Comments by "Valorie Napoletana" (@valorienapoletana4063) on "Big Think" channel.

Why though? Why are those stretched? Why isn't the increase in population viable? Because when we truly examine such things... we see the influence of major polluters preventing the ability of communities to incorporate such increases in population because the resulting strife underwrites their ability to pollute and increases their power and profits. We're being lied to at every turn... and at every turn... is a pollution companies representative stoking the fires of division to protect their profits so we don't understand the most viable course of action is to end their operations and utilize our resources more efficiently and effectively.
3
@mbarker_lng we’ve literally hit a level of technology that makes most “work” unnecessary. We need to adapt to it. Not be forced to continue the tactics of economic slavery of the present day.
2
@mbarker_lng The ego can truly ruin society. I have to say, it’s awesome that you’re understanding of these concepts. It’s rare and we need more of it if we’re gonna progress.
2
That's the big lie though. The idea that our way of life would be sacrificed for a net negative if we do t allow polluters to continue destroying the biosphere. This is fundamentally false. And in fact, switching to alternative and more efficient resource distribution would specifically improve the quality of life of most people. But this comes at the cost of wrenching power and money from the companies who rigged the system to prevent such changes. We can support billions. And for the most part our lives would not change much at all. We currently, in our daily lives, represent one eight billionth of 6% of total emissions. While they represent over 70%. That 70% isn't required to maintain our lives the way we envision them and especially not when we consider how we could live in the future. We could have shorter work weeks, more efficient and effective ways to gain the items we need to survive and enjoy our lives and would barely notice much of the impact outside of a transition period where concerns would mostly be centered upon how people change commuting habits, where and how their food is brought to their table and which luxuries we desire. The problem of population is really a problem of collapse under biosphere retraction. If 30% of our food supply and livelihoods is eliminated when we lose coral.. that's 2-4 billion people impacted. A severe crisis for us all in terms of food shortages and distribution networks. And the very companies causing such damage are poised to profit the most from it. So I think it's worth asking... are we overpopulated or are we being fed that lie to prevent people from more effectively and directly utilizing the resources of the world simply for the sake of a few companies profits and really... that of a handful of billionaires?
2
@Spyder8561 Yeah... cause those are real things...
2
We already are that frog. This pandemic just proves it.
2
@NT-ot3nz What he’s saying... is Amazon is so big... you literally can’t boycott it. You’d need to be living in a box on a deserted island... and even then the box is probably something sold on Amazon. It’s a pervasive company. You purchase and use their products every day without ever realizing it.
2
@diegogonzalez9086 90% of the world has no need to work anymore with the technology level we’re currently at... the rest is just keeping the slaves the royalty is worried about giving up. But also, we should all be able to have an income. That should be a right given the status quo.
2
I think most people don't understand that 90% of jobs or more are utterly obsolete and are literally killing us for no reason other than to keep us financially enslaved to the people killing us and the biosphere for profit.
2
To quote one of the first viral videos and an obscure video game... “You have no chance to survive, make your time! Ha ha ha!” We’re likely to be obliterated by the next ice age or large asteroid impact.
1
@JH-KU we can only hope...
1
All you base are belong to us... you have no chance to survive make your time... ha ha ha.
1
@sebastiantschatordai we already have that technology level... we’re just not using it. It’s basically like... we have the iPhone 13 of society... but a few completely horrible people and their mindless army want to keep landlines...
1
@mbarker_lng Yeah, the inefficiency actually generates market stability. And that’s the whole point. We have the technology level that most jobs are just not necessary unless someone wants to perform it. And that performance could be compensated well for any job we currently have... while all others could rely on UBI that provides a great quality of life. We’d actually have enormous gains with such systems but they would currently rather have slaves an inefficiency than free people and extreme advances in our technology that yield a quality of life most only dream about while growing economies. Maybe one day...
1
@mbarker_lng Yes, to a person literally putting themselves in an extreme health and safety risk situation just to have decent job benefits. The back to “normal” push is disgusting. It should be a “we can do better” approach.
1
I’m worried about the bacteria and viral growth and mutation from the temperature shifts and desalination alone. We’re heading toward oblivion and disease on a scale that most people can’t even understand because for a while, we didn’t have the technology to impact the climate stability we’re currently enjoying and no culture remembers the climate events that drop world life populations down to less than 10,000 complex animals.
1
@goodeye6373 Plastic is definitely one of our major problems. The general populace has been sold a complete lie about it being recyclable. We get maybe one or two uses for most consumer plastic at best. Same goes for paper... and we make that at the expense of extreme deforestation. These straight up lies are a major reason we aren’t using actually recyclable materials like glass and metal. And even then... All so we can have a bubbling, poisoned, acidic concoction with extreme health consequences taste a certain way or so we can ship things globally instead of locally... all for the corporate overlords that want us fat sick and nearly dead anyway because it makes them slightly more money...
1
@TCGaming4fun You’re philosophically absurd… nothing more.
1
@TCGaming4fun Sorry you’re so dense you can’t form a rational thought. The same philosophical constructs you’re using are absurdity. You know enough to think you’re right but not enough to know you’re wrong.
1
Why? Because it is... literally.
1
It's very complex and interrelated. But don't let that fool you. There's enormous pressure from polluters for us to continue the same way we have always utilized resources instead of addressing such inefficiency and scarcity producing models that do nothing but drive up prices and profits and gin them power to further rig the systems in their favor. The raw resource problem is one mining experts have been talking about for decades. Whether it be peek oil, or the precious metals needed for vehicles or the sand we need for concrete. We're using these things wildly inefficiently and ineffectively purely due to the influence of the biggest polluters attempting to increase and maintain their profits.
1
@joshkeating7825 actually they're not interrelated. Consumption and overpopulation being problematic is a contrivance of our current economic models and lack of limitations on monopolies. The vast majority of us wouldn't notice any meaningful change in our lives if we regulated the top 100 entities and required them to pay for the damages they cause in their entirety. As that incentive would alter business practices. There would be a transition period. It would change certain things in the short term. But in the end, reducing the 70% or more of total emissions by requiring companies to reduce their impact or pay for its impact means a wealth and abundance of resources to the vast majority of people. And I'm talking high 90% of people with only the super rich lifestyles being impacted much at all. Collectively we're 6% of emissions. An 8 billionth of 6%. That's not tipping the balance. What's causing the vast majority of resource shortages and societal instability is the influence of the largest companies on earth polluting and attempting to get away with it.
1
@jonnanderson6489 actually, that's literally fossil fuel propaganda... collectively in our daily lives we represent 6% of global emissions. If we simply allowed individuals to live full and healthy lives they'd represent an 8 billionth of 6% of total emissions. Everything else is a contrivance of pollution propaganda to pretend we are forcing their hand when they destroy the environment and therefor must underwrite their trillions in damages. It is a blatant and unacceptable lie. Your carbon footprint for the most part is next to nothing even with the current inefficiency. If we focused on creating specific efficiency... your life would barely change in actions other than drastically reducing your risk and costs... especially in terms of environmental impact and resource use... simply put... we could drive a human rights based society that dismantles the pollution systematically for the benefit of literally everyone except that a few billionaires who in the end would literally be more wealthy but hold less control over our lives and governments. Don't be fooled. You're not the problem, neither are your friends or family, neither are people around the world. The vast majority of us are merely stuck into a monetary system that can do absolutely nothing but create scarcity and inefficiency because that's what debt based economic in centralized banking systems does. It's a war production system. And it's why they want us to fight with ourselves while their economics literally slowly kill us.
1
It's not overpopulation. That's been shown to be an indicator that's much more related to how we're engaging resources than whether our resources can maintain large populations. Food production at current could support 11 billion people without collapsing if we made better decisions regarding production. But the vast majority of the problem is that we're dependent on about 100 entities that aren't necessary for our survival, but we are dependent upon to maintain our current status quo. And we aren't seeing a "free market" correcting such imbalance but rather a rigged system preventing such course correction. The companies that do emerge are purchased and closed or isolated into short term supply chains that inevitably lose market share. We are in a resource crisis. And it's being driven by the biggest polluters on earth and their strong desire to limit their costs at great expense to human life and the biosphere. This messaging was propagated and distributed by the companies that are destroying our biosphere and the false philosophies regarding it and the various ideologies that contribute toward such sentiment. The marketing pushing us toward underwriting their damages has been severe and well funded. And it's difficult to even understand where it's coming from until you do a LOT of research into where the dark money funding the divides is originating. Hint: it's the top 100 polluters every time.
1
@louiscamacho3457 stfu... people who want to live peacefully by themselves aren’t comparable to such people by default. You’re just being a jerk.
1
@Spyder8561 You’re one of the reasons I’d want to live on my own.
1
@Spyder8561 yeah... cause living apart from society is so easy... and cheap...
1
Leftists? It’s literally the right wing that tried the revolution in January... and the day after we were all mocking their ridiculous attempts and horrible crimes and started rounding them up and prosecuting...
1
We did start back then... remember occupy Wall Street? Problem is by the time my generation even came of voting age it was already too late.
1
@morganwright224 fascism is a philosophical concept... not a person... and let's be really clear... it's rooted in supremacy... the entirety of early 1900 fascism came directly from the concepts of the US postbellum south. Fascism specifically corrupts democracies by stoking nationalism and divisions. The 1930s of Germany used the same and may as well have been saying the same the "America First" and MAGA people do.
1
@morganwright224 That's cause the felon is parroting the German not the Italian...
1
@pouljrgensen1668 they’re a bit off... but the analogy isn’t far off.
1
The whole problem is people are using data to confirm their bias and while they think they are coming up with a solution, they are actually perpetuating the problem. The issue is the information. We’ve got so much conflicting data thrown at us individually. We egotistically assume we’re capable of filtering and using such information. That’s the absurdity of confirmation bias. It’s ego. The bane of this country and every great nation is hubris. We can confirm our biases... and egotistically think that our philosophical assumptions are a proper way to run a planet... or find better ways of determine what’s valid and how to solve our problems. I mean seriously, confirmation bias is a matter of perspective. If we’re on a spaceship hurtling through the universe and mind bending speeds.... and we are... would you want that ship taken care of like it’s the enterprise... or do you think it should be run like a golf cart being driven by a drunken billionaire who cares more about his fourth super yacht being finished by the end of the year than your life, your kids or the future of humanity? We all know what’s going on. Some people just ignore it. And that’s the problem. It’s not a left or right or a climate change got worse or better... and the middles all messed up. What brings people together is reality. We have to deal with something because it’s 105 out and that’s not going to go down anytime soon until that temperature melts the ice caps and raises the oceans 30 meters. So it’s reality that really changes things. The reality that we mask up or die at record rates. The reality that we stop burning down this planet with our eating and travel habits or a few generations from now will get to see exactly how bad things are going to get.
1
He’s not a symptom... he’s the current embodiment of what the right wing has always been fighting for since the postbellum war white supremacists began taking over the party and sold out in the 70s... it’s the same evil we faced in multiple wars...
1
Woah woah woah... Bezos already has robots to replace all those people... they’re called drones and just need FAA clearance. This guys talking about robots that do a lot more than pick, pack and ship boxes.
1
@icemike1 Yes, we’re literally letting robots buy and sell most of Wall Street these days.
1
@icemike1 Sure... and they are... they’re just not using them the same way people are... robots are definitely buying those things... and reselling them. And on and on. And while they may be set up by and benefit people... they’re definitely adding to economy in major ways.
1
@thatoneguy6233 🤔 maybe 🤷‍♀️ I tend to look at things differently I guess
1
In order to understand what’s going on and what our governments are preparing us to do in order to survive... Ask ANY bioresearcher what increasing temperature 2-4 degrees does to bacteria and viral growth and mutation. It’s not even the oceans rising 20-30 meters (certain to occur in the next 200 years) and weather shifts. Wait till bacteria outpaces and becomes immune to antibiotics and when viruses outpace our ability to create vaccines and inoculate people because that’s the next couple decades.
1
@jasoncrandall been outside lately? Wanna walk back this comment or just a troll of the past with a comment on the internet? Everything scientists have explained occur have happened. We’re accelerating our climate shift and it’s not pretty.
1