|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On January 16 2020 09:01 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2020 08:58 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:50 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 08:47 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:17 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:43 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 07:41 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:33 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 07:28 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]They don't have to insulate themselves from the consequences. They just don't have to give a shit, or less shit then they give about losing 20% of their pay (random ass number) for the company to become green.
People are really good at ignoring negative consequences that are not directly apparent, and by the time we see direct consequences of climate change, beyond "oh this year is a little hotter then the previous one" it will be way way to late. Which do you think is more likely, that 50% of the workers of a company that are not insulated collectively decide not to give a shit, or that a board of CEOs that are insulated decide not to give a shit? Sounds fairly clear cut to me, do you disagree? I'd love to see why. I will confidently say neither of them will give enough of a shit. Which again goes back to what Belisarius said. And there is zero evidence that once they do the people make decisions collectively that are better for the environment and not to make their own lifestyles more comfortable So far your answer still is 'magic'. Walk up to 100 average Joes and ask them how much salary and living comfort they will give up to save the environment. The answer will be "not enough". Well then we're going to die, which I also believe is the most likely outcome. Is that an issue for you? On January 16 2020 05:14 Nebuchad wrote:
Well yeah, it's likely that humanity is screwed. We realize that. Doesn't mean we just stop fighting in my book. Not particularly, I resigned myself to the fact that humanity as a whole isn't going to do enough a while ago. And yes I am aware that is a rather pessimistic outlook. Nor do I think you shouldn't stop fighting. But you should realise that people aren't just going to jump aboard of whatever idea you come up with. I should have mentioned that I don't want you to jump aboard my ideas, I want us to come together and figure out better ideas together once we have acknowledged that the ideas we have currently aren't working. It's a pretty massive failure of me to never have mentioned that before on the forum, I realize that if I had people would stop saying this to me. My belief is that humanity is the fundamental issue with the problems facing humanity. Hopefully we survive long enough to develop advanced enough AI to take over the task of making important decisions for us. Why would that help? Within the current framework all such technology is being utilised into more efficiently converting people into being good little consumers. Through Magic mostly, didn't say it was a great shot. But I'm also not trying to convince people its the right way to go on the internet. So what was the point of bringing it up? Sorry, thought you wanted idea's so I gave my opinion, your free to ignore it.
|
Northern Ireland26745 Posts
On January 16 2020 09:06 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2020 09:01 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:58 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:50 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 08:47 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:17 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:43 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 07:41 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:33 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
Which do you think is more likely, that 50% of the workers of a company that are not insulated collectively decide not to give a shit, or that a board of CEOs that are insulated decide not to give a shit? Sounds fairly clear cut to me, do you disagree? I'd love to see why. I will confidently say neither of them will give enough of a shit. Which again goes back to what Belisarius said. And there is zero evidence that once they do the people make decisions collectively that are better for the environment and not to make their own lifestyles more comfortable So far your answer still is 'magic'. Walk up to 100 average Joes and ask them how much salary and living comfort they will give up to save the environment. The answer will be "not enough". Well then we're going to die, which I also believe is the most likely outcome. Is that an issue for you? On January 16 2020 05:14 Nebuchad wrote:
Well yeah, it's likely that humanity is screwed. We realize that. Doesn't mean we just stop fighting in my book. Not particularly, I resigned myself to the fact that humanity as a whole isn't going to do enough a while ago. And yes I am aware that is a rather pessimistic outlook. Nor do I think you shouldn't stop fighting. But you should realise that people aren't just going to jump aboard of whatever idea you come up with. I should have mentioned that I don't want you to jump aboard my ideas, I want us to come together and figure out better ideas together once we have acknowledged that the ideas we have currently aren't working. It's a pretty massive failure of me to never have mentioned that before on the forum, I realize that if I had people would stop saying this to me. My belief is that humanity is the fundamental issue with the problems facing humanity. Hopefully we survive long enough to develop advanced enough AI to take over the task of making important decisions for us. Why would that help? Within the current framework all such technology is being utilised into more efficiently converting people into being good little consumers. Through Magic mostly, didn't say it was a great shot. But I'm also not trying to convince people its the right way to go on the internet. So what was the point of bringing it up? Sorry, thought you wanted idea's so I gave my opinion, your free to ignore it.
