Comments by "antonyjh1234" (@antonyjh1234) on "Labour only cares about people who are earning or learning" video.

That was the limit of the gold based system, once debt became money and the workforce doubled the amount of money increased, so things cost more, also 400% world population growth in that time meant loans would be paid back, now 23 countries are going to lose 50% of their populations by 2100.
4
@Tensquaremetreworkshop " Progress means costs go up" I would say costs go up because more debt has been put through a certain item/system, progress does mean in a lot of cases costs go down, jevons paradox of course then enters the conversation.
3
@oneoflokis It's 23 countries, maybe i won't list them all, China will lose 600 million, Japan another 50 million, mostly European countries.
2
@downshift4503 Why shouldn't we live like the 1800's gentry but with electricity? If that is the cost, why is that a hard sell?
2
@Tensquaremetreworkshop Costs go up because the money supply increases, if half the money was removed from society do you think the prices would stay the same?
1
@doomlord6668 Money isn't limited by how much debt the population can take on as govt debt and private debt is different but the ability to get into debt shouldn't be the reason that is the amount of money or amount of food one can have, or shelter or medical care, having to hold other peoples debt to have these things is immoral. We are not going to see growth like that again because the world had a 400% growth rate the last 80 years and the next due to old age will mean it will be lucky to be 40% the next 80 so whatever this Ponzi scheme of continual growth is, can not continue.
1
@Tensquaremetreworkshop The goal isn't to remove half the money I am commenting on your post where you said progress means costs go up but central and private banks both create money, the more money they create, the more costs and prices go up, because there is more money in the system, inflation is more money, so costs go up. Inflation is caused, it is a part of the system of money.
1
@doomlord6668 As all debt is money and all money debt, the population will take as much money as is printed, it will all find a home and because so much is govt spending and they always have to be at negative zero, they are not like a business that wants to stay above zero, as long as it is taxed out again the amount of money supplied by govt doesn't matter, the govt can't go broke as you said.
1
I disagree, I think it is time to offer basics for free. Food, shelter and medical. Jobs are just more money and consumption goes down the same path that has and has to decrease. Young people need a person who will go on a platform of less jobs, not more.
1
@downshift4503 Money as you know it will have to change in your lifetime, cost vs need is a needed shift. edit ; it
1
@downshift4503 It is a question of money because everybody thinks they can buy the same amount of energy moving forward. The energy we revolve our lives around, oil, can not continue to be used as it is so creating oddles of money is a problem if people spend it as before on fossil fuels. THE question of money needs to be re-examined.
1
@downshift4503 With poverty, because it hasn't happened in 200 years so stop being so confident unless you have an example, please.
1
@downshift4503 I'm not sure what you mean. the point of society now is to reduce consumption/emissions, this can only be done with less production. edit just give an example?
1
@downshift4503 " I disagree, I think it is time to offer basics for free. Food, shelter and medical. Jobs are just more money and consumption goes down the same path that has and has to decrease. Young people need a person who will go on a platform of less jobs, not more" I believe if you offered people shelter, food and medical care, for free, for the rest of their lives billions of people would leap at the chance, if they had to work five or so years during their life in these three industries so be it. Emissions from food is 10% in a place like USA, add medical. shelter and services, then we could cut emissions by roughly 80%, if everybody stayed home. In a place like UK electricity is 15% of total energy and half of that is gas, we could cut that in half, stay home and emissions are reduced within an election term 60% minimum,
1
@downshift4503 The point of society for you to reject that it is to protect society must mean it is something else?
1
@downshift4503 " for instance, you could ban tourism and flying for pleasure tomorrow - you know how people would respond to that." Once upon a time people said that about slavery. We have energy slaves that we are not paying the external costs of, yet.
1
@downshift4503 People only need to work on a roster system like military service. It's ok you don't get. we need food etc, we don't need a lot of the jobs..
1
@downshift4503 Everything you do is because of somebody else's choice and we are products of our environment, I am talking about changing the environment.
1
@downshift4503 You think there is choice for military service? The point that you seem to be ignoring is most people are going to stop working, lower consumption of fossil fuels is in humanity's interests instead of letting people have pleasure boating as a hobby and spew gases into the atmosphere killing other people for thousands of years, why should some people over consume food and other people starve to death? edit If you don't want to work in the industries society needs you might not be needed in the work force.
1
@downshift4503 If we thought people were equal we wouldn't be consuming the energy like we do ruining the planet. There is more chance we return to living like the 1800's but with electricity in your lifetime than any technological fix will replace oil
1
@downshift4503 There is no tech fix to replace oil.
1
@downshift4503 That's a claim under the proposal of offering free food etc, as a condition. You are ignoring the last time the world went to the temps we re going to 90% of all species died and online it has oil running out in a lot of peoples' lifetime, well easily accessible so change is coming forced or chosen, choosing early and examine what it means with the removal of it from your life has to start sometime. The tide is turning against govts who deny global warming as they do I'm done though, messages aren't coming through and I have to refresh and you are in reality a climate denier, you aren't facing the reality of the situation and you have to understand, we live under a media bubble, when people fully realise what is being held back from them, the govts that exist might get lynched.
1