[the5thforce]

the earth is made to go into our bodies, the universe is made to go into our bodies, consume until theres nothing left, expand until theres no more expansion

we should also keep in mind the longest existential path may or may not be the most worthwhile path but obviously constant warfare isnt either

the most efficient path will require extremely intelligent planning and molding every aspect of our environment(our home) to suit our continued existence, we should probably invest heavily in IQ/merit based education for kids because ultimately high-neuron people are one of the most vital resources we have, neuron count/brain activity scanners should be created as a voluntary option for parents to test their kids and the government should provide these parents and their kids options for highly specialized schools starting at a young age

we have a shortage of neurons in western government and we all know the greed gene is through the roof in many jews(theyre a double edged sword) which is ultimately why extreme diplomacy with china, north korea and russia is gonna be the only path forward

[Tim the Plumber]

Soon, in the next few decades, humanity will start to capture asteriods and mine them. The resources floating around the solar system are practically infinate. The potential populations that can be accomodated in extreme luxury in artifical habitats will be beyond anything we will be able to fill in the next thousand years and beyond.

You did not bother to read the second half of the post then;

Soon, in the next few decades, humanity will start to capture asteriods and mine them. The resources floating around the solar system are practically infinate. The potential populations that can be accomodated in extreme luxury in artifical habitats will be beyond anything we will be able to fill in the next thousand years and beyond.

[/color]

[Aemilius]

Well, I have to confess, I didn't read the whole thread but, we landed on the Moon after all.... Didn't we? So, why not just a well placed artificially induced asteroid impact? It's a simple matter really, surely NASA could at least manage that....

[Tim the Plumber]

Not evil at all??

Why are you fantising about killing billions of people?

[alancalverd]

Why are you fantising about killing billions of people?

To whom was this addressed?

According to the World Health Organisation

• 131.4 million births per year   • 55.3 million people die each year

which does suggest something of an imbalance. The answer is simply to reduce the number of births.

Since every birth involves a lot of effort (courtship, mating, pregnancy, birth, child raising..) and risk at each stage, it seems sensible to do less, reduce risks, and let everyone live a long and happy life.

[Tim the Plumber]

Why are you fantising about killing billions of people?

To whom was this addressed?

According to the World Health Organisation

• 131.4 million births per year   • 55.3 million people die each year

which does suggest something of an imbalance. The answer is simply to reduce the number of births.

Since every birth involves a lot of effort (courtship, mating, pregnancy, birth, child raising..) and risk at each stage, it seems sensible to do less, reduce risks, and let everyone live a long and happy life.

So lets drop an asteroid onto the earth! Yeah that will kill loads!!!

Who needs to consider that the changes in population levels reflect increasing life spans and that any population that has experienced longer life in the modern world has, without any killing, stopped increasing it's population and there is no need what so ever to kill billions of people!!

If you can redirect an asteroid, and you can, then you can do so such that it is availible for mining and thus start a space industry which would allow us to have vast resources for very little effort. To build large habitats which could house billions in spacious luxury.

[Tim the Plumber]

But it isn't a lie. We only survive because of artificial fertilisers, without which crop yields globally would be 30 - 50% less, and the production of artificial fertilisers depends on burning fossil fuels, of which we only have a finite amount. Most populations are now critically short of drinking water: not only in the third world but in places like California.

It is entirely possible that our great-grandchildren could eke out a pathetic living with a population of 10,000,000,000 or more, but only a very evil man would wish it on them. On the other hand, if we took steps to limit the population immediately, we and every successive generation would benefit from an increasingly good standard of indefinitely sustainable living.

Utter drivel.

California only has a water "shortage" because in a natural desert almost all the water availible is used for agriculture. Even then there is hardly a shortage of swiming pools.

Why spout such negative drivel?

