Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ...
5
6
7
8
9
LastLast
  1. #121
    Dreadlord Ooid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    In the oven baking
    Posts
    980
    Eat the bugs.
    Live in the pod.
    Get sterilized.
    For the Greater Good™.

  2. #122
    Quote Originally Posted by Thereturn View Post
    With overpopulation and everything that comes with it, one of the solutions that comes to mind is a 1 child policy, globally, for the next somewhat years. Would you be in favour of this or not? Why?

    Personally id say this is a pretty big infringement on our autonomy, on the other hand, its needed. So if not for life, id say its cool.
    But the problem with the global economy is not the amount of people being born but people living too long so if you are really concerned about this you should be advocating for killing the old at a certain age not a one child policy.

  3. #123
    Quote Originally Posted by Amarys View Post
    No and it's not needed. Overpopulation is only a problem in *ahem* developing countries.

    Not to mention personally I would want Earth to be overpopulated as humans are a lazy, complacent species and I don't think currently the pressure for innovation isn't strong enough. We need more "problems" to go to Mars... or experiment with new technologies such as fusion power.
    Why do we need to go to Mars? It's just a big desert with nothing on it. I dont understand why people want to live on Mars. You'll be bored after 5 minutes. Why not just make Earth better? The effort to make Mars better would be much efficiently served on earth.
    Last edited by GreenJesus; 2020-02-18 at 03:49 AM.

  4. #124
    The Insane PC2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    17,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Josuke View Post
    And maximising growth is the problem. I dont think you can really say it wont work because you believe maximising growth is the only way human beings can live fulfilling lives while providing the necessities of life.

    I see you're selectively reading what I say, I'll be more literal and direct.
    Nah how is maximizing the future size of the economy/resources a problem? It's like saying a person shouldn't maximize their physical healthiness, there's literally no reason whatsoever to not want to maximize things like resources & wealth, good health & long life.
    -------
    Quote of the month:
    We should avoid the age-old question of "who should rule?" because it cries out for an authoritarian answer.
    Logical Fallacies: Ad hominem, Generalizing history to pre-determine the future.

  5. #125
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    Nah how is maximizing the future size of the economy/resources a problem? It's like saying a person shouldn't maximize their physical healthiness, there's literally no reason whatsoever to not want to maximize things like resources & wealth, good health & long life.
    Imagine prioritising your physical health to the point all the relationships in your life deteriorated and you died miserable and alone. Because that is how your metaphor ends.

    Millions of people have died and will keep dying to feed the beast, so a few people can have fantastical amounts of wealth. Then when the resources of this planet are expended they'll probably flee to another and repeat the cycle.

    I'd rather we ironed out the kinks in our power structures before we end up living in an even worse sci-fi dystopia

  6. #126
    The Insane PC2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    17,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Josuke View Post
    Imagine prioritising your physical health to the point all the relationships in your life deteriorated and you died miserable and alone. Because that is how your metaphor ends.

    Millions of people have died and will keep dying to feed the beast, so a few people can have fantastical amounts of wealth. Then when the resources of this planet are expended they'll probably flee to another and repeat the cycle.

    I'd rather we ironed out the kinks in our power structures before we end up living in an even worse sci-fi dystopia
    Nobody is asking anyone to prioritize physical health above everything else and all their relationships. Same with the size of the economy or the number of children you have, nobody is saying maximize them "at the cost of everything else". The point is to try and find the best combo that maximizes everything we care about, which isn't a big deal because maximizing these different factors tend to go together anyways. For example you can't grow the economy very well if everybody is in poor physical health and you can't afford to have more kids when you haven't grown the economy to be able to support those kids.

    Then when the resources of this planet are expended
    Except resources are never ultimately expended or depleted, it's just a matter of learning how to gain access to more and better resources, especially as it relates to energy/electricity. Since ultimately with enough energy production it's possible to transmute any number of simple and abundant resources into any number of complex and rare resources.
    -------
    Quote of the month:
    We should avoid the age-old question of "who should rule?" because it cries out for an authoritarian answer.
    Logical Fallacies: Ad hominem, Generalizing history to pre-determine the future.

