensions: logical validity, linkage strength, and relative importance. Logical validity assesses the soundness of the argument's reasoning, while linkage strength measures how directly and powerfully the argument supports or opposes the conclusion. Relative importance gauges how significant the argument is in determining the belief's overall strength. Each dimension's score is determined by analyzing the performance of branching pro/con sub-arguments, ensuring a systematic and evidence-based evaluation process.

---

💡 Interest / Motivation of those who agree:

1.  Geopolitical Strategy: Counterbalance China’s rise to maintain U.S. influence in Asia.
2. Moral Imperative: Uphold democratic values and human rights for allies.
3. Economic Security: Protect supply chains (e.g., semiconductors) and trade routes.
4. Treaty Obligations: Honor commitments to Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines.

 

🤝 Interest / Motivation of those who disagree:

1. Domestic Priorities: Focus on infrastructure, healthcare, and education reform.
2. Diplomatic Engagement: Avoid a new Cold War through dialogue with China.
3. Economic Stability: Preserve trade with China ($559 billion in 2022).
4. Military Caution: Reduce defense spending and overseas risks.

 

🤲 Shared Interests between those who agree and disagree:

1. Regional peace and stability
2. Open, prosperous Asian markets
3. Resilient global supply chains
4. Prevention of large-scale conflict

 

⚔️ Opposing Interests between those who agree and disagree (Key Obstacles Between Parties Preventing Resolution):

1. U.S. vs. China: U.S. seeks a rules-based order; China prioritizes regional autonomy.
2. Allies’ Dilemma: Allies want U.S. protection but fear U.S.-China conflict.
3. Business Interests: U.S. firms value China’s market but face decoupling pressure.
4. Ideological Divide: Democracy vs. authoritarianism fuels tension.

 

---

📂 Evidence that agrees 

1.  USTR Reports: Highlight China’s trade coercion and IP theft (Section 301, 2018).
2. U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy (2022): Calls for countering China’s influence.
3. Freedom House (2023): Notes global democratic decline tied to authoritarianism.
4. CSIS Analysis: Details South China Sea militarization risks.

  

📄 Evidence that agrees 

1.  RAND Studies: Estimate trillions in losses from U.S.-China conflict.
2. Pew Research (2023): 60% of Americans favor avoiding military conflict with China.
3. IMF Data: U.S.-China trade interdependence ($559 billion in 2022).
4. Foreign Affairs: Critiques U.S. overextension and hypocrisy.

 

---

🎯 Most Likely Benefits: 

1.  Deter Chinese aggression (e.g., fewer South China Sea incursions).
2. Strengthen alliances (e.g., AUKUS pact).
3. Protect critical supply chains and technologies.
4. Reinforce U.S. leadership in global norms (e.g., digital trade).

 

💥 Most Likely Costs: 

1. Economic retaliation (e.g., China dumping U.S. bonds).
2. Military escalation risk in the Taiwan Strait.
3. Diverted resources from domestic needs.
4. Higher consumer prices from supply chain disruptions.

 

---

📘 Books that agree:

1.  The Long Game – Rush Doshi (China’s strategy).
2. Destined for War – Graham Allison (U.S.-China rivalry).
3. The China Nightmare – Dan Blumenthal (threats to U.S. interests).

 

📕 Books that disagree:

1. Avoiding the Thucydides Trap – Critiques war inevitability.
2. The China Boom – Ho-fung Hung (China’s economic benefits).
3. No More War – Dan Kovalik (anti-militarism).

 

---

⚖️ Local, federal, and international laws that agree (or can be said to be built on the same principals):

1. Taiwan Relations Act (1979): Supports Taiwan’s defense.
2. Mutual Defense Treaties: With Japan, South Korea, Philippines.
3. Indo-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative: Boosts naval presence.

 

🚫 Laws that disagree:

1.  War Powers Resolution: Limits military action without Congress.
2. WTO Rules: Restrict sanctions unless justified.

 

---

🎵 Songs that agree

1.  “For What It’s Worth” – Buffalo Springfield (vigilance).
2. Fight the Power” – Public Enemy (resistance).

