4 ms·

Yes it's musical chairs; through monetary policy, reserve banks keep pulling out chairs and thus inflating the value of remaining chairs... Then they'll claim t

Yes it's musical chairs; through monetary policy, reserve banks keep pulling out chairs and thus inflating the value of remaining chairs... Then they'll claim that this is all to prevent global warming. All this is actually starting to make me doubt global warming. The banks certainly never gave a damn about global warming before. Do I think that people in power suddenly became more altruistic over the past few years? No, from my experience, they became much more selfish! The whole timing with Greta Thunberg media hype followed by COVID19 then multi-trillion dollar bailouts followed by talks of 'green new deals' and the great reset (which is actually just a continuation of existing policies; not a reset by any definition of the word) is starting to all look a bit too convenient. I've seen first hand how money can corrupt everything. So I'm wondering if it is the science which is attracting the money or the money which is attracting the 'science'. All the climate models are oversimplified and phony; it's pseudoscience... They have tens of thousands of different models and each year they cherry-pick the ones which guessed correctly... Then they keep switching to newer models which keeps proving them right claiming that they did so to keep up with technology (of course not because they were running out of correct old models to cherry pick from)... It's a joke.

SCUSKU 6y ago
I'm not sure I follow your logic here. You're saying that central banks are keeping interest rates low in order to prevent global warming? Generally speaking, I would assume low interest rates = higher economic activity = increased CO2 emissions; not the other way around.
- cryptica 6y ago
  They're using man-made global warming as story to justify their unjust inflationary policies which are in fact all about control and centralization of wealth and power. Global warming could just be rhetoric to convince those people who can see the injustice of what's happening to justify why it needs to happen in this unjust way. It's a way to justify why we should all be playing the game of musical chairs instead of the game of 'make more chairs' or even 'make more chairs, but each person should only have one chair'. It all stinks like corruption. If you really wanted to solve global warming, the best solution would be to limit population growth, you could just give people tax incentives to have fewer children. Could be implemented as UBI: You get less basic income if you have more children. That is a much simpler and fairer solution and doesn't require deceiving billions of people with an epic global monetary ponzi scheme. Also we could get rid of useless bureaucratic jobs which are making the lives of billions of people miserable.
  - WanderPanda 6y ago
    „Don‘t ascribe to malice what can be ascribed to stupidity“ (stupidity and short term, well intentioned, but in the end egoistic thinking, I would add)
    - cryptica 6y ago
      "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice" - Grey's Law. You just need a handful of people to independently see a few opportunities to profit from different activities (which are related in non-obvious ways) and together they can effect great malice without any single individual being aware of their collective malice. The Upton Sinclair principle ensures that the perpetrators of malice are not aware of it: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." Only the victims of malice can see it as such, the perpetrators are the last to see it.
      - WanderPanda 6y ago
        Wow, really cool, thanks for the pointers!! I was always thinking in these terms but never explicitly looked for other people's takes
WanderPanda 6y ago
Very divisive territory you are getting into here :D Just wanted to add that the track record of predictions about the environment doesn‘t shine a bright light on the (popular) science in the ways you mentioned. Just have a look at the club of rome report. When a part of science gets overly politicised you should get wary.
stjohnswarts 6y ago
I think you are too harsh on money. Power corrupts people. Whether thats in the form of a Communist dicatorship, Capitalist dictatorship, winning the lottery (money is a form of power), being a town sheriff that doesn't pay a lot but lets you shoot people and throw them in jail. Power corrupts, it's not necessarily money.

SCUSKU 6y ago

I'm not sure I follow your logic here. You're saying that central banks are keeping interest rates low in order to prevent global warming? Generally speaking, I would assume low interest rates = higher economic activity = increased CO2 emissions; not the other way around.

cryptica 6y ago
They're using man-made global warming as story to justify their unjust inflationary policies which are in fact all about control and centralization of wealth and power. Global warming could just be rhetoric to convince those people who can see the injustice of what's happening to justify why it needs to happen in this unjust way. It's a way to justify why we should all be playing the game of musical chairs instead of the game of 'make more chairs' or even 'make more chairs, but each person should only have one chair'. It all stinks like corruption. If you really wanted to solve global warming, the best solution would be to limit population growth, you could just give people tax incentives to have fewer children. Could be implemented as UBI: You get less basic income if you have more children. That is a much simpler and fairer solution and doesn't require deceiving billions of people with an epic global monetary ponzi scheme. Also we could get rid of useless bureaucratic jobs which are making the lives of billions of people miserable.
- WanderPanda 6y ago
  „Don‘t ascribe to malice what can be ascribed to stupidity“ (stupidity and short term, well intentioned, but in the end egoistic thinking, I would add)
  - cryptica 6y ago
    "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice" - Grey's Law. You just need a handful of people to independently see a few opportunities to profit from different activities (which are related in non-obvious ways) and together they can effect great malice without any single individual being aware of their collective malice. The Upton Sinclair principle ensures that the perpetrators of malice are not aware of it: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." Only the victims of malice can see it as such, the perpetrators are the last to see it.
    - WanderPanda 6y ago
      Wow, really cool, thanks for the pointers!! I was always thinking in these terms but never explicitly looked for other people's takes

WanderPanda 6y ago

Very divisive territory you are getting into here :D Just wanted to add that the track record of predictions about the environment doesn‘t shine a bright light on the (popular) science in the ways you mentioned. Just have a look at the club of rome report. When a part of science gets overly politicised you should get wary.

stjohnswarts 6y ago

I think you are too harsh on money. Power corrupts people. Whether thats in the form of a Communist dicatorship, Capitalist dictatorship, winning the lottery (money is a form of power), being a town sheriff that doesn't pay a lot but lets you shoot people and throw them in jail. Power corrupts, it's not necessarily money.