  7. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    Except resources are never ultimately expended or depleted, it's just a matter of learning how to gain access to more and better resources, especially as it relates to energy/electricity. Since ultimately with enough energy production it's possible to transmute any number of simple and abundant resources into any number of complex and rare resources.
    You can rewind time?

    Also I'm not a huge fan of planning things around other things being invented. Seems like a bad thing to plan your economy around
    Last edited by Josuke; 2020-02-18 at 05:29 AM.

  8. #128
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Quarantine and Chill
    Posts
    47,059
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    Nah how is maximizing the future size of the economy/resources a problem? It's like saying a person shouldn't maximize their physical healthiness, there's literally no reason whatsoever to not want to maximize things like resources & wealth, good health & long life.
    Because it's not sustainable. This is a fact that has been repeatedly demonstrated by study after study on the subject, which you've conveniently chosen to ignore because of some nonsense "we can't predict the future" shtick that is quite clearly designed to shut down discussion rather than actually discern truth.

    What white westerners think makes people happy really only makes a small number of white westerners happy. Who would have thought!
    Elizabeth Warren is the neighbor in the horror movie who drives by the haunted house and is like “hey guys seems bad in there want to come with me?” and America is the family that’s like “nah it’s probably not that bad there were only chainsaw noises in the night that one time!”

  9. #129
    The Insane PC2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    17,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Because it's not sustainable. This is a fact that has been repeatedly demonstrated by study after study on the subject, which you've conveniently chosen to ignore because of some nonsense "we can't predict the future" shtick that is quite clearly designed to shut down discussion rather than actually discern truth.

    What white westerners think makes people happy really only makes a small number of white westerners happy. Who would have thought!
    Except no, growth is thee only sustainable strategy. Economic stagnation is the least sustainable strategy. The reality is that either you're growing or you're dying. There's no such thing is a sustainable third option.

    Quote Originally Posted by Josuke View Post
    You can rewind time?
    Nah for anything sub-optimal that happened in the past just consider it similar to a "sunk cost". Never sit around worrying about sunk costs, only worry about the present and future.

    Quote Originally Posted by Josuke View Post
    Also I'm not a huge fan of planning things around other things being invented. Seems like a bad thing to plan your economy around
    That's too bad because civilization will never ever be able to plan for the future in any reliable or deterministic way, especially not by trying to predict the future based on things that strictly exist in history. Solving the problems of the next century can't be done with the technology of the current century as we can always expect new problems to accompany the new ideas, tech, and happenings of each era. It would be great if civilization could "plan" success, unfortunately success cannot be planned ahead of time no matter how much resources is put into predicting the future.
    Last edited by PC2; 2020-02-18 at 05:49 AM.
    -------
    Quote of the month:
    We should avoid the age-old question of "who should rule?" because it cries out for an authoritarian answer.
    Logical Fallacies: Ad hominem, Generalizing history to pre-determine the future.

  10. #130
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Quarantine and Chill
    Posts
    47,059
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    Except no, growth is thee only sustainable strategy. Economic stagnation is the least sustainable strategy. The reality is that either you're growing or you're dying. There's no such thing is a sustainable third option.
    Correction: growth is the only sustainable strategy in an unrestricted consumer economy.

    Capitalism needs humans, humans don't need capitalism.
    Elizabeth Warren is the neighbor in the horror movie who drives by the haunted house and is like “hey guys seems bad in there want to come with me?” and America is the family that’s like “nah it’s probably not that bad there were only chainsaw noises in the night that one time!”

  11. #131
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    Except no, growth is thee only sustainable strategy. Economic stagnation is the least sustainable strategy. The reality is that either you're growing or you're dying. There's no such thing is a sustainable third option.



    Nah for anything sub-optimal that happened in the past just consider it similar to a "sunk cost". Never sit around worrying about sunk costs, only worry about the present and future.