What makes humans happy and content?
Very few people I have ever met will answer ‘having more stuff than other people’, but yet our economic system is predicated on that.
|
On January 16 2020 09:06 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2020 09:01 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:58 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:50 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 08:47 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:17 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:43 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 07:41 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:33 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
Which do you think is more likely, that 50% of the workers of a company that are not insulated collectively decide not to give a shit, or that a board of CEOs that are insulated decide not to give a shit? Sounds fairly clear cut to me, do you disagree? I'd love to see why. I will confidently say neither of them will give enough of a shit. Which again goes back to what Belisarius said. And there is zero evidence that once they do the people make decisions collectively that are better for the environment and not to make their own lifestyles more comfortable So far your answer still is 'magic'. Walk up to 100 average Joes and ask them how much salary and living comfort they will give up to save the environment. The answer will be "not enough". Well then we're going to die, which I also believe is the most likely outcome. Is that an issue for you? On January 16 2020 05:14 Nebuchad wrote:
Well yeah, it's likely that humanity is screwed. We realize that. Doesn't mean we just stop fighting in my book. Not particularly, I resigned myself to the fact that humanity as a whole isn't going to do enough a while ago. And yes I am aware that is a rather pessimistic outlook. Nor do I think you shouldn't stop fighting. But you should realise that people aren't just going to jump aboard of whatever idea you come up with. I should have mentioned that I don't want you to jump aboard my ideas, I want us to come together and figure out better ideas together once we have acknowledged that the ideas we have currently aren't working. It's a pretty massive failure of me to never have mentioned that before on the forum, I realize that if I had people would stop saying this to me. My belief is that humanity is the fundamental issue with the problems facing humanity. Hopefully we survive long enough to develop advanced enough AI to take over the task of making important decisions for us. Why would that help? Within the current framework all such technology is being utilised into more efficiently converting people into being good little consumers. Through Magic mostly, didn't say it was a great shot. But I'm also not trying to convince people its the right way to go on the internet. So what was the point of bringing it up? Sorry, thought you wanted idea's so I gave my opinion, your free to ignore it.
So is it your opinion of what we should do or is it not? You just offered an opinion, then said that it wouldn't really help but [dumb shot at Neb], and now you're back to saying it's your opinion.
|
On January 16 2020 09:10 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2020 09:06 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 09:01 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:58 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:50 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 08:47 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:17 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:43 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 07:41 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]I will confidently say neither of them will give enough of a shit.
Which again goes back to what Belisarius said.[quote]So far your answer still is 'magic'.
Walk up to 100 average Joes and ask them how much salary and living comfort they will give up to save the environment. The answer will be "not enough".
Well then we're going to die, which I also believe is the most likely outcome. Is that an issue for you? On January 16 2020 05:14 Nebuchad wrote:
Well yeah, it's likely that humanity is screwed. We realize that. Doesn't mean we just stop fighting in my book. Not particularly, I resigned myself to the fact that humanity as a whole isn't going to do enough a while ago. And yes I am aware that is a rather pessimistic outlook. Nor do I think you shouldn't stop fighting. But you should realise that people aren't just going to jump aboard of whatever idea you come up with. I should have mentioned that I don't want you to jump aboard my ideas, I want us to come together and figure out better ideas together once we have acknowledged that the ideas we have currently aren't working. It's a pretty massive failure of me to never have mentioned that before on the forum, I realize that if I had people would stop saying this to me. My belief is that humanity is the fundamental issue with the problems facing humanity. Hopefully we survive long enough to develop advanced enough AI to take over the task of making important decisions for us. Why would that help? Within the current framework all such technology is being utilised into more efficiently converting people into being good little consumers. Through Magic mostly, didn't say it was a great shot. But I'm also not trying to convince people its the right way to go on the internet. So what was the point of bringing it up? Sorry, thought you wanted idea's so I gave my opinion, your free to ignore it. What makes humans happy and content? Very few people I have ever met will answer ‘having more stuff than other people’, but yet our economic system is predicated on that. That's an entire different topic from climate change.