[the5thforce]

the west is devolving into a system that not only favors low brain activity people- but even more tragic- favors low brain activity in high brain activity people.. i believe it is largely the continued ego, narcissism and greed of previous generations to blame, along with the misguided attempt to replace racism with sexism disguised as 'feminism' or 'lgbt rights' which will undoubtedly backfire if it isnt already, particularly in diverse countries

social issues aside, our solar system is itself a 'spaceship'- we exist to redesign this entire ship and then drive it to search for a new one (a new solar system), in the meantime we should optimize the structure of this planet and eventually start building a new planet, this will require extremely efficient central planning via mass communication and merit-based government, unguided/misinformed capitalism is inevitably on its way out

[Tim the Plumber]

the west is devolving into a system that not only favors low brain activity people- but even more tragic- favors low brain activity in high brain activity people.. i believe it is largely the continued ego, narcissism and greed of previous generations to blame, along with the misguided attempt to replace racism with sexism disguised as 'feminism' or 'lgbt rights' which will undoubtedly backfire if it isnt already, particularly in diverse countries

social issues aside, our solar system is itself a 'spaceship'- we exist to redesign this entire ship and then drive it to search for a new one (a new solar system), in the meantime we should optimize the structure of this planet and eventually start building a new planet, this will require extremely efficient central planning via mass communication and merit-based government, unguided/misinformed capitalism is inevitably on its way out

You will understand that I disagree that centrally planned economies are any good. Just look at the historical examples.

The west has triuphed not due to it being unified but because of it's internal competition and disorder. The most continiuosly revolutionary places are those with the best pace of technological development.

Soon there will be an industry based upon captured, mined and inhabited asteroids. This will be the single greatest leap of human wealth ever. The practically limitless resources of the solar system will provide an abundance that will never be exhausted. These rocks will be exploted not by slow and safe central planning but by the dynamic, often dangerous, private initiative and energy of individuals and venture capital taking big risks.

[the5thforce]

edited for ease+expanded:


-the economy is not presently and wont ever be one or the other(capitalism and communism are not incompatible with eachother)

-technology eliminates the false dichotomies of the past, technology is fusing capitalism with communism

-communism is itself communication/commutication of- ideas, products, services, resources, strengths, weaknesses, people, genetics, diversity

-as governments continue to merge with technology people will become the main capital

-if the goal is to organize a cooperative/functional global community then its in everyones interest to spread their own wealth (whatever that wealth may be) as often, far, and wide as possible away from the billionare megacorporation communes

-billionare megacorporation communes have become the modern equivalent of "stagnant communism" funded by a global national debt bubble

-the unwillingness of governments to either enforce a wealth cap/wealth tax or to educate citizens that they need to stop giving their money away to these billionare megacorporation-communes is why we have a global national debt bubble

-billionares with literally more money than they know what to do with are stagnating the economy, their wealth is sitting in a personal or corporate bank or asset- collecting dust

-no single mind on earth is worth a billion dollars otherwise they would find a way to spend the billions as fast as they earned them and they wouldn't need to keep more money than they could reasonably spend in a lifetime
 
-only ideas are worth a billion dollars and ideas are products of the communities from which a person lives

-the day billionares enforce their own wealth cap by splurging quicker and paying their employees higher wages so their employees can splurge quicker will be the day they're truly giving back/fairly compensating the community of which they are a product of

[Tim the Plumber]

its not presently and wont ever be one or the other, technology eliminates the false dichotomies of the past, technology is the fusion of capitalism with communism, communism is itself communication/commutication of- ideas, products, services, resources, strengths, weaknesses, people, genetics, diversity, as governments continue to merge with technology people will become the main capital, if the goal is to organize a cooperative/functional global community then its in everyones interest to spread their own wealth (whatever that wealth may be) as often, far, and wide as possible away from the billionare megacorporations that have become the modern equivalent of "stagnant communism" funded by a global national debt bubble and enabled by the unwillingness to either enforce a wealth cap/wealth tax or to educate people to stop giving their money away to these megacorporation-communes owned by billionares with literally more money than they know what to do with

OK, come back when you can translate that into something understandable.

And I have no wish to be any sort of centrally directed global community.

[alancalverd]

California only has a water "shortage" because in a natural desert almost all the water availible is used for agriculture. Even then there is hardly a shortage of swiming pools.

