4 ms·

I have to push back on this because you’re basically saying that old people visibly existing killed your vibe, and that jaywalking made you think less of the pl

by dangus 9mo ago

I have to push back on this because you’re basically saying that old people visibly existing killed your vibe, and that jaywalking made you think less of the place. Heck, in a country with top-tier public housing (17th most affordable housing in the world) and healthcare (2nd best outcomes in the world, 12th highest life expectancy), how are you even sure those older people working jobs are “low paid?” Maybe you’re seeing older people working because they live healthier for longer in Singapore? If you work at McDonald’s in Mississippi you are much more low wage than working at McDonald’s in Denmark, especially considering guaranteed paid time off, healthcare, and other quality of life factors. You literally live 10 years longer on average in Denmark (or Singapore) compared to Mississippi. But those two people wear the same McDonald’s uniform. How can you tell someone is making a “low wage” just by looking at the job they’re doing?

Der_Einzige 9mo ago
The rapidly aging populace is bad for everyone including the old. Isiah 57:1. We should have had the “day of the pillow” that conservatives in Texas were advocating for during Covid.
- dangus 9mo ago
  So your plan is endless growth? When is the population high enough to stop doing that? How is that supposed to work logistically? In what scenario does that not result in societal collapse within a short few lifetimes? Endless growth and the inevitable planetary destruction/exhaustion from that process isn’t good for anyone, either. It’s easier to adapt to a shrinking population than one that is too large to sustain with food and energy. I hate to say it but tossing bible versus around isn’t going to make your case very well. If we want to talk about things that are grounded in reality maybe let’s not cite a book that says god sent bears to kill children who made fun of a guy for being bald (2 Kings 2:23-24). Let’s be real: the Christian plan is to trash the earth (Genesis 1:26) until rapture comes around to bail out believers who have been dutifully praying and fucking. Any day now!
  - somenameforme 9mo ago
    You're creating a false dichotomy since there's always the obvious option of sustainability which is a fertility rate of around 2.1. And declining populations will likely create a far less sustainable world than increasing would. I described in a peer thread how fertility rates directly lead to the age ratios in society. Low fertility rates means you're going to have a low number of working age people for a large number of elderly people. On top of this, positive fertility rates mean that economies naturally increase in size even if you do absolutely nothing - negative growth rates mean that economies will naturally shrink. We're nowhere even remotely near our production capacity for food, water, or energy - but we're already facing labor issues in achieving such. And in a low-growth future, which is our future, these labor issues will magnify exponentially. And it's not like you can just pay people more and everybody lives happily ever after - there simply won't be enough people to do everything that needs to be done, even if everybody's willing to work themselves to death. The expectations for what a society can provide will begin to unravel. And I see no reason not to go sci-fi here because there's every reason to believe it's our future. Earth will not be humanity's only domain. It's practically inconceivable that we won't have thriving off-planet civilizations within a century and realistically - far sooner. And a century of unsustainable growth would be vastly less damaging to society than a century of unsustainable decline.
    - dangus 9mo ago
      The global total fertility rate is already just above your stated ideal rate of 2.1, it's currently at 2.35, so I am really confused at why the comment I originally responded to thought we should all shack up and fuck during the pandemic.
      - somenameforme 9mo ago
        I don't think you're discussing in good faith there. Obviously what happens in Chad, Nigeria, and so on has relatively little consequence on what happens in America and the Western world in general.
        9mo ago

by dangus 9mo ago

Der_Einzige 9mo ago

The rapidly aging populace is bad for everyone including the old. Isiah 57:1. We should have had the “day of the pillow” that conservatives in Texas were advocating for during Covid.

dangus 9mo ago
So your plan is endless growth? When is the population high enough to stop doing that? How is that supposed to work logistically? In what scenario does that not result in societal collapse within a short few lifetimes? Endless growth and the inevitable planetary destruction/exhaustion from that process isn’t good for anyone, either. It’s easier to adapt to a shrinking population than one that is too large to sustain with food and energy. I hate to say it but tossing bible versus around isn’t going to make your case very well. If we want to talk about things that are grounded in reality maybe let’s not cite a book that says god sent bears to kill children who made fun of a guy for being bald (2 Kings 2:23-24). Let’s be real: the Christian plan is to trash the earth (Genesis 1:26) until rapture comes around to bail out believers who have been dutifully praying and fucking. Any day now!
- somenameforme 9mo ago
  You're creating a false dichotomy since there's always the obvious option of sustainability which is a fertility rate of around 2.1. And declining populations will likely create a far less sustainable world than increasing would. I described in a peer thread how fertility rates directly lead to the age ratios in society. Low fertility rates means you're going to have a low number of working age people for a large number of elderly people. On top of this, positive fertility rates mean that economies naturally increase in size even if you do absolutely nothing - negative growth rates mean that economies will naturally shrink. We're nowhere even remotely near our production capacity for food, water, or energy - but we're already facing labor issues in achieving such. And in a low-growth future, which is our future, these labor issues will magnify exponentially. And it's not like you can just pay people more and everybody lives happily ever after - there simply won't be enough people to do everything that needs to be done, even if everybody's willing to work themselves to death. The expectations for what a society can provide will begin to unravel. And I see no reason not to go sci-fi here because there's every reason to believe it's our future. Earth will not be humanity's only domain. It's practically inconceivable that we won't have thriving off-planet civilizations within a century and realistically - far sooner. And a century of unsustainable growth would be vastly less damaging to society than a century of unsustainable decline.
  - dangus 9mo ago
    The global total fertility rate is already just above your stated ideal rate of 2.1, it's currently at 2.35, so I am really confused at why the comment I originally responded to thought we should all shack up and fuck during the pandemic.
    - somenameforme 9mo ago
      I don't think you're discussing in good faith there. Obviously what happens in Chad, Nigeria, and so on has relatively little consequence on what happens in America and the Western world in general.
      - 9mo ago