Look I'm not a fan of capitalism as an economic system, its shit and full of flaws. But it happens to work better then everything else we tried, it however requires restraints.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland26745 Posts
On January 16 2020 09:13 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2020 09:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 09:06 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 09:01 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:58 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:50 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 08:47 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:17 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:43 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
Well then we're going to die, which I also believe is the most likely outcome. Is that an issue for you?
[quote] Not particularly, I resigned myself to the fact that humanity as a whole isn't going to do enough a while ago. And yes I am aware that is a rather pessimistic outlook. Nor do I think you shouldn't stop fighting. But you should realise that people aren't just going to jump aboard of whatever idea you come up with. I should have mentioned that I don't want you to jump aboard my ideas, I want us to come together and figure out better ideas together once we have acknowledged that the ideas we have currently aren't working. It's a pretty massive failure of me to never have mentioned that before on the forum, I realize that if I had people would stop saying this to me. My belief is that humanity is the fundamental issue with the problems facing humanity. Hopefully we survive long enough to develop advanced enough AI to take over the task of making important decisions for us. Why would that help? Within the current framework all such technology is being utilised into more efficiently converting people into being good little consumers. Through Magic mostly, didn't say it was a great shot. But I'm also not trying to convince people its the right way to go on the internet. So what was the point of bringing it up? Sorry, thought you wanted idea's so I gave my opinion, your free to ignore it. What makes humans happy and content? Very few people I have ever met will answer ‘having more stuff than other people’, but yet our economic system is predicated on that. That's an entire different topic from climate change. Look I'm not a fan of capitalism as an economic system, its shit and full of flaws. But it happens to work better then everything else we tried, it however requires restraints.
It isn’t at all. If people don’t judge their worth based on needless crap they buy, then there’s a pretty big environment bonus.
It’s a cultural shift that is needed, not imposed restraints from above, regardless of the overarching system employed.
What does it work better than in actually doing? Encouraging needless expenditure, encouraging feelings of inadequacy in the population?
|
|
|
On January 16 2020 09:13 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2020 09:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 09:06 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 09:01 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:58 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:50 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 08:47 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:17 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:43 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
Well then we're going to die, which I also believe is the most likely outcome. Is that an issue for you?
[quote] Not particularly, I resigned myself to the fact that humanity as a whole isn't going to do enough a while ago. And yes I am aware that is a rather pessimistic outlook. Nor do I think you shouldn't stop fighting. But you should realise that people aren't just going to jump aboard of whatever idea you come up with. I should have mentioned that I don't want you to jump aboard my ideas, I want us to come together and figure out better ideas together once we have acknowledged that the ideas we have currently aren't working. It's a pretty massive failure of me to never have mentioned that before on the forum, I realize that if I had people would stop saying this to me. My belief is that humanity is the fundamental issue with the problems facing humanity. Hopefully we survive long enough to develop advanced enough AI to take over the task of making important decisions for us. Why would that help? Within the current framework all such technology is being utilised into more efficiently converting people into being good little consumers. Through Magic mostly, didn't say it was a great shot. But I'm also not trying to convince people its the right way to go on the internet. So what was the point of bringing it up? Sorry, thought you wanted idea's so I gave my opinion, your free to ignore it. What makes humans happy and content? Very few people I have ever met will answer ‘having more stuff than other people’, but yet our economic system is predicated on that. That's an entire different topic from climate change. Look I'm not a fan of capitalism as an economic system, its shit and full of flaws. But it happens to work better then everything else we tried, it however requires restraints.
