HOW TO BECOME ONE OF WORLD'S TOP 5 ECONOMIES: JackMaNews (10/17) DAMO Academy will change world's human 1 values of -1 data intelligence, 2 the Internet of Things, 3 fintech, 4 quantum computing : ALQ & 5 human-machine interaction-will yours be one of the first 7 DamoCity along with AliBaba's supercity Hangzhou (inaugural 40000 person comp summit, host china g20)? - will half the innovation be led by girls? correspondence rsvp (at project of Norman Macrae Family Foundation) if you search out a superapp story worthy of worldwide youth celebrations .. 21st c logistics netpreneurs 10T MIT

DAMO (Discovery Adventure Momentum Outlook) to attract world-class talent, build partnerships and open research laboratories in seven cities around the globe..Its research areas will cover data intelligence, the Internet of Things, fintech, quantum computing and human-machine interaction. Within those areas, it will focus on real-world applications like machine learning, network security, visual computing and Natural Language Processing. Intro to Tech Concerning AI blockchain -off site reddit:neo

Do you know top 10 ways your kids can be imagineering jobs and happy lives?: 1 friend mapping 2 additive manufacturing 3 sensors everywhere 4 type 2 blockchains =big-data-community-app'd 5 robots with more memory than university full of professors 6 everyone's a shopkkeper as well as customer 7 everyones a teacher as well as student as well as coder 8 to 10 - utellus

Thursday, December 31, 2015

unctad nets of ma

Roundtable discussion on corporate reporting and the UN sustainable development goals

When: 23 Apr 2018 1:30 AM, EDT
Where: United Nations, New York, NY
A Roundtable discussion on measuring the private sector's contribution to the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals(SDGs) will take place at the United Nations Headquarters in New Yorkon Monday, April 23 2018, from 1.30 p.m. to 5.00 p.m., in room S-2726. This event is organized by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in partnership with the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC), the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD), and the Royal Netherlands Institute of Chartered Accountants (NBA).
In the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including its financing needs, UNCTAD has over the past years aligned its work on enterprise sustainability reporting with the SDGs. This work builds on UNCTAD's long-standing role in servicing the annual sessions of the Intergovernmental Working Group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting (ISAR). It also builds on the work of the convening organizations on sustainable development.
The Roundtable will bring together United Nations permanent representatives, representatives from capitals, United Nations agencies, prominent leaders from the private sector and civil society, in order to interactively discuss the important role of corporate reporting in the SDGs' monitoring mechanism. The event will also provide an opportunity for networking among key stakeholders in the area of reporting, including formal elected members of ISAR and member States interested in applying for formal membership in the Group.
If you are interested in joining the Roundtable on April 23, please confirm your availability to, with copy and Please also contact Neil Stevenson at if you wish to discuss this further.

Monday, November 30, 2015

preparing english speaking cities with a future 4 youth - baltimore and

balitmore signs upo for musk's Hyperollop
Baltimore orginal socail jutice city of black girls since 1880- the thurgood marsjhall alumni communities
baltimore connectir bey ted leonsis promoise that sports  and tech stars will give bank all across baltimore-dc
baltimore ooen soace for anythin dc cant currently debate on green or other sustainability youth agenda
baltimore joint catalogued with dc's special olympcs of how to aprtner communities o olympics form 2020
baltimre juice - the leading black inspired training netwirk of blockchain and big data small
baltimoire- potentakilly tghe greatest health sevant cross roads - lana wen, hjopkinks, guest appearnces jin mim, thriving young chronics chapter linked to boston global health professionals
baltimore suoerhup round under armor
baltimore one of uS cities pope frabcis and other faith groups are encouraging most
baltimore has a downtoin university, in fact the whole city is downtow
baltimore has ain international airport

