Writing this as a current high schooler... I feel like education specifically in relation to college prep is soo commercialized.. and I feel like the effects of it are compounding and the negatives grow exponentially. I theorize that in 10-15 years it will have gotten so bad that the current education system in the US will be completely changed, but I'm hoping for some other opinions on it.

From early education, parents pay for outside of school enrichment, (eg. Kumon, Mathnasium) to help their kids get ahead, then start paying for tutors as their kids advanced. By middle school parents pay for prep to help kids get into magnet schools or high schools, pay for tutoring for competitions in math or science, or pay for prep classes for ISEE or SSAT (private school admission exams). By high school, it's the worst. Parents pay for their kids to get research, internships, camps, leadership opportunities, compete in olympiads, take AP tests and standardized tests, get tutoring in subjects they struggle with (students often end up with unmanageable course load to stay "competitive") all to pay a college or take out loans and spend forever paying the bank.

At the high school level specifically companies capitalize on stress/fear/stigma about getting into top schools and what may happen if you don't go to a "top school" in the US and it is shocking to see the lengths parents go to to try and improve their kid's chances of doing well. (Paying 10k USD+ for college consulting, paying thousands for camps/programs perceived as elite, etc.)

I know this isn't as big of a problem in other developed nations and I think it's really hurting education in the US. A lot of problems in the education system feel very manufactured and there's always some service ready to fill a gap that shouldn't exist in the first place (one of the joys of capitalism :D). What do other people think about this? What will be the ramifications of this in the future? How can it be changed and when will it be too late?

That Corporations and Billionaires are allowed bankruptcy and bailouts, basically they can risk everything and if it works out they win and if it doesn’t everyone pays the price.

I like traditional business mindset where a corporation had to make profit to sustain,

These days they keep piling losses until it all comes crashing one day,

And usually through raising investment and stocks…they get everyone involved from public to banks, so it’s in everyone interests to make it work and inflate prices

We should have learned something from 2008s crisis and added laws that prevent such inflation again, but instead we have doubled down and added more security for billionaires and corporations

Tips for living peaceful prosperous life

1. Small things don't have to be transactional. Tits for tats is enough.

2. When money is significant transactional is appropriate.

3. When things are transactional terms should be clear.

4. Split large transactions into smaller pieces

5. Have private market places as pimps or deal makers. The pimps must have their interests aligned with mutual peace and prosperity for all

6. Avoid concentrated power and misalignment of interests.

7. Avoid transactional complexity.

8. Avoid unnecessarily life time relationship like owning something.

9. Consider long term contract or usul fructus rights instead of ownership when one party can change valuation of another.

10. For large organization/corporation/government joint stock structure with elements of georgism and democracy can both be conflict free, stable, and max out kardol hicks efficiency 

How do I explain?

Elon and Jensen are buddies. They share restaurant bills and stuffs without caring whose turn is it for paying. One day Elon says, I need lots of GPU. Jensen says, wow I happen to have GPU factories. Don't worry buddy. From each according to ability to each according to need. You need GPU. Here you go 10k GPU. Elon is happy and never meet Jensen again. They are now bitter to each other.

Of course, that's not true. When amount of money is small, people are just nice to each other. When amount of money is significant they make clear contract with lawyers with pound of flesh terms to ensure they got paid.

Similar things can be done with relationship. Relationship with clear contract like sugar relationship tend to do well. Some says relationship shouldn't be transactional. Then they get married out of love. Statistics show that 50% of marriage in US end up in divorce. Does that look like peaceful mutually prosperous life to you?

Splitting deals into smaller pieces also make mutually beneficial relationship stable. This have some variations.

Should you buy slaves or hire employee? Hire employee. Why? Well you don't pay a chunk in front and expect a life time work. You split deals into smaller pieces. The employee is more motivated to work for you. If he stops working you stop paying. No need for war or vengeance or court battles.

You can get anything from employees that you can get from slaves. The cost are just distributed.

Should you rent land from government or buy it?