A very rough rundown could be:
1) consumerism
2) people unhappy
3) people buy more to feel happy
4) climate change
5) climate anxiety
6) people more unhappy.
happiness, consumerism, disregard for nature and other people, how we treat each other, it's all connected.
|
Northern Ireland26745 Posts
On January 16 2020 09:23 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2020 09:13 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 09:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 09:06 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 09:01 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:58 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:50 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 08:47 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:17 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]Not particularly, I resigned myself to the fact that humanity as a whole isn't going to do enough a while ago. And yes I am aware that is a rather pessimistic outlook.
Nor do I think you shouldn't stop fighting. But you should realise that people aren't just going to jump aboard of whatever idea you come up with. I should have mentioned that I don't want you to jump aboard my ideas, I want us to come together and figure out better ideas together once we have acknowledged that the ideas we have currently aren't working. It's a pretty massive failure of me to never have mentioned that before on the forum, I realize that if I had people would stop saying this to me. My belief is that humanity is the fundamental issue with the problems facing humanity. Hopefully we survive long enough to develop advanced enough AI to take over the task of making important decisions for us. Why would that help? Within the current framework all such technology is being utilised into more efficiently converting people into being good little consumers. Through Magic mostly, didn't say it was a great shot. But I'm also not trying to convince people its the right way to go on the internet. So what was the point of bringing it up? Sorry, thought you wanted idea's so I gave my opinion, your free to ignore it. What makes humans happy and content? Very few people I have ever met will answer ‘having more stuff than other people’, but yet our economic system is predicated on that. That's an entire different topic from climate change. Look I'm not a fan of capitalism as an economic system, its shit and full of flaws. But it happens to work better then everything else we tried, it however requires restraints. A very rough rundown could be: 1) consumerism 2) people unhappy 3) people buy more to feel happy 4) climate change 5) climate anxiety 6) people more unhappy. happiness, consumerism, disregard for nature and other people, how we treat each other, it's all connected.
Just how capitalism works.
Be decently attractive person, be bombarded by advertisements saying you’re defective and need their products to be attractive. Develop complexes.
The whole system trades off inadequacy, real or believed.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland26745 Posts
On January 16 2020 09:31 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2020 09:28 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 09:23 Artisreal wrote:On January 16 2020 09:13 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 09:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 09:06 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 09:01 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:58 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 08:50 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 08:47 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]My belief is that humanity is the fundamental issue with the problems facing humanity. Hopefully we survive long enough to develop advanced enough AI to take over the task of making important decisions for us. Why would that help? Within the current framework all such technology is being utilised into more efficiently converting people into being good little consumers. Through Magic mostly, didn't say it was a great shot. But I'm also not trying to convince people its the right way to go on the internet. So what was the point of bringing it up? Sorry, thought you wanted idea's so I gave my opinion, your free to ignore it. What makes humans happy and content? Very few people I have ever met will answer ‘having more stuff than other people’, but yet our economic system is predicated on that. That's an entire different topic from climate change. Look I'm not a fan of capitalism as an economic system, its shit and full of flaws. But it happens to work better then everything else we tried, it however requires restraints. A very rough rundown could be: 1) consumerism 2) people unhappy 3) people buy more to feel happy 4) climate change 5) climate anxiety 6) people more unhappy. happiness, consumerism, disregard for nature and other people, how we treat each other, it's all connected. Just how capitalism works. Be decently attractive person, be bombarded by advertisements saying you’re defective and need their products to be attractive. Develop complexes. The whole system trades off inadequacy, real or believed. This reminds me of how to actually deal with addiction. I apologize for the source being tucker Carlson but h barely talks. They go through how the opposite of addiction is not sobriety but rather it is connection. For those of you that prefer entertaining cartoons to talk I’ll add that shortly. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UpvjH9cVJDIEdit: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C8AHODc6phg