 

Songs that disagree

1.  “Imagine” – John Lennon (peace vision).
2. “Give Peace a Chance” – Plastic Ono Band (anti-war).

 

---

👥 People who agree 

1. Mike Gallagher (House China Committee Chair).
2.  Elbridge Colby (The Strategy of Denial).
3.  Bipartisan hawks (e.g., Senators Rubio, Schumer).

 

🧑‍💼 People who disagree 

1.  fareed Zakaria (advocates restraint).
2. Andrew Bacevich (critic of militarism).
3. Rep. Ro Khanna (progressive caution).

 

---

🌐 Web Pages that agree

1.  White House Indo-Pacific Strategy
2.  CSIS on Chinese Expansion
3.  U.S.-China Commission

 

Web pages that disagree 

1. Foreign Policy: Against Confrontation
2.  Brookings: Cooperation
3.  RAND: Conflict Simulations

 

---

📷 Images that can be said to agree

1.  

Images that can be said to disagree

1.  

---

🎥 Videos that agree:

1.  

Videos that disagree:

1.  

---

🧪 Best Objective Criteria for Assessing the Validity of this Belief

1. China’s military/diplomatic actions (e.g., incursions, trade coercion).
2.  Allied public support for U.S. presence (e.g., Pew polls in Japan).
3. Trade/military readiness metrics (e.g., U.S. naval deployments).
4. Global diplomatic reactions (e.g., UN votes, ASEAN statements).

 

---

🗞️ Supporting Media

1.  

🔍 Most Likely Root Cause of associated problems

1. Geopolitical Rivalry: U.S.-led liberal order vs. China’s authoritarian model.
2.  Economic Interdependence: U.S./allies rely on China but seek autonomy.
3.  Domestic Divisions: U.S. debates over foreign vs. domestic priorities. 

Other Templates:

• Interests/Motivation Template 

 

Background, context, definitions, and assumptions:

1.   

---

Reasons to agree this proposal or belief has ethical means or methods

1.  

Reasons to agree this proposal or belief has ethical ends or results

1.   

---

Local, federal, and international laws that agree (or can be said to be built on the same principles):

1.  

Local, federal, and international laws that disagree (or can be said to be built on beliefs that disagree):

1.    

---

Reasons to disagree this proposal or belief has ethical means or methods

1.  

Reasons to disagree this proposal or belief has ethical ends or results

1.  

 

Fundamental Beliefs and Principles One Must Reject to Reject This Belief

• [List core assumptions or principles that, if not accepted, make the belief untenable.]

🤝 Strategies to Encourage Cost-Benefit Analysis and Conflict Resolution

• [Practical steps to bridge gaps, such as data sharing, open forums, or mediation tactics.]

 

 

To the tune of You'll Be Back Song by Jonathan Groff and Original Broadway Cast of Hamilton.

This isn't something I just found.

This is my daft.

I would love feedback, or your version!

Lyrics:
You say,
The price of a king's love is not something you're willing to pay
You cry,
In your Tesla, you must hawk since you got canned today
Why so sad?
Remember, we had a deal when you picked me,
Though I tried to torch democracy-
Now, you're making me mad!
Don't be disrespectful,
Remember, despite my convictions, I'm your manly-man

Chorus:
I came back, soon, you'll see
You remember you belong to me
You'll be back, time will tell,
You'll recall I played golf while our country went to hell.
Oceans rise, alliances fade,
Canada, Ukraine, Greenland-betrayed,
But we owned the libs through it all!
And when push comes to shove,
I will send a strung-out teen DOGE bro or Jan-6th thug to remind you of my love!

