At first glance, this title is extremely bizarre, even for an article in The Lemur. Who is the MATH man? Why does he want to make you healthy? And most importantly, why should you care?
The MATH Man wants to make you healthy because he believes that health is a human right. And you should care because his revolutionary approach to health also re-envisions how we engage, approach, and interact with capitalism: he wants to realign our country’s incentives. The MATH Man is a former US Presidential candidate. He’s not a politician. He’s a businessman. And his most recent venture is a phone network company. Who is he? His name is Andrew Yang.
MATH: Make America Think Harder.
When Andrew Yang ran for president in 2020, he made mild shockwaves across the political spectrum. His presence was notable, and recognizable, as the first major-party Asian-American nominee for president. One of his slogans, MATH—”Make America Think Harder”— directly poked fun at both President Trump’s MAGA and the United States’ plunging test scores. But far more notable were his nontraditional, speculative ideas. While Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders debated over COVID-19 health concerns and standing up to Donald Trump, Yang focused on the impending doom of artificial intelligence, Medicare, and the concept of Universal Basic Income: giving every citizen a “Freedom Dividend” of $1000 per month just for existing.
To quote Andrew Yang himself, “the Asian man from the future wants to give you money”.
His most inventive idea: shifting government incentives to prioritize human welfare above capital gains. But more on this later.
Andrew Yang was indeed an unorthodox candidate, appearing on podcasts to gain attention (before it became a popular political tactic) and using his debate time to warn about automation instead of bashing Donald Trump. His dark horse candidacy drew diverse crowds of liberals and, interestingly, many conservatives as well. His reach went so far that, despite being an Asian candidate, he actually garnered surprising support from alt-right groups (he promptly condemned them). Perhaps the truth that Andrew Yang was preaching goes beyond political ideology and partisan barriers? Altogether, this strange band of support became the highly meme-d “Yang Gang”.
Andrew Yang obviously didn’t become President. But many of his campaign ideas are still very relevant, and unlike most others who run for the Presidency, Mr. Yang hasn’t stopped pushing for his presidential promises.
Not Left. Not Right. Forward.
Running for president as a political outsider changed Andrew Yang and his view of politics. Rather than be welcomed to an even playing field, Mr. Yang was subject to the immediate influence of a political system hostile to non-politicians, being asked fewer questions during the debates, having the least amount of allotted speaking time, and frequently being ignored by media outlets. Without mainstream party support, Yang was forced to embrace grassroots measures. Worse still, if he didn’t consistently meet polling thresholds, he wouldn’t be allowed in primary debates. Despite outpolling notable democrats (Cory Booker, Bill de Blasio, Beto O’Rourke), Yang continued to face harsh media critique. Politics proved that it isn’t friendly to outsiders.
Andrew Yang grew to believe that in order to better promote his nontraditional ideas for capitalism, he’d have to do it through a nontraditional approach. In 2021, Andrew Yang left the Democratic Party. stating that “[the US political system] is stuck. It is stuck in part because polarization is getting worse than ever.” Reminiscent of another campaign slogan (Not Left. Not Right. Forward) he founded the Forward Party alongside a former Republican (New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman), its primary goals are focused on implementing electoral reforms in local politics, including ranked choice voting and fighting gerrymandering. As the slogan suggests, the Forward Party works to transcend the partisanship of the Democrats and Republicans. Its bottom-up, values-driven approach is unorthodox, but has attracted crowds of disenfranchised voters — the Forward Party is now the third largest party in the United States.
Andrew Yang has since served as the Founding Co-Chair to the party, and continually tours the country in support of its ideas. But his new political party, his multitude of nonprofit ventures, and even his presidential run are not just random “side quests.” Instead, I argue that these actions were all small steps contributing to a far greater and far grander scheme: a rewiring of capitalism itself.
As Andrew Yang describes himself on his campaign website: “Our current emphasis on corporate profits isn’t working for the vast majority of Americans. This will only be made worse by the development of automation technology and AI. We need to move to a new form of capitalism – Human Capitalism.”
Humanity First
“Huh?” was my first reaction. “What the —” was my second. A presidential candidate was proposing a new form of capitalism that isn’t socialism?