Axios Executive Editor Mike Allen hosts a conversation on the collision of infrastructure and innovation in cities of the future including interviews with:
  • The Honorable Mitch Landrieu
    President, U.S. Conference of Mayors
    Mayor, New Orleans
  • The Honorable Eric Garcetti
    Chair, U.S. Conference of Mayors Infrastructure Task Force
    Mayor, City of Los Angeles
  • Dr. Mory Gharib
    Director, Center for Autonomous Systems and Technologies
    California Institute of Technology
  • Mr. Dan Katz
    Director, Global Public Policy and North American Projects
    Hyperloop One
Friday, November 3rd at 8:00 a.m.
Doors open at 7:30 a.m.
Ticket Concourse
Los Angeles Union Station
800 North Alameda Street
whilst i would be happy if any of the 14 us/canada places where i have friends trying to create jobs turn out to get amazon hq2 if they want (eg 50000 gentifried houses in under a year could sink some places i know) i suggest now is an optimal time to get all these places mayors and others who submitted 200 proposals to amazon to combine their best parts - a curriculum of how places can invest in being job ready?

david- if you are down baltimore-dc way ever lets make a start on that with eg al and jayfus and amy and ?harrison
thanks chris  240 316 8157
amazon is due to announce 1 happy new year present and 199 losers

my question appeared on page 33
CM: ( would you explain to me why given that Amazon is looking for tens of thousands highly paid technology networkers, why is it looking for one second headquarters as opposed to, say, Alibaba who’s just announced 15 billion being put into an academywhich looks for 20 cities all over the world? 

MR. McDEARMAN: Maybe they are. It would not be surprising if they go through this process, and come up with multiple locations or that they’re looking out and you’re we’ll start with this net one and given the way we’re growing, we’re going to have to go to the next one. So I wouldn’t rule out that they’re not looking for that because Seattle’s even -- you know, they’re obviously saying by having to go that even as big and successful and techsavvy and headquarters like a Seattle, they probably need to diversify. So your question is a good one. 

MR. McKENNA: And if I could say something critical of the tech industry not that I’m the representative of, but I am a representative of it, is even though we’ve built all this technology to distribute, digital work and all this kind of stuff, we are biased towards location. Just look at Apple’s headquarters. They have just spent billions of dollars to move all of their people from these different -- even it wasn’t enough to be in 10 buildings in Cupertino

Sunday, November 29, 2015

Amazon’s red herring

Richard Shearer
    As many others have already pointed out, Amazon’s recent announcement that it will build a second headquarters in North America has set in motion what will become one of the biggest competitions in history among state and local governments for a corporate expansion project. In the world of state and local economic development, Amazon is a whale. The possibility of 50,000 highly-paid jobs for professionals at a new $5 billion development is too tempting to pass up for any metro area with even the slimmest hope of courting one of the largest and most profitable companies in the world. Amazon’s unsubtle hint that tax incentives will play a big role in its decision helps ensure it will receive one of the biggest packages in history. Already, cities and states have rushed to announce their hope to entice Amazon with their distinct value proposition, and—in all likelihood—breathtaking handouts.
    This begs important questions about the wisdom of state and local economic development strategies and their ability to remain focused on addressing the real challenges American communities face today.