Da-da-da, dat-da, dat, da-da-da, da-ya-da
Da-da, dat, dat, da-ya-da
Da-da-da, dat-da, dat, da-da-da, da-ya-da
Da-da, dat, dat, da-ya
Verse 2:

You say,

My self-love's draining, and you're ready to flee,
You'll be whining online if I leave, you'll see!
And no, don't try to change the subject
'Cause I'm the only subject
Your sweet, submissive subject
You are my loyal, I'm your royal subject,
Forever and ever and ever and ever and ever-

I came back, not like before,
It's time to settle all my scores.
I won't fight their fights,
I'll help Russia win the war
For your love, for your praise
I'll hawk merch 'till the end of days
New conspiracies I'll weave
I'll love myself 'til your dying days
When you're gone, I'll go mad
So don't throw away this thing we had
'Cause when push comes to shove
I will break our oaths to defend
Flood X with ALL-CAPS screeds,
Blame Ukraine for mess, say "your fired" to impress,
Cut Oligarchs taxes,
And balloon the debt
-To remind you of my love!

Da-da-da, dat-da, dat, da-da-da, da-ya-da
Da-da, dat, dat, da-ya-da
Da-da-da, dat-da, dat, da-da-da, da-ya-da
Da-da, dat- everybody!
Da-da-da, dat-da, dat, da-da-da, da-ya-da
Da-da, dat, dat, da-ya-da
Da-da-da, dat-da, dat, da-da-da, da-ya-da
Da-da-da, dat, da-ya-da-ah!

When Loyalty Tests Replace Truth: The Existential Threat to Democracy

Introduction: Beyond Political Disagreement

Democracy thrives on debate and policy disagreements, but it cannot survive when truth itself is sacrificed for power.

Donald Trump’s demand for loyalty through repeating falsehoods—from election fraud claims to crowd size exaggerations—was more than political spin. It was a deliberate test, forcing allies to prove allegiance by aligning with verifiable falsehoods.

This practice undermines elections, institutions, and governance, posing a greater threat than any policy dispute. History warns that when leaders demand fealty to lies, democratic societies unravel.

---

Trump’s Loyalty Tests Through Lies

1. The Loyalty Test Pattern

Trump’s presidency featured clear examples where power depended on repeating falsehoods:

• 2020 Election Fraud Claims: Republican politicians who privately acknowledged Biden’s victory publicly supported Trump’s false claims, showing that political survival required repeating the lie.
• Inauguration Crowd Size (2017): Sean Spicer, as White House Press Secretary, falsely claimed Trump’s inauguration drew “the largest audience ever”, despite clear photographic evidence.
• SharpieGate (2019): Trump altered a weather map with a Sharpie to falsely claim Hurricane Dorian would hit Alabama. Government officials were pressured to back his claim.

These weren’t innocent misstatements—they were loyalty tests, designed to separate those willing to lie for Trump from those who wouldn’t.

---

2. The Psychological Binding Effect

Repeating falsehoods deepens loyalty through:

✅ Moral Threshold Crossing: Defending a lie forces followers to compromise integrity, making it harder to later reject the leader.
✅ Cognitive Dissonance: Once supporters publicly embrace falsehoods, they rationalize their stance rather than admit they were manipulated.
✅ Social Reinforcement: Groups repeating the same falsehoods create identity-based loyalty, replacing shared values with shared deception.

This mirrors cult behavior, where leaders demand that followers repeat obvious falsehoods—a tactic used by Jim Jones in the People’s Temple to test absolute allegiance.

---

Why the Death of Truth Matters More Than Policy Disagreements

1. Democracy Requires a Shared Reality

Truth is the foundation of democracy. Without it:

✅ Informed Voting is Impossible: Citizens can’t make rational choices when leaders manufacture false realities.
✅ Accountability Mechanisms Break Down: If evidence is dismissed as “fake news”, oversight collapses.
✅ Institutions Lose Credibility: Courts, law enforcement, and media become targets of disinformation rather than trusted sources.

When truth is treated as subjective, democracy shifts toward authoritarian control.