I actually largely agree with his points I just disagree that they’re ringfenced as solutions to the problems of addicts rather than general good practice.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland26745 Posts
On January 16 2020 09:45 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2020 09:40 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 09:31 JimmiC wrote:On January 16 2020 09:28 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 09:23 Artisreal wrote:On January 16 2020 09:13 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 09:10 Wombat_NI wrote:On January 16 2020 09:06 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 09:01 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:58 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]Through Magic mostly, didn't say it was a great shot. But I'm also not trying to convince people its the right way to go on the internet. So what was the point of bringing it up? Sorry, thought you wanted idea's so I gave my opinion, your free to ignore it. What makes humans happy and content? Very few people I have ever met will answer ‘having more stuff than other people’, but yet our economic system is predicated on that. That's an entire different topic from climate change. Look I'm not a fan of capitalism as an economic system, its shit and full of flaws. But it happens to work better then everything else we tried, it however requires restraints. A very rough rundown could be: 1) consumerism 2) people unhappy 3) people buy more to feel happy 4) climate change 5) climate anxiety 6) people more unhappy. happiness, consumerism, disregard for nature and other people, how we treat each other, it's all connected. Just how capitalism works. Be decently attractive person, be bombarded by advertisements saying you’re defective and need their products to be attractive. Develop complexes. The whole system trades off inadequacy, real or believed. This reminds me of how to actually deal with addiction. I apologize for the source being tucker Carlson but h barely talks. They go through how the opposite of addiction is not sobriety but rather it is connection. For those of you that prefer entertaining cartoons to talk I’ll add that shortly. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UpvjH9cVJDIEdit: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C8AHODc6phg I actually largely agree with his points I just disagree that they’re ringfenced as solutions to the problems of addicts rather than general good practice. Yes deep positive connections would help with a whole host of other societal and human problems. It is just very hard for us to get out of the punish and scare strategy.
Is it that difficult if that’s your end goal?
|
On January 16 2020 08:47 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2020 08:17 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:43 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 07:41 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:33 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 07:28 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 07:21 Nebuchad wrote:On January 16 2020 07:15 Gorsameth wrote:On January 16 2020 06:59 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
No problem, thanks for asking. There are two main drivers of climate change, it's emissions by the more developped countries and emissions by the industry. Industry is responsible for most of the emissions of course but there's also a more individualistic element in that our way of life produces a level of emissions that is not really sustainable long term.
The issue that capitalism has in dealing with this is that because it allocates too much power to the specific people who run the industries, the capitalist class, it is ill-equipped to activate change in those. So instead we observe what we have seen in the world today: people should take personal responsibility and change their lives according to climate, we should stop having vacations, we should stop using cars, we should pee in the shower.
This is something but it's not enough because of the dual nature of the problem we face. We see that capitalism is "decent" at demanding that people change their lifestyles, it can use propaganda, it can tax them if they behave poorly, that sort of thing. We also see that capitalism is atrocious at demanding that industry changes, because of the amount of power allocated to the bosses of industry, and because of the profit motive that causes every change to be adopted reluctantly.
Therefore a logical step to make is to increase the power that we have over industry. We can do that using social democracy and have the government regulate the businesses so that they are forced to be more ecofriendly. That has issues, but either way it's the only realistic step that we have so let's do that.
The reluctance that will be shown by industry and the general issues of corruption and propaganda will make it so that it's not enough though. It isn't realistic to expect that the capitalist class won't fight back. Corruption will be more profitable than respecting their limits, so they will corrupt the controllers. All the change that we see will be done reluctantly, thus basically ensuring that it isn't bold enough to lead us to where we need to be. And they will still hold more power on society than the rest of us do, which means they will be in prime position to influence politics and make the discourse drift right again in the near future even if we manage to win right now.
