[yor_on]

so we need trust, all of us does, those that reaps the benefits from your trust needs it more than you. Losing your trust is losing their privileges.


spelling

[yor_on]

It's a weird world you built, just as weird as quantum mechanics and relativity.

[yor_on]

Built on bs mostly.

No, not physics, your world. The game.

[yor_on]

Funny isn't it?

All that trust, misplaced.

[yor_on]

The real world, the one we used to have, was built on sustainability. You took that concept and replaced with profits. What you see around is a result from it. Not all is bad, some of the science we created are a result of it. But you have to be very stupid to believe that science is a result of profits. I don't know how stupid you are though, maybe you do believe it?

[yor_on]

That on a world built from sustainability science won't exist?

That's a revolutionary theory. Now you just need to prove it.

[yor_on]

It's funny. Just realized that by going extinct, as a result of our 'science', the game and 'profits', you might be able to formulate a argument supporting it. And what that would mean would then be that " no species survive 'science' " :)

That's really funny.
Want to use it?

[yor_on]

It would still be wrong. Science as used for profits is not 'science'. Science is based on avoiding bias. Can't avoid all preconceptions though, as the 'water' you grew up in, your innermost instincts, beliefs and ideals, religion and traditions. If it could there would be no need to look for bias, only for errors.

so I place it on the game

[yor_on]

You're definitely a hierarchical species, always on the lookout for leaders. And the game is based on you, your instincts and ideals, and beliefs. The best you can hope for is 'enlightened leaders' as you won't take any responsibility yourself.  The problem is that most of your leaders think the same as you, and they have more to lose by doing it.

[yor_on]

And if we then add the traits they need to become leaders. As defined from a game of inequality and competition, you don't really stand a chance, do you? Your role models, the ones that will lead you out of this game.

[yor_on]

And it leads to blame games and wars. It always does when you have herds centered on different leaders. Doesn't really matters what the reasons are. The distrust is a natural consequence of you being a herd.

[yor_on]

I can't prove that one yet. It's new to me too, just thought about it. So let's put it as a hypothesis.

[yor_on]

We could look at nature for it though. There you can find both solitary species and those that are herds. I'm not sure about that one. It's about group dynamics and how they act meeting another group (external) as well as internally. Like Sweden where we now have gained over one million immigrants on a population of around ten millions (around 16 % born outside Sweden 2015) over the last twenty years. Group dynamics and 'different waters', that's a example of internal. Sweden relative other nations, that's external.
=

Putting in a time frame for the population growth.

[yor_on]

I'll have to think about it, and so should you.

[yor_on]

This one is quite interesting. It's statistics over Sweden and fertility all the way  from 1630 till 1900.  And further down you can find it all the way to 2019.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sweden#Historical_fertility_rates_from_1630_to_1900

Using those data we can see how the the birthrate falls with our industrial revolution. And I would expect it to be much the same in all industrialized country's.

[yor_on]

That is related to the immigration you want to keep your GDP flowing. It's also related to what demands you put on the immigration. 1965 USA changed its immigration laws. "The legislation, also called the Hart-Celler Act, ended the former system of placing quotas on immigrants by national origin, instead prioritizing skilled workers and family members."

https://time.com/4050914/1965-immigration-act-pew/

Today Finland tries to attract highly skilled workers while Sweden tries from another more mixed perspective. But it should be about the GDP in both cases.

https://www.foreigner.fi/articulo/work-and-study/finland-is-not-for-low-skilled-labor/20190418171302001735.html
and    https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5391395&t=1615473223495

[yor_on]

I think I will us my pointy hat here, won't happen.  https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210310-the-trillion-dollar-plan-to-capture-co2

I'm sure someone will test it, but for it to work on a larger scale is very dubious. I'll probably come back to this later but for now it's enough with my pointy hat.


syntax

[yor_on]

Overfishing, jobs and profits, and no sharing.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/mar/12/galapagos-marine-reserve-plan-ecologists-ecuador-fishing-industry

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/12/kern-oil-field

Everyone's knows it. You know it personally too. And the more you're into 'the market', competitions, the more obvious it becomes. It has to make a profit. From your banks, government to your wallet. Same story.


syntax, again.

[yor_on]

The game won't take you out.

[yor_on]

Kind of sux all of it. You're not prepared to change and if the richest countries in the world won't, what do you expect from the poorest?