---

2. Historical Precedents: How Truth’s Collapse Leads to Authoritarianism

Every modern dictatorship began by destroying truth:

• Stalin’s Show Trials (1936-1938): Party members confessed to fabricated crimes to prove loyalty.
• Mao’s Cultural Revolution (1966-1976): Citizens made false public confessions to reinforce ideological control.
• January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol Riot: Fueled by election fraud lies, Trump’s most devoted supporters resorted to violence to overturn democratic results.

When leaders demand allegiance to lies, history warns that democracy is in its final stage before collapse.

---

3. The Escalation Spiral: How Lies Tighten Control

Loyalty tests don’t stop at small distortions—they escalate:

1️⃣ Initial Test: Followers accept minor distortions (“fake news media”)
2️⃣ Escalation: They defend increasingly blatant falsehoods (e.g., “The election was stolen”)
3️⃣ Active Participation: They must spread and enforce the lie themselves
4️⃣ Point of No Return: Each step raises the psychological cost of defection

This “moral threshold effect” ensures that once a person crosses one line, they are more likely to cross the next—making defection nearly impossible.

---

Truth’s Death vs. Political Disagreements: A Critical Comparison

Aspect	Policy Disagreements	Erosion of Truth
Impact on Democracy	Strengthens democratic processes	Undermines democracy itself
Resolution Mechanism	Elections, debate, compromise	None—when truth is subjective, resolution is impossible
Historical Precedent	Normal in healthy democracies	A precursor to authoritarian rule
Long-Term Effect	Leads to shifts in governance	Destroys institutions and leads to societal breakdown

Democracy survives and thrives on disagreement—but it dies when truth itself is abandoned.

---

Breaking the Cycle: Why Truth Must Be Defended

✅ Reject Falsehoods as Loyalty Tests: No leader should demand public allegiance to lies.
✅ Hold Institutions Accountable: Media, courts, and government agencies must resist pressure to conform to political narratives.
✅ Recognize Truth as a Nonpartisan Issue: When any leader, left or right, demands loyalty over facts, democracy is in danger.

---

Final Thought: Truth is Democracy’s Lifeline

Democracy can survive bad policies.
It cannot survive when truth itself is sacrificed.

The greatest political divide today isn’t left vs. right—it’s between those who defend truth and those who subordinate it to power.

When truth dies, democracy dies with it.

Trading with Purpose: A Values-Based Framework for Global Trade

In 2022, as Russian missiles devastated Ukrainian cities, Western companies continued operating in Russia, inadvertently channeling resources into Putin's war machine. This was no anomaly—it starkly illustrates the moral and strategic failures of a global trade system that prioritizes short-term economic gains over democratic values, human rights, and global stability. Whether it’s Western technology enabling China’s surveillance state or oil revenues financing extremism, trade too often empowers authoritarian regimes to undermine justice, freedom, and security.

To address these systemic issues, we must fundamentally rethink global trade policy. Import tariffs should be determined by a transparent formula based on objective scores from reputable indices, such as Freedom House’s Freedom in the World report and Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index. This approach would replace politically motivated trade deals with a values-driven framework, rewarding nations that foster democracy and penalizing regimes that perpetuate oppression.

---

The Flaws in Current Trade Policy

The existing global trade system is plagued by three critical weaknesses:

1. Political Manipulation: Tariffs are frequently influenced by political whims, special interests, or diplomatic favors, resulting in inconsistency and favoritism.
2. Misaligned Incentives: Authoritarian regimes enjoy trade benefits while continuing to oppress their citizens, destabilize regions, and resist meaningful reform.
3. Strategic Short-Sightedness: Trade agreements often prioritize immediate economic gains over long-term security, enabling authoritarian regimes to weaponize their economic power against democracies.

These structural flaws create a vicious cycle, where democracies inadvertently undermine their own principles and security by empowering their adversaries.

---

A Transparent, Formula-Based Solution

Rather than relying on backroom deals or political expediency, trade policy must be grounded in transparent, objective criteria. A values-based tariff system would calculate rates based on a nation’s adherence to democratic principles, human rights, and the rule of law, as measured by internationally respected indices.