That's why we shouldn't stop there, logically, in an ecologic framework. Luckily not stopping there is also a good thing in general, so it's not a problem that we have to continue. You didn't address his point tho. And there is zero evidence that once they do the people make decisions collectively that are better for the environment and not to make their own lifestyles more comfortable If you change up who owns the industry then they become the class of people who fight against climate change regulations because they now control the industry. By changing ownership from a couple of rich people to a lot of 'poor' people your just increasing the number of people you are fighting and not reducing their power at all, they still control the industry. It's somewhat easy for a few rich people to insulate themselves from the consequences of climate change. It's a lot harder for the entirety of the workers of a company to do so. So no, I don't think that a democratic worker force would make the same decisions than a single CEO would, in fact I think that's pretty ludicrous to believe. It's not just that, it would also be harder for them to promote actively lying to the people for personal benefit, as the whole enterprise would have to agree to do that. So we wouldn't see as much propaganda and in consequence, not as much climate change or overall science denial. You are underestimating the dynamic of an elite vs a people. Replacing the elites with the people doesn't just make the people the elite. They're still the people. They don't have to insulate themselves from the consequences. They just don't have to give a shit, or less shit then they give about losing 20% of their pay (random ass number) for the company to become green. People are really good at ignoring negative consequences that are not directly apparent, and by the time we see direct consequences of climate change, beyond "oh this year is a little hotter then the previous one" it will be way way to late. Which do you think is more likely, that 50% of the workers of a company that are not insulated collectively decide not to give a shit, or that a board of CEOs that are insulated decide not to give a shit? Sounds fairly clear cut to me, do you disagree? I'd love to see why. I will confidently say neither of them will give enough of a shit. Which again goes back to what Belisarius said. And there is zero evidence that once they do the people make decisions collectively that are better for the environment and not to make their own lifestyles more comfortable So far your answer still is 'magic'. Walk up to 100 average Joes and ask them how much salary and living comfort they will give up to save the environment. The answer will be "not enough". Well then we're going to die, which I also believe is the most likely outcome. Is that an issue for you? On January 16 2020 05:14 Nebuchad wrote:
Well yeah, it's likely that humanity is screwed. We realize that. Doesn't mean we just stop fighting in my book. Not particularly, I resigned myself to the fact that humanity as a whole isn't going to do enough a while ago. And yes I am aware that is a rather pessimistic outlook. Nor do I think you shouldn't stop fighting. But you should realise that people aren't just going to jump aboard of whatever idea you come up with. I should have mentioned that I don't want you to jump aboard my ideas, I want us to come together and figure out better ideas together once we have acknowledged that the ideas we have currently aren't working. It's a pretty massive failure of me to never have mentioned that before on the forum, I realize that if I had people would stop saying this to me. My belief is that humanity is the fundamental issue with the problems facing humanity. Hopefully we survive long enough to develop advanced enough AI to take over the task of making important decisions for us.
You can imagine a situation wherein AI distribution of certain goods and services is better than the market. Basically sidestepping Hayek's main criticisms of socialism.
|
|
|
If I’m an 18-year old, voting for the first time (with no deep knowledge of lobbying bias and party affiliation). Who am I supposed to vote for, if not Trump.
|
Northern Ireland26745 Posts
On January 16 2020 10:15 Emnjay808 wrote:
If I’m an 18-year old, voting for the first time (with no deep knowledge of lobbying bias and party affiliation). Who am I supposed to vote for, if not Trump.
Somebody who isn’t Trump?
Personal opinions aside having zero knowledge of your political leanings I’m not sure how I, or anyone else can answer that question.
|
No deep knowledge =\= zero knowledge.
Basically ,in theory, the person would only know what they would see on national TV or Twitter.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland26745 Posts
On January 16 2020 10:22 Emnjay808 wrote:
No deep knowledge =\= zero knowledge.
Basically ,in theory, the person would only know what they would see on national TV or Twitter.
I don’t think you need much knowledge from the outside to vote against Trump, but again entirely depends on your political sensibilities to begin with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