    That's too bad because civilization will never ever be able to plan for the future in any reliable or deterministic way, especially not by trying to predict the future based on things that strictly exist in history. Solving the problems of the next century can't be done with the technology of the current century as we can always expect new problems to accompany the new ideas, tech, and happenings of each era. It would be great if civilization could "plan" success, unfortunately success cannot be planned ahead of time no matter how much resources is put into predicting the future.
    I get it. We are doomed.

  12. #132
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Quarantine and Chill
    Posts
    47,059
    Quote Originally Posted by Josuke View Post
    I get it. We are doomed.
    Nah, we're not.

    “We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings."
    Elizabeth Warren is the neighbor in the horror movie who drives by the haunted house and is like “hey guys seems bad in there want to come with me?” and America is the family that’s like “nah it’s probably not that bad there were only chainsaw noises in the night that one time!”

  13. #133
    The Insane PC2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    17,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Correction: growth is the only sustainable strategy in an unrestricted consumer economy.

    Capitalism needs humans, humans don't need capitalism.
    No growth is the only sustainable strategy for any system. No matter what kind of system you think of, if you don't grow the scope of that system then it is inevitable that it will fail once a big enough problem comes along. Where as if you keep growing it bigger and bigger both in terms of there being more people(brain power) and material resources then you at least have a chance to keep it going in perpetuity.
    -------
    Quote of the month:
    We should avoid the age-old question of "who should rule?" because it cries out for an authoritarian answer.
    Logical Fallacies: Ad hominem, Generalizing history to pre-determine the future.

  14. #134
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Quarantine and Chill
    Posts
    47,059
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    No growth is the only sustainable strategy for any system. No matter what kind of system you think of, if you don't grow the scope of that system then it is inevitable that it will fail once a big enough problem comes along. Where as if you keep growing it bigger and bigger both in terms of people(brain power) and material resources then you at least have a chance to keep it going in perpetuity.
    Lol, ten thousand years of human history begs to differ. The growth-only model is a relative novelty and something of an aberration given its unsustainability.
    Elizabeth Warren is the neighbor in the horror movie who drives by the haunted house and is like “hey guys seems bad in there want to come with me?” and America is the family that’s like “nah it’s probably not that bad there were only chainsaw noises in the night that one time!”

  15. #135
    The Insane PC2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    17,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Lol, ten thousand years of human history begs to differ. The growth-only model is a relative novelty and something of an aberration given its unsustainability.
    I mean all of human history shows that societies only thrive when growing and not when they shrink... However this point I just made doesn't matter at all because you should never ever used repeated historical observations to reason about anything, especially the future. For example capitalism could be system in which the most progress has happened for the last 300 years, or the last 3 million years, it makes zero difference since historical numbers mean nothing whatsoever and have no bearing on what causes things to fail or succeed.
    -------
    Quote of the month:
    We should avoid the age-old question of "who should rule?" because it cries out for an authoritarian answer.
    Logical Fallacies: Ad hominem, Generalizing history to pre-determine the future.

  16. #136
    Field Marshal Zinstorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Gaithersburg, MD
    Posts
    97


    Pretty sure most of our overpopulation issues will go away once we advance most of the world to the first world.

    Granted I'm sure the issue isn't as simple as that...but I imagine its a big part of it... people tend to have less children overall as living conditions improve. not to mention their is no way to enforce something like this without uniting the world under one nation... and that's not gonna happen.

  17. #137
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Quarantine and Chill
    Posts
    47,059
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I mean all of human history shows that societies only thrive when growing and not when they shrink...
    Citation neeeeeeded. Many of history's "golden ages" have been chiefly defined by a cessation of expansion.

    However this point I just made doesn't matter at all because you should never ever used repeated historical observations to reason about anything, especially the future.
    We've already established why this crap continues to be crap. We're not talking about predictions of the future here, we are talking about a comparison of historical systems to our current one with an eye on refinement.