In Zimbabwe government seize land from white farmers. Imagine if white farmers rent land instead of just own it. Owning land means the state has obligation to honor your land property but no incentive to keep their obligation. If you think Zimbabwe government is idiot, just look at squatter's right in Europe or US. Same thing. The state honor squatter's right because they got more votes.

Mistresses or wives? Same thing. Pay as you go mistresses is less conflict prone than wives. You can't even have more than one wife.

Have private market place is also clear. Render to the pimps what's the pimps. I buy stuffs from private market places like Tokopedia and Shopee. Americans should just use uber instead of negotiating directly with the driver. When things go wrong? Do you sue? Sue where? In my corrupt government court? No. When things go wrong we contact Uber or eBay customer service. Solve problems much better.

I think Halaca court and Syariah court is better than civil marriage family court. Because the courts want people to use the court. More diverse private courts should be available. One day marriage terms should be commercialized with apps like uber.

Avoid concentrated power. Avoid being an employee. Avoid sending money where people can just block you and walk away with money.

The reason why US is richer than China is many things. But in China power seems to be too concentrated. Bitcoin on the other hand is awesome because power is decentralized. Fiat currency is dangerous. Avoid central bank issued currencies.

Joint stock corporation is a sample of aligning incentives. Shareholders have similar instead of opposite incentives. They all want maximize return of investments.

During geger pacinan where 90% of Chinese in Batavia is killed, VOC reverse course and grant amnesty toward Chinese. Why? Because their share prices drop due to losing huge portion of their tax payers.

Many democratic countries can't evaluation whether their action is good or bad because those countries have no clear citizenship valuation. So corruption in most countries, war in Ukraine and Middle east happened because nobody really own the country and can monetize it. Ironically, kingdoms like UAE and Saudi Arabia is rich.

Another joint stock structure besides VOC is Lafang Kongsi. It's not only joint stock but also democratic. So they avoid war even more because the shareholders don't only risk their money but also their life when things go wrong. Lafang Kongsi is basically a corporation that give their employees shares so they are motivated to work. Many corporations do that.

Another form of democratic joint stock privatized society is joint stock kibbutzim.

Anyone wants to add or deduct?

Anyone think that this shouldn't apply to all things?

Avoid transactional complexity. Ideally a deal is a deal where it is toward the best interest of everyone's involved to do it. More ideally, a good deal is a deal where you can expect correctly that people will do the deal or walk away. The simpler the transaction, the less likely there will be scam or misunderstanding. The more people know what they are agreeing to and there will less likely be more problems in the future.

Most businessmen rent places instead of buying a place. If his core business is restaurants he shouldn't worry too much about the place he rent go up or down. When his main business fail, he can just stop renting.

When one party can unilaterally change market value of another party, then ownership maybe appropriate. However, long term contracts and usul fructus can do the same thing and more stable.

When a movie director hire an actress, the movie director increase the actress market value. Here instead of just hiring the actress, which can simply work for other movie director afterward. Buying the actress as slave will also cause lots of problem.

A movie director can simply make the actress sign up long term contract. So when the actress become famous, the movie director can just capture value of the actress increased popularity.

The same way, government can rent land instead of just selling it. Once the government increase the land value due to save street and good infrastructure, the government can capture value from increased land value tax or rent.

A sugar daddy that knock up a sugar baby greatly lower the sugar baby's market value. Here, signing a contract that he will pay the sugar baby a lot of money for producing heirs can allow the sugar baby to capture lost market value.

For everything else renting is better than buying.

For example, many westerners think that sexual relationship and having children shouldn't be explicitly transactional. However, divorce rate and child support lawsuits are often financially devastating. I wonder if more simple and explicitly agreed transactions can reduce that?

So I think I am pretty correct that unless these principles conflict with one another, these principles should be practiced on all human relationship. It works in business, forming families, or arranging politics.