In other words, the part of the world with the most desirable standard of living, is not capable of sustaining that standard for its present population. Pretty much what I've been saying all along.

There are only two solutions: make more water, or make fewer people. Only one of these is actually feasible on a large scale, in a short time, and indefinitely. If we can't do it by persuasion and reward, the time will come when Man or nature will do it the  hard way.

[timey]

Well Alan - undoubtably there is no argument against the undeniable necessity for population control - and... I think it is here that you have hit the nail on the head.  Persuasion!  Let's have a look at that...

Fact of the matter is that man is a pack animal.  It is a psychological necessity within the physical make up of mankind to interact with his fellow man as part of a pack.   Unfortunately the byproduct of such interaction incorporates the existence of alpha omega tendencies...

This is a natural form of hierarchy that is echoed throughout the animal kingdom, however the human is an inventive creature.  Alpha personalities, in a bid to ensure their Alpa positions more lazily, quickly realised that to render ones people divided makes for a more peaceful dictatorship, consisting of a greater longevity.

It is clear to see that people living in clans of families is the natural orientation for man, but in that we 'are' divided and ruled, the bond of personal family psychologically replaces the bond of the clan.  You yourself Alan have stated in a post elsewhere that you learnt, or was taught early on in your life to make the distinction between family members and 'others'...!

The point I make is it's all very well saying that we must in the future become one child only families - and with exceptionally good reason - but that we really cannot ignore the fact that this, under the current remit of divide and rule circumstances of smaller and smaller divisions, whereas older generations of family no longer live with the younger generations, constitutes an unnatural and damaging way of life for elders, parents, and children, alike.  That divisions of distance between relatives becomes apparent in lack of local job opportunities, etc, etc.

We already are observing the break down of traditional family values within the remit of society today, and the social ramifications of such.  What will happen if these bonds of family are further reduced by the event of even smaller family groups? Will children of the future become people who make the distinction between family and others as a singular family member?  Are we opening a can of worms in that our future generations, in growing up as the singular point of focus and ambition within a family, will then view themselves as singularities, un-bonded to, and without empathy for their fellow man?

Any policy, as necessary as it may be, will always bear negative effects.  This does not mean that such policies should not be adopted, but it is important that one consider what effects will be caused by a policy across the board, and that all perspectives are fully addressed.

People have an inherent psychological need within themselves to be part of something that is bigger than themselves. This inherent and hard wired need of the human, I believe, requires some very careful thought and consideration indeed...

Personally, I find that within the parameters of a capitalistic society, whereby the notion of community becomes a market place of opportunity to further one's own ends as the result of another's misfortune, that for me...neither politics, religion, nor football suffice!

What to do?

[Tim the Plumber]

California only has a water "shortage" because in a natural desert almost all the water availible is used for agriculture. Even then there is hardly a shortage of swiming pools.

In other words, the part of the world with the most desirable standard of living, is not capable of sustaining that standard for its present population. Pretty much what I've been saying all along.

There are only two solutions: make more water, or make fewer people. Only one of these is actually feasible on a large scale, in a short time, and indefinitely. If we can't do it by persuasion and reward, the time will come when Man or nature will do it the  hard way.

No. The only reason there is a "problem" is that there is not enough water for the growing of all the water needing crops in the desert.

The solution is to not grow those crops in the Imperial valley and grow them elsewhere. Which yes I suppose does involve spending a couple of cents a houshold per year extra on fruit to keep the swimming pool.

[Tim the Plumber]

Well Alan - undoubtably there is no argument against the undeniable necessity for population control - and... I think it is here that you have hit the nail on the head.  Persuasion!  Let's have a look at that...

Fact of the matter is that man is a pack animal.  It is a psychological necessity within the physical make up of mankind to interact with his fellow man as part of a pack.   Unfortunately the byproduct of such interaction incorporates the existence of alpha omega tendencies...