    For example capitalism could be system in which the most progress has happened for the last 300 years, or the last 3 million years, it makes zero difference since historical numbers mean nothing whatsoever and have no bearing on what causes things to fail or succeed.
    They do tell us when to stop repeating the same mistakes, like exploiting resources indefinitely. Rapa Nui says hi.
    Elizabeth Warren is the neighbor in the horror movie who drives by the haunted house and is like “hey guys seems bad in there want to come with me?” and America is the family that’s like “nah it’s probably not that bad there were only chainsaw noises in the night that one time!”

  18. #138
    Quote Originally Posted by gaymer77 View Post
    I'm 100% in favor of this and would take it one step further and have forced sterilization on people upon puberty unless/until they can prove they can support their ONE child on their own without the aid of the government or anyone outside of the two parents (or one parent if a woman so elects to be a single mom).
    I do find the irony of a gay man arguing for eugenics quite comical.
    Expansion leak claiming Legion is the last expansion
    Quote Originally Posted by golds
    NO it will be me laughing at how you doubted this....
    Quote Originally Posted by golds
    I was right

  19. #139
    The Insane PC2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    17,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Citation neeeeeeded. Many of history's "golden ages" have been chiefly defined by a cessation of expansion.
    That's nonsense. My citation is all of the examples that have ever existed, the West in the last few centuries and China in the last few decades are two examples of how growth happens in parallel with societal success and shrinkage with a lack of progress.

    Just pick any example, the idea that any society started a "golden age" after the economy and population size shrink or stagnate is nothing short of absurd.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    We've already established why this crap continues to be crap. We're not talking about predictions of the future, we are talking about a comparison of historical systems to our current one with an eye on refinement.
    Okay well we have liberal democracy so if you're pro-refinement then you're just pro-capitalism since you really can't ever refine the foundation of a system out of that system.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    They do tell us when to stop repeating the same mistakes,
    Yes history is good at telling us about mistakes! Which isn't to be confused with the functionality of a crystal ball.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    like exploiting resources indefinitely. Rapa Nui says hi.
    I'm okay with exploiting all non-conscious things. If something isn't conscious then who cares if it is exploited.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Josuke View Post
    I get it. We are doomed.
    lol? There's no reason to think we're doomed nor that prosperity is inevitable. Just depends on the quality of effort that people put in. One thing that guarantees doom is if everybody thinks the future is dictated by all of our constant prophecies and not the quality of daily effort.
    Last edited by PC2; 2020-02-18 at 06:33 AM.
    -------
    Quote of the month:
    We should avoid the age-old question of "who should rule?" because it cries out for an authoritarian answer.
    Logical Fallacies: Ad hominem, Generalizing history to pre-determine the future.

  20. #140
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Quarantine and Chill
    Posts
    47,059
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    That's nonsense. My citation is all of the examples that have ever existed, the West in the last few centuries and China in the last few decades are two examples of how growth happens in parallel with societal success and shrinkage with a lack of progress.
    So, your examples are just basically limited to capitalist European societies.

    Just pick any example, the idea that any society started a "golden age" after the economy and population size shrink or stagnate is nothing short of absurd.


    Again, the view of exponential growth as a necessary feature of economic systems doesn't predate 1800 at the earliest.

    Okay well we have liberal democracy so if you're pro-refinement then you're just pro-capitalism since you really can't ever refine the foundation of a system out of that system.
    The US does not have liberal democracy, for starters.

    And "refine" can also mean "replace" in this circumstance. You're assuming a particular attachment to capitalism as an ideology that isn't there; I only care about it insofar as it produces results, and it isn't producing results.

    Yes history is good at telling us about mistakes! Which isn't to be confused with the functionality of a crystal ball.
    Cool, and one such mistake is feckless exploitation of natural resources at a clearly unsustainable rate. See: Rapa Nui. Or the Maya.

    I'm okay with exploiting all non-conscious things. If something isn't conscious then who cares if it is exploited.
    Because exploiting it means it isn't there for other people to use after it? Duh?
    Elizabeth Warren is the neighbor in the horror movie who drives by the haunted house and is like “hey guys seems bad in there want to come with me?” and America is the family that’s like “nah it’s probably not that bad there were only chainsaw noises in the night that one time!”

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •