"at his incompetence" ?
Your nickname is aptly chosen, yet the same can't be said of the words in your post.
Honnold climbs without a rope because he can afford to do so.
He may well one day lose his life, but he knows it, and puts much more care in preparing and then stays concentrated on his climbs than most people do when driving a car.
I encourage you to read articles about him, they should help give you some perspective.
The difference between europe on one hand and the US and Canada on the other hand, is that in the latter cases, the original population has been "replaced".
As an European, I find it quite tasteless to be criticised by Canadians for our views on immigration, when you get the cream of the crop and we get the rabble mostly because of geographical reasons. To take an example from Turkey: you get the educated slice of society, liberal and progressive.
We get the peasants that deem it normal to bury their daughters alive because they talk with boys.
(This is an exaggeration, but you don't seem to mind heavy-handedness).
We don't oppose mass immigration because of the color of their skin or their religion, but because their views regarding women's rights, LGBT rights are so alien to ours, as well as because we don't actually manage to assimilate migrants fast enough to ensure our society thrives.
High IQ creates barriers that can prevent one from experiencing the social situations that enable the development of social skills. And when you are left behind in social skills, past a certain age, people show much less tolerance for your quirks, and basically think that if you are that way, you must be weird/ have a problem and will not tell you honestly what is the issue with you. Giving somebody with subpar social skills social cues serve no purpose, as they don't get any benefit out of it.
So you get a catch 22, as you don't have sufficient social skills to know / get the help needed to develop your social skills.
Suppose you give everybody the same universal revenue (let us postulate everybody has the same rights).
The issue at stake, is that unless you also engineer them to be similar in every aspect (looks, intelligence, physical capability), there will be differences, and those differences will enable a new hierarchy, with people who have more, and others who have less, thus recreating a unequal base situation.
You don't get to solve the problem by making every human's base situation identical, you solve it by making the inequality device and the means to use it available to everybody.
Having lived in Beijing for 3 years, I try to pay more attention to the country's "hidden" or at least somewhat non obvious debts.
The Chinese soil is dying or dead.
The population as a whole and the younger generations in particular are facing future health issues of cataclysmic proportions.
The pace at which the country moves is sure to leave dozen of millions of people in the dust. Those already left in the dust endure, because their living conditions are better than those of their parents. Yet their kids' might not be, and they will choose to endure or not (and vent in a way they think appropriate).
That, added to the dearth of females, and the Confucianist view of a man's place in society are already proving explosive.
China has a lot of potential, but it also faces challenges of epic proportions. To me, the economic problems are more a symptom of the problem rather than the problem to worry about.
The way I see it:
1: Really low barriers to entry for each snowflake to express their views.
2: Social networks work as echo chambers, which allow anyone to find dozens that share their views ("If they think like me, it must mean that I am right!!").
3: Misunderstanding of the way the cyberspace works, with people not understanding really that it is encroaching on the "physical" world, and professing extreme opinions they would never have dreamed of voicing if not in front of a screen in the safety and "privacy"(hum) of their home.
4: The powers that be, that is to say the social networks operators have so much at stake that they are walking on eggs, wary of taking any action that could jeopardise their cash cow(actual or potential).
The situation is a mix of all those factors, and the result is I think a bit depressing.
Can you imagine our societies without a police force?
Today's social networks are not far from that imho.
Is there really good TV? There are good programs on TV, but they happen to be accessible through means that do not require one to navigate brain-dead filler and ads.
Using the TV and remote set seems akin to fish with one's hands instead of using nets. Doable, possibly thrilling sometimes, but not the best use of one's time in a context where it is limited.
The article's argument seems sound to me, so seeing how the proposed solution delivers cannot hurt.
Honnold climbs without a rope because he can afford to do so. He may well one day lose his life, but he knows it, and puts much more care in preparing and then stays concentrated on his climbs than most people do when driving a car.
I encourage you to read articles about him, they should help give you some perspective.