    Richard Shearer

    Senior Research Associate & Senior Project Manager - Metropolitan Policy Program

    Before communities go all in, they should think about who will ultimately win. Amazon has set the table in a way that ensures that just about every community that plays this game will lose, and not just because all but one place will come away without the grand prize. Many elected officials and economic development professionals will work tirelessly over the upcoming weeks and months to put together the most competitive bids their public coffers will permit. They will do this at a time when the country and many of these places face very real economic and social challenges that will not change that much from Amazon’s expansion, all on the hope for growth that is destined to happen somewhere, but probably not there. Meanwhile, one very unlucky place that ultimately ties the knot with Amazon will pay dearly for something it probably could have gotten for free.
    Amazon’s announcement creates the expectation of a bake off—that places that can tick the boxes in Amazon’s request for proposals all have a chance. That is far from true. Amazon has become the world’s largest online retailer through ruthless cunning. The company’s success is built on a bet that it could win market share at the cost of its competitors by remaining unprofitable for many years. Amazon will have applied the same sort of cunning and long-range thinking to its expansion planning. As is often the case with corporate expansions and relocations like this one, there’s a very good chance Amazon already knows exactly where it would like to open its second headquarters, which would mean its request for proposals is a way of inviting the place it has already chosen to foot the bill for Amazon’s new digs. But even if the field is still open, most of the places that hope to compete really won’t.
    Amazon’s RFP already winnows the list of potential contenders to only a couple dozen metro areas, at most. In addition to what’s in the RFP, it is probably safe to assume there are other factors the company has already considered, which would shorten its list to only a few places.
    Employees work at the Amazon distribution center warehouse in Saran, near Orleans, France, November 22, 2016. REUTERS/Philippe Wojazer - RC14E99D05A0
    First, it seems safe to assume Amazon will locate in the eastern United States. Inverting to Canada would send a strong message about the company’s attitudes about the U.S. political environment right now. But, again, Amazon does not think short term. Moving to Canada would send the wrong message at the wrong time. It would invite a costly and ongoing rebuke from President Trump and his supporters. It would also play into President Trump’s arguments about U.S. corporate tax policy—a debate Amazon probably wants to avoid. And if the president’s tax reform proposals do become law, the move to Canada could prove shortsighted. Within the United States, Amazon may prefer locations in the Eastern or Central time zones, which would extend the company’s capability to manage its business in Europe and other parts of the world.
    Second, Amazon needs a metro area large and diversified enough to house it. That metro area must be large enough to supply up to 50,000 professionals and/or house a large influx of these workers and their families over the course of the next few years. That narrows the list to only the nation’s 10 or 12 largest metropolitan areas. Among those, most boast the assets Amazon is looking for in its RFP: most large metro areas have international airports that are well connected to other large metro areas, though not all have reliable public transit to their airports from other job centers in their region. Most large metro areas have more than one research university, but not all claim highly ranked engineering or management schools.
    Third, Amazon is probably looking for business-friendly environs where it will hold sway. Costs of doing business isn’t the only factor that matters, or maybe even the biggest factor. Although Amazon will need a very large metro area, it probably wants a place with a navigable public sector. That means a highly business-centric civic environment, attractive cost structure, and accessible state and municipal leaders who will always take Amazon’s calls—places where the company will be a very big fish. This probably rules out several of the country’s largest metro areas or those that are politically fragmented. Amazon may also like a location in a state where its presence could bend the political winds to its liking at the right moments.
    Even if only a few of these assumptions about Amazon’s interests were correct, they would limit Amazon to only one to three places. Amazon already knows that, and given what we know about the company and the site selection industry, it most likely has a favorite.
    If one assumes that Amazon has already made a choice about the location of its second headquarters, this game looks rather grim for any place that chooses play. Instead of simply announcing the decision it has most likely already made, Amazon has opted to create the illusion of a competition. It is hard to fault Amazon for that. It is a highly competitive, publically traded company with a fiduciary responsibility to get the best deal for its shareholders. Amazon’s faux competition will lure one otherwise enviable place into handing over a huge amount of its taxpayers’ money to a fabulously wealthy corporation for something that place could have gotten for free.
    However, whether or not Amazon already knows where it would like its second headquarters to be, its competition will create a net loss nonetheless. The competition will create more costs for the communities that make bids for its headquarters than Amazon can ever hope to recoup through the tax incentives it ultimately receives. It will lure many places into spinning their wheels to propose a deal they never had any real chance of closing. These places will waste valuable staff time, including that of elected officials, organizing themselves and their pitch for naught. This is an opportunity cost—time and effort that could have gone into solving other problems. What is worse, this game will create hope that is destined to be dashed. Smaller big cities do have a lot to offer and they tend to be rather proud of that. But many of them have seen company after company pull out of their place over the last thirty years, creating a nagging sense of loss. Because of the number of these places, they are destined to lose in these competitions more often than they win. Though they may not have wagered anything all that tangible, those losses can be devastating all the same. They lead to a lot of consternation, antipathy, and finger pointing after the fact.
    This game reveals a lot about the power of large companies and their distorting influence on places today, especially in local economic development. It is not Amazon’s game. Like many companies before it, Amazon is playing a game that states and local governments have designed themselves and that only they can lose. State and local governments happily accept this. They have proven over and over that they are all too willing to give up their tax base for growth that would have occurred somewhere anyway. And while that growth, if it arrives, may benefit some of that state or metro area’s residents, the competition itself isn’t going to fix any one of the many, many economic and social challenges American communities face today.