While Andrew Yang’s universal basic income policy was the most well-known idea of his presidential run, it was actually his larger idea of a human-centered economy that was the most groundbreaking. In essence, Yang’s argument revolves around the dangers of a corporate system that prioritizes profit over people. Individuals, as the theory suggests, would reach a point where they would not be paid enough to be able to afford the very products they manufacture. Worse still, the advancement of AI would only rush this process, jeopardizing workers who don’t otherwise have the education to advance into less-labor-intensive workplaces.
Yang recognized this problem, and decided that the best solution would be to highlight these soon-to-arrive labor struggles by running for president. While he built a reasonably impressive following, Yang went mostly ignored by the political establishment and his ideas of Human Capitalism were overshadowed by UBI and MATH. And now, years after his warning, the economy is now seeing the potency of AI. It has already been introduced to vital labor industries like trucking, and has become a regular part of call centers, customer service, healthcare, and social media (need I remind you of robocall scams or the “algorithm”).
In running for president, Andrew Yang not only recognized a problem, but spotlighted a possible solution: tackle capitalism’s incentives. In Yang’s proposed re-envisioning of the economy, the “human” becomes as valuable as the dollar; human welfare, through government-based incentives such as tax breaks, is realigned with capitalist metrics such as GDP. Imagine a world where companies compete to maximize human welfare instead of their bottom line, and get rewarded for it. In theory, it is doable, but only if the government takes action to align human welfare with profit, thereby making capitalism compatible with human-centered goals (job satisfaction, healthcare, longevity, happiness).
To better illustrate this, let’s compare two scenarios. In the status quo, market power dominance between massive firms, lack of corporate regulations, and the prioritization of profit means that major pharmaceutical companies are able to charge higher rates for life-saving medications, and that ticketers can upcharge their fees the week before a concert. This is also why we see a growing problem of planned obsolescence; why would companies make durable products if that leads to fewer sales in the future? In modern capitalism, making money is more important than making people happy. However, in a human-centered economy, with a prioritization of the human, pharmaceuticals, for example, would be given tax incentives for providing life-saving medications at reduced prices. For an even more extreme example, an optimized human capitalist system would pay people when they go to the gym (through state-run gyms, or partnerships with corporations, or through tax breaks).
This all sounds extremely idealistic (or even crazy), but it warrants discussion. As these examples illustrate, there can exist health-based economic incentives if the government takes active effort to support them. By prioritizing new metrics such as median income and standard of living, the US government could shift global incentives and make the improvement of health a competitive (and profitable) venture.
The MATH man wants to make you healthy
So, is any of this actually possible? Andrew Yang surely thinks so. And he hasn’t stopped trying to prove it since. Case in point, his newest venture: Noble Mobile.
The ultimate test case of human capitalism, Noble Mobile is a network carrier that refunds you based on your data usage. It’s simple: the less you use your phone, the more money you earn back. Your “noble cash” (also known as the Data Dividend) sits in a Noble Mobile-run account that earns 5.5% interest, accessible at any time if you wish to take your savings out. Your progress (and data) resets each month, so everyone has a fresh start at decreasing phone usage.
The start of Noble Mobile raises many questions, and the future will show how successful such an idea could be. The concept is reminiscent of other endeavors, such as billionaire Mark Cuban’s attempt at reducing prescription drug costs (CostPlusDrugs). Contingent on their financial success, these examples could serve as proof that human-centered capitalism can be compatible with, and even competitive in, modern markets. A phone company, of course, is just one small example. In Yang’s own words, “Imagine an AI life coach with the voice of Oprah or Tom Hanks trying to help parents stay together or raise kids. Or a new Legion of Builders and Demolishers that install millions of solar panels across the country . . . Or a digital personalized education subscription that is constantly giving you new material and grouping you with a few other people who are studying the same thing. Or a wearable device that monitors your vital signs and sends data to your doctor while recommending occasional behavior changes.” All the options above, as Yang suggests, are entirely possible, but the current incentives prioritize money over people.
I am not an economic expert (though arguably no one is) and arguing the validity of economic principles isn’t my objective. Rather, it’s intriguing to explore the feasibility of human capitalism. If we intend to shift our objectives, we need to rewire our incentives. In short, Andrew Yang argues that many of society’s shortcomings are not problems, but symptoms. The greater problem is in what we value. Capitalism has grown to become the enemy of human welfare. So, we need to change our economic incentives.
The MATH man wants to make everyone healthy, and for the past six years he’s been working to make it happen. Perhaps more people should follow suit.
by Kris Sun