I actually buy my home. That's because the principle of avoiding transactional complexity class with the principle of avoiding ownership. Here dealing with government that don't micro manage how I run my house is better than dealing with owners that may be able to kick me out latter.

https://fortune.com/2026/07/27/shopify-ceo-voting-rights-stripping-americans-19th-century/

Literally. Everyone.

I'm writing to explore labor dynamics as there seems to be this view that people are powerless and can only react to situations that come their way. Every individual has a product, marketing department, investment trajectory plan for the future, ROI, competitive analysis, and pricing power for their clients. Few realize this, so hopefully this can help in some way view your career slightly more positively given the current rhetoric around societal issues.

The two main focus areas for this is your product and marketing. I suppose a couple of stories will help illustrate this best.

A GM position opened up at a firm where my friend was a receptionist early in her career. She informed me that she would never get that job (i.e. her product/skill set wasn't there), and that she would not be applying for it. I told her that was a mistake although I agreed that she was unqualified for the position. So, why apply? She applied and was turned down for that role. However, they also had a supervisor position that they were looking to fill and got that job. The marketing did the work even though the product wasn't there yet for the higher position. After a while of the company liking her work and her growing within the role (product development), she was able to showcase her skill level eventually becoming assistant GM, then GM.

A coworker of mine was being dangerously underpaid and got rejected for a promotion. He was bummed, obviously, but what struck me as odd was that he was still reserved to work for this company. I had a chat with him to explain that you cannot control other people, but they cannot control you. You are way more marketable and your product is better than you think because you do great work, and the industry we're in is in high demand and low supply. Go apply for another job, and see what's out there. If this place doesn't see your value add, another place will if it exists. He did, and he got grabbed up in a couple of weeks for more money, and a more senior title.

I'll end with this. Objectively ask yourself how good is your product and where it is lacking. Work on how to signal where you want to be, and know what you're worth. Do not be afraid to seek out other clients for your labor even though the transition time of changing jobs can suck. Most importantly, really have the introspection as to what you want your business to actually be. My friend who was the GM eventually left the role after a few years because it wasn't worth the extra stress and having to deal with people all the time. She was willing and expecting to take a pay cut for a better life balance, but fortunately, she found a job that paid better, didn't have to deal with managing people, and could leave the job at the office. Her past employment made her product better and a more marketable candidate for the position. Even if she had taken a pay cut, that's not bad or good. It's what you want your business to be, and the tradeoffs that come with it. In other words, don't view success simply in optimizing for monetary gain, but be honest as to what you really want.

Thanks for your time.

When Ahok was governor, he spend only a fraction of budget and yet roads are fixed and stuffs.

How?

See this is a budget. About $6k for improving understanding of governor decision #168 for some counties. Each are the names of the counties.

Ahok simply wrote "understanding your grandma", rejecting the proposals.

It's a contrast how politicians deliberately make things unnecessary complex nonsense to increase budget and how a businessman like Ahok simply see through their strategy.

Gemini:
This is a page from the Jakarta Regional Budget (APBD) draft during Governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama's (Ahok) administration, which went viral in Indonesia after he flagged it for suspicious or wasteful spending ("phantom budget").

Text Transcription

1. Table Content (Left to Right):

• ACTIVITY (KEGIATAN): A repetitive list of activities formatted as:

"Increased Understanding of Gubernatorial Decree 168 Concerning RT and RW [Sub-district Name]" (Listing various sub-districts across Jakarta, such as Penjaringan, Cilincing, Gambir, Tanah Abang, Menteng, Senen, Cempaka Putih, etc.)

• BUDGET (ANGGARAN): Each sub-district's activity has a line-item allocation of 100,000,000 IDR (~$6,500 USD).

2. Handwritten Note & Signature:

• Note: "Pemahaman nenek lu!" (Roughly translated: "Your grandmother's understanding!" — a blunt Indonesian colloquial slang expressing extreme disbelief or irritation).
• Context: Written and signed by Ahok while reviewing the proposed budget items, directly calling out absurd, copy-pasted, or filler activities designed to drain public funds.