    Amazon wants to be near a downtown university

    Scott Andes
      No shortage of ink has been spilled over what exactly Amazon is looking for in HQ2. Urban planners think the company wants an amenity-rich downtown location; for environmentalists it’s an eco-nirvana campus; and traditional economic developers believe Amazon wants what every company demands: tax incentives and talent.
      One element of Amazon’s RFP has received less attention—its desire to be near an urban university. Of course, the most obvious reason to locate near a university is to attract a steady flow of talent. But Amazon is seeking a headquarters location, not simply a technology or engineering center—and that means it will need lawyers, accountants, and marketing and design reps in addition to coders and engineers. Not only will the region need a sizeable existing labor pool, it will also a steady flow of new blood.
      However, talent is not the only reason why a downtown university should be desirable to the “everything” company. In a recent Brookings paper, I explain how research universities located in the midtowns and downtowns of cities punch above their weight in terms of translating academic research into market-ready ideas.
      It’s time cities played a game of their own. In exchange for tax breaks, cities should have companies train those residents who might lose out if Amazon comes to town. We’ve seen what happened in the Bay area, when long-term city dwellers who weren’t drawing hefty paychecks from the likes of Apple, Facebook or Google were priced out of their neighborhoods.
      “Silicon Valley tech companies love to build super awesome campuses that their employees will never want to leave,” writes reporter Emma Grey Ellis, “[T]hey’re also at least partially responsible for tech’s biggest sins: a lack of diversity and gentrification.”
      Amazon is skilled at using competition to its advantage, receiving financial benefits from multiple cities that use them as inducements to have a piece of one of the largest companies in the world. The economic development policy group Good Jobs First, a watchdog of sorts that has documented Amazon’s exchanges with cities preceding the competition, found that “Amazon has continued to receive subsidies from cities valued at least $115 million (not including four deals of undisclosed value), for a long-term total exceeding $1 billion.”
      What’s less clear is what cities stand to gain from participating. Who gains the most? Upwards of 50,000 hires at an average salary of $100,000 is certainly a benefit to the home of HQ2, not to mention the $5 billion in capital expenditures Amazon plans to fork over to build it. However, the RFP also states, “A highly educated labor pool is critical and a strong university system is required.” Amazon wants people who are already “work ready,” in a city that already possesses the educational institutions to produce them.
      More high-paying jobs should not be the sole measure of reward. Sure, if your mayor is selling your city, you’d like to see more and better-paying jobs in return. But if you’re not working at a place like Amazon, its presence can price you out, and divide your city into enclaves of the haves and have-nots.
      What if we used innovation and competition to build inclusive economies instead?
      The gambit of offering tax incentives while promoting the idea that employees must enter the door “work ready” is decreasing cities’ and states’ abilities to fund the building of an inclusive workforce.
      We share a collective responsibility in training those who don’t yet have the skills to work at places like Amazon. Schools, universities and private industry all play a role. Each needs resources to do the arduous work of training underrepresented folk in industries that have left them in the dust. However, the gambit of offering tax incentives while promoting the idea that employees must enter the door “work ready” is decreasing cities’ and states’ abilities to fund the building of an inclusive workforce.
      Businesses can eradicate racial and educational disparities in the workforce tomorrow if they hire underrepresented groups today, though it’s unreasonable to think companies will hire people not ready for the job. Still, it’s also not right for companies to absolve themselves from participating in training people. Schools clearly can’t shoulder all the responsibility of preparing the public for the workforce — that has long been the model, and it is not working for everyone.