Core Metrics

1. Freedom House’s Freedom in the World Report: Evaluates political rights and civil liberties.
2. Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index: Assesses corruption in governance.
3. World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index: Measures adherence to legal fairness and accountability.

How It Works

Using these metrics, tariffs would be adjusted through a straightforward formula:

Tariff Rate = Base Rate × (1 + Composite Score Adjustment)

• Higher Tariffs: Imposed on nations with poor governance, incentivizing reform.
• Lower Tariffs: Rewarding countries that uphold democratic values, transparency, and the rule of law.

This system creates a direct and transparent link between governance quality and trade benefits, driving positive change while penalizing oppression.

---

The Benefits of a Values-Based Trade Policy

A values-driven trade system offers strategic, moral, and economic advantages:

1. Enhanced Predictability

• Businesses can anticipate tariff changes based on publicly available indices, reducing uncertainty and allowing for better long-term planning.
• Trade becomes less susceptible to the volatility of political whims, fostering market stability.

2. Strengthened Incentives for Reform

• Democracies and reforming nations gain economic advantages by improving governance.
• Authoritarian regimes face tangible economic consequences for oppressive policies, limiting their ability to fund military aggression or domestic repression.

3. Improved Accountability

• Leaders of countries with high tariffs are incentivized to address corruption, human rights abuses, and governance failures.
• Transparency minimizes the influence of lobbying and special interests on trade decisions.

4. Strategic Alignment with Democratic Values

• Trade policy reinforces global principles of justice, democracy, and human rights.
• Democracies build stronger alliances while reducing reliance on authoritarian states for critical resources.

5. Long-Term Global Stability

• By penalizing oppression and promoting reform, this approach reduces risks of conflict, strengthens governance, and fosters global security.

---

Addressing Concerns

Economic Disruptions

Critics may argue that a values-based system could disrupt trade or increase costs. However, gradual implementation, transition periods, and technical assistance programs can mitigate these effects. Over time, the benefits of stability, accountability, and aligned trade interests will far outweigh any initial challenges.

Feasibility and Flexibility

Some may question whether such a system can accommodate the complexities of global trade. By using well-established and regularly updated indices, the system remains fair and adaptable. An appeals process and regular review cycles ensure flexibility while maintaining accountability.

---

Implementation Plan

Phase 1: Pilot Program

• Test the formula with select trading partners to refine metrics and processes.
• Establish mechanisms for monitoring and adjustment.

Phase 2: Gradual Rollout

• Expand to include more trading relationships over time.
• Provide grace periods for nations to adapt and support reform efforts with technical assistance.

Phase 3: Full Adoption

• Apply the formula globally, ensuring regular updates to indices and calculations.
• Collaborate with international organizations, such as the WTO, to oversee implementation and enforcement.

---

The Moral and Strategic Imperative

Every dollar traded with authoritarian regimes strengthens their ability to oppress, destabilize, and threaten global security. From funding military aggression to enabling censorship and surveillance, unprincipled trade undermines the very values democracies claim to uphold.

A values-based trade policy isn’t just ethically justified—it’s strategically essential. By rewarding good governance and penalizing oppression, democracies can:

• Strengthen alliances with like-minded nations.
• Support reformers and pro-democracy movements worldwide.
• Reduce the influence of authoritarian regimes.
• Build a more stable, secure, and just global order.

---

Conclusion

The tools for implementing a values-based trade policy already exist. Respected indices provide the data, and global institutions have the capacity to adapt. The question is not whether we can make trade reflect our values—it’s whether we have the political will to do so.

A world where trade empowers democracies rather than tyrants is possible. By adopting a transparent, formula-driven system, we can ensure that trade not only promotes economic growth but also advances justice, human rights, and global stability. The time to act is now.

Its important to gather good parental advice

Please help me give good parental advice!