This is a natural form of hierarchy that is echoed throughout the animal kingdom, however the human is an inventive creature.  Alpha personalities, in a bid to ensure their Alpa positions more lazily, quickly realised that to render ones people divided makes for a more peaceful dictatorship, consisting of a greater longevity.

It is clear to see that people living in clans of families is the natural orientation for man, but in that we 'are' divided and ruled, the bond of personal family psychologically replaces the bond of the clan.  You yourself Alan have stated in a post elsewhere that you learnt, or was taught early on in your life to make the distinction between family members and 'others'...!

The point I make is it's all very well saying that we must in the future become one child only families - and with exceptionally good reason - but that we really cannot ignore the fact that this, under the current remit of divide and rule circumstances of smaller and smaller divisions, whereas older generations of family no longer live with the younger generations, constitutes an unnatural and damaging way of life for elders, parents, and children, alike.  That divisions of distance between relatives becomes apparent in lack of local job opportunities, etc, etc.

We already are observing the break down of traditional family values within the remit of society today, and the social ramifications of such.  What will happen if these bonds of family are further reduced by the event of even smaller family groups? Will children of the future become people who make the distinction between family and others as a singular family member?  Are we opening a can of worms in that our future generations, in growing up as the singular point of focus and ambition within a family, will then view themselves as singularities, un-bonded to, and without empathy for their fellow man?

Any policy, as necessary as it may be, will always bear negative effects.  This does not mean that such policies should not be adopted, but it is important that one consider what effects will be caused by a policy across the board, and that all perspectives are fully addressed.

People have an inherent psychological need within themselves to be part of something that is bigger than themselves. This inherent and hard wired need of the human, I believe, requires some very careful thought and consideration indeed...

Personally, I find that within the parameters of a capitalistic society, whereby the notion of community becomes a market place of opportunity to further one's own ends as the result of another's misfortune, that for me...neither politics, religion, nor football suffice!

What to do?

What to do;-

Point out the drivel that this evil set of lies is.

There is no problem with 10 billion productive people on the planet. There is space a plenty and if the resource that is human endevour is allowed to develope the deserts with good land management there will be more than enough food for all.

Beyond that there is no trouble with hydroponically grown food. It may be slightly more expensive but with all those people being part of a dynamic capitalist economy the average wealth level for us all will be easily high enough to pay for it.

[timey]

I'm sorry Tim, but is there any chance that you may post in a 'deeper' blue?

[alancalverd]

There is no problem with 10 billion productive people on the planet. There is space a plenty and if the resource that is human endevour is allowed to develope the deserts with good land management there will be more than enough food for all.

The Oklahoma Dust Bowl, the Sahara Desert, and the gradual salinification of coastal Asia, are all testaments to human endeavor. Land management in a temperate, fertile country like England has led to increased frequency of flooding. Great swathes of the Amazon basin have been rendered sterile by all forms of agriculture, most of which resulted in the starvation of their practitioners.

[Tim the Plumber]

There is no problem with 10 billion productive people on the planet. There is space a plenty and if the resource that is human endevour is allowed to develope the deserts with good land management there will be more than enough food for all.

The Oklahoma Dust Bowl, the Sahara Desert, and the gradual salinification of coastal Asia, are all testaments to human endeavor. Land management in a temperate, fertile country like England has led to increased frequency of flooding. Great swathes of the Amazon basin have been rendered sterile by all forms of agriculture, most of which resulted in the starvation of their practitioners.

Yes, that's the sort of trouble that happens when you don't do it right.

Doing it right however can result in great things.

https://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change?language=en

Please watch this video. It will change your opinion.

[alancalverd]

Interesting, but baffling! So herds of domestic animals cause desertification and reverse it. There must be some secret in that "planned grazing" concept that has escaped farmers for the last thousand years or so, and it looks as though the secret is actually "unplanned" grazing, as done by wild animals that just follow the grass.

[syhprum]

In the UK there is a very effective form of birth control i.e An obsession with owning your own house and very high house prices.
It is impossible for a married couple with only one person working to buy a house so both work and take great care not to conceive or have abortions if they do.