maketotaldestr0i

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

I posted the wrong link with the title and reposted with the correct link

[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

Shit I dont know what happened there . I must have posted a link I was looking at instead of the one with the title

[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

hah , i did some girls college homework paper in like 20 minutes the other day then put it in AI and told it to rewrite it as a C student paper so she wouldn't get in trouble. lol

[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 5 points 2 months ago

also bad phosphorus fertilizers contain just about every bad heavy metal and radioactive ones. USA has dirty P . China actually has some of the cleanest P because so much of their P refining are newer facilities and they work with different feedstock sources. USA is basically Mosaic corp which has bad sources now that theyve high graded the country, and old shitty refining process facilities.

People sleep on this contamination source getting added every year on almost all farmlands in USA . and its totally preventable problem with effects that cant be undone economically.

[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

literally this time

[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

sad, its one of my favorite fishes. even decent quality sardines are crazy expensive now, except the ones from the baltic which are completely full of toxic PCBs and flame retardants and such.

[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago

whats the terrible take? im just describing society

[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago

Even just with the normal variability and demand vs levels of carryover stocks from year to year , it only takes 3 standard bad crop years to get us into a full blown serious global food crisis.

people are sleeping on this as one of the biggest risks, its not a matter of if, its a matter of when.

[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

i think the argument can be made that about 4% of the population are sociopaths and they rise to the top. if we continually liquidated them we could get to a new equilibrium that wasn't dystopia.

the domesticated people who just folllow and do their bidding like zombies are the source of power unfortunately.

unfortunately the benevolent do not rise to the top or else the good could harness the followers rather than the malevolent using them.

[–] maketotaldestr0i@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago (4 children)

There are some papers about distributing resources so that everyone has enough. we can elevate standard of living while reducing ecological impact. Much of the west is miserable because despite having tons of clothes and TVs and iphones etc... they dont have basic shit like shelter or healthcare or friends. just this hollow life on the treadmill miserable. So you could substantially reduce the GDP of somewhere like america while potentially increasing gross national happiness just by doing something like legalizing shelter , reducing workweeks , having community bbqs and block parties , switching roads for bike lanes etc.... Lower total ecological impact but have better life.

then with resources that would go to all the rich first worlders distribute those resources to people in actual material poverty like the ones starving to the point of permanent stunting.

Then if we continue with womens rights and birth control we can taper off the human population to sustainable levels over the next 200 years without requiring draconian measures. we just have to make it past the next few hundred and come out the other side in a good place.

We dont have the top down global coordination to do this so we will just crash this train and have to pick up from degraded afterfuture. best to start making small scale lifeboat communitiies to practice this stuff

view more: ‹ prev next ›