I'm trying to outline various topics using a formal process to identify reasons to agree/disagree and published documents that agree/disagree in a method that automates cost/benefit analysis and conflict resolution between those who agree and disagree with each belief.

Please leave your comments to help me outline this issue.

Thesis: It’s important to gather good parental advice

Reasons to agree:

1. Dangers of addiction and substance abuse.
1. Evidence: Documented correlation between early intervention and reduced addiction rates
2. Key Example: Impact of alcohol abuse on academic and career trajectories
3. Supporting Research: Studies showing the effectiveness of parent-child communication about substance risks
2. Risk of life-altering relationships and economic pitfalls.
1. Evidence: Statistical data on teen pregnancy and poverty correlation
2. Source: "The Lives of Teen Parents After Welfare Reform" (HHS Study)
3. Key Finding: 25% of teen mothers require welfare within 3 years
3. Positive impact of well-timed, respectful advice.
4. Danger of living a pointless, shallow, selfish, unexamined consumeristic life.  
5. Some things can drastically worsen your quality of life. You should identify things you should avoid and explain why. 
1. Reasons to agree:
1. Alcohol can destroy your life
1. Reasons to agree:
1. Drunk driving
2. I know people who were much smarter than me, but they partied in school and suffered the rest of their lives because of it. 
3. Websites that agree:
1. http://thecleanlife.hubpages.com/hub/How-Alcoholism-Can-Ruin-Your-Life
2. The interest of those who agree:
1. Validating their decision not to drink
2. Honestly seeking truth
3. Being careful
3. The interest of those who agree:
1. Validating their decision to drink
2. Honestly seeking truth
3. Being "fun"
2. Drugs can destroy your life
3. Falling in love with the wrong person can destroy your life
1. Books that Agree
1. "The Great Gatsby," by F. Scott Fitzgerald
4. Teen Pregnancy increases the chance of poverty. Poverty makes it much more difficult to have a good life
1. Publications That Agree:
1. Approximately one-quarter of teen mothers go on welfare within 3 years of the child’s birth 
1. Kaye, K. & Chadwick, L., The Lives of Teen Parents After Welfare Reform and the Role of TANF, 2006, Unpublished manuscript, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Assistant Secretary of Planning and Evaluation.
2. Poverty is almost nonexistent among those who graduated high school and did not have kids out of wedlock.
3. Two-thirds of families beginners with a young unmarried mother are poor.
1. Sawhill, I.V., Analysis of the 1999 Current Population Survey
2. Webpages that agree
1. http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/why-it-matters/pdf/poverty.pdf
6. Poverty can destroy your dreams
1. Books that Agree
1. "The Grapes of Wrath," by John Steinbeck
7. All you need is good love. Good love involves respect. You should respect people who can provide for themselves. 
8. you must correctly define a successful life to give good parental advice. If there is an afterlife, living a good life would involve preparing for it. You can prepare for the next life and live a good life now.
9. You might need to respect your kids if you want a long-term relationship and feel good giving them your inheritance. You need to at least explain your side of what it takes to be respectful

Reasons to Disagree and Limitations

1. Your kids must live their own lives.
2. Practical Constraints
1. Limited windows for meaningful communication
2. Competing time demands
3. Cultural/family dynamic variations
4. There are not very many times that your kids will want to hear your advice. Time passes; if you don’t have regular time to share your thoughts, everyone stays busy. They don’t need advice. They need good examples and a stable place to learn.
3. For those who grew up with very strict definitions of what is required to be “good,” it’s impractical to expect parenting to involve gathering with your children and family life to be a philosophical salon.

 

Recommendations for Implementations

1.       Regularly doing things with kids, asking about their lives, and doing fun things. Being open, honest, and transparent.

Objectives:

• Rank advice by its expected benefits and costs using tools to automate scoring.
• Foster consensus on best practices using evidence-based argument aggregation.

Freakonomics, the podcast that draws on Twin Studies, has shown that parents have very limited impact on Children’s lives.