111–120 of 311 posts
The biggest threat is health. The whole world have become helpless in front of Corona. World class medical institution, labs, scientist, colleges were weeping like an orphaned child. Don't think other than health. If we will remain, then we will think and work. For anything else human life needs.
Soil scouts, with patches for an acre that sequestors x amount units of carbon, or another that rewards those that have y ppms of living microbes.
If someone could recruit, deploy messaging, and enable long term action, at a minimum it'd be symbolic. In tandem it could be hopeful, and with success could be valuable.
Part biology, part humint.
See: JADAM and Korean natural farming.
The world population is collapsing at a rapid pace. Our economic growth is based on a growing productive population. Our economic prosperity is based on a growing productive population. Different parts of the world are dealing with population collapse. Look at Japan, a xenophobic country facing population collapse. The total GDP has remain stagnant over the past 20 years. Look at UAE, a country facing population coll…
World population is still increasing. It's climbed from 2.6 billion in 1950 to 7.8 billion in 2020. If world poulation halved we'd still be at 1975 population levels .. a time when the world functioned. > Our economic prosperity is based on a growing productive population. We live on a finite planet with limited resources, the notion of unlimited growth being essential for continued status quo is flawed thinking. Our…
1. Age distribution would look like an inverted pyramid instead of a pyramid
2. The geographical, racial/ethnical and cultural demographics would also look like the totally different. The share of global population of the global south, which is currently highly dysfunctional, would be drastically more important, especially in the younger age groups.
Note that the increase of wealth of the “third world” is mainly due to China / India, followed a bit by Indonesia / Bangladesh / Vietnam. Nearly all of them have already a TFR Other countries’ economies even lost complexity and the share of their economies that are basically commodity exports increased
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because “equity” (communism) requires violence. Taking away from those who create more and giving to those who create less. Something that is non-consensual and requires violence is by definition unfair (unless you’ve a wicked moral compass).
Communism (at least in an ideal Marxist form) has no relation to equity, it’s more of a liberal concept than anything else. People use the term Communism (both upper-case and lower-case) in various ways nowadays, but Marx’s original ideal form of society was "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" The ultimate goal is to create an affluent productive society that can provide all amenities…
From my knowledge of European history, this is not true.
Marx also said that there should be a dictatorship of the proletariat, who should seize the means of production.
The difficulty is, is that absolute power corrupts absolutely, to steal a phrase.
The worker's union movement working inside a capitalist system has brought more benefits for workers, than communism, which proved to kill millions wherever it is attempted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
While communism does have it's flaws, i would argue it has in fact never been tried.
The biggest threat is health. The whole world have become helpless in front of Corona. World class medical institution, labs, scientist, colleges were weeping like an orphaned child. Don't think other than health. If we will remain, then we will think and work. For anything else human life needs.
For inspiration what are some easy problems to solve and then what are some of the more difficult problems to solve on the same path?
The biggest problem domain worth pursuing is figuring out fusion. If we can unlock what is effectively limitless power a lot of problems become far more tractable. Everything else is a distraction. We need cheaper and more available power. Every physicist and engineer in the world should probably try dedicating at least one or two month of their life to figuring out fusion. If humanity could pay a trillion dollars to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Fair" is just an arbitrarily-applied constant in your sentence. Why is meritocratic more "fair" than equitable? Perhaps more precisely, why do you deem meritocratic to = fair? Someone could just as easily (and supportably) deem equitable to = fair. Hearts!
Because “equity” (communism) requires violence. Taking away from those who create more and giving to those who create less. Something that is non-consensual and requires violence is by definition unfair (unless you’ve a wicked moral compass).
Javascript of course.