Youtube comments of Nashton (@nashton9964).

  1. 218
  2. 145
  3. 140
  4. 98
  5. 59
  6. 53
  7. 44
  8. 42
  9. 40
  10. 32
  11. 32
  12. 32
  13. 30
  14. 28
  15. 23
  16. 21
  17. 20
  18. 19
  19. 19
  20. 18
  21. 17
  22. 17
  23. 17
  24. 17
  25. 16
  26. 15
  27. 15
  28. 14
  29. 14
  30. 14
  31. 13
  32. 13
  33. 13
  34. 13
  35. 12
  36.  @higreentj  I find it fascinating how swept up in futurism you are. It takes one good solar flare to wipe out most of the electronic infrastructure we have, and it could happen every 150-250 years which would be a continuous long term disaster for the electronic systems that would be responsible for say, keeping an artificial womb stable. I like this idea of us doing an egg type of birth (for space travel), I think Mark Zuckerberg was born that way, but I think it might be worth considering why mammals are dominating so much (it's certainly multifaceted) and I think one of those reasons is that the children of mammals get a lot of genetic triggering and information through the umbilical cord from a creature (the mother) currently living in the environment. Im not sure being multiplanetary necessitates the use of artificial wombs, we can get to all places within our solar system within a decade and every other place is more inhospitable than Antarctica. Maybe in a couple 100 million years as the sun gets hotter it will make more sense, but other than that I think realistically it's resource extraction, space cowboys. Again, the technology is exciting, but I think like plastic surgery, I dont want to be the first baby (patient) born from an artificial womb who has some severe form of autism or something. Also, about your point with who would want to be a single dad... creeps who want a child for bad reasons, a widowed father who wants to create a child with an egg from his passed wife, or maybe a dictator daddy who want to increase soldier population. Besides, whats the point of having a wife who can take half your money if you can produce an heir, who can be raised by an elite trained nanny for cheaper than what it would cost to lose half your fortune. There may be a lot of ugly things we learn about ourselves when we don't need to comply with nature anymore, like what birth control did for women (feminist breakthroughs) and how that changes the social dynamics in society.
    12
  37. 11
  38. 11
  39. 11
  40. 11
  41. 10
  42. 10
  43. 10
  44. 9
  45. 9
  46. 9
  47. 8
  48. 8
  49. 8
  50. 8
  51. 8
  52. 8
  53. 7
  54. 7
  55. 7
  56. 7
  57. 7
  58. 7
  59. 7
  60. 7
  61. 7
  62. 6
  63. 6
  64. 6
  65. 6
  66. 6
  67. 6
  68. 6
  69. 6
  70. 6
  71. 6
  72. 5
  73. 5
  74. 5
  75. 5
  76. 5
  77.  @SimplyMayaB1994  I am stepping ahead, you're right, and it's likely that much of this won't be affordable to most people since it's a 9 month hospital visit, but maybe it could come down in price significantly and not require hospital staff where middle income people could afford it in private institutions. To me, this makes sense for the woman who is tied to her work, but it makes me wonder if a woman that tied to her career should even have a child, or if it will always be in the background as a sort of status symbol being raised by a nanny. For the mother who is at risk for dying from childbirth complications this makes sense I suppose (and premature birth), and if this technology could be used for organ/tissue development (still need stem cells). At a certain point wouldn't a surrogate mother be just as comparable? I mean, there is the whole aspect of epigenetics in the womb and the transfer of nutrient and immune information through the placenta which shape how the fetuses Gene's are expressed. Then there is the legal problems around what happens if an artificial womb doesnt bring a baby to full development, or who owns the baby or has the right to terminate if the parents die in an accident or something. Also, if you did have a baby in an artificial womb, would you go see it before it was born? Would you play music for it outside the tank or are the caretakers expected to do that? I suppose they would probably integrate a monitoring system that has an app that could be downloaded to your phone, maybe record voice messages to your baby? I just think of so many possibilities outside of the supposed convenience of it all.
    5
  78. 5
  79. 5
  80. 5
  81. 5
  82. 5
  83. 5
  84. 5
  85. 5
  86. 5
  87. 5
  88. 5
  89. 5
  90. 4
  91. 4
  92. 4
  93. 4
  94. 4
  95.  @Orinatl  To some degree you are right, respecting individual life certainly does that especially after we are born, like you are saying. I never said I wouldn't allow people to use an artificial womb, it's a choice, like getting plastic surgery (but the mistakes happen with babies). There are genes that are latent in our DNA that get triggered by our environment, this is epigenetics and the most crucial time for genetic development in the womb where fetuses are exposed to the regulated cycles of the mother, immune information, and metabolism as regulated by the placenta. Hopefully it's easier than I think, but I think in this area we may see similar abnormalities that we get with premature babies. I imagine the process will also be going hand in hand with genetic enhancements/experiments and thus I think the area may develop in ways similar to the eugenics movement (lots of pregnancies were terminated because of percieved "lack of fitness" that would only slow down societies. I think it will become easier to make cases of early termination (cor various reasons and it would be easier), or start planning what sort of genetic diversity a society wants in the future through imposed regulations. I just have some genuine questions for you if you wouldn't mind... Does the sanctity of the currently living extend to senior citizens like it does for the youth, or do you think there is a divining return there? If you could have a baby through this process, would you go see it during the development? Would you bring music for it, touch your hand to its chamber? Or would you swing by the day it was supposed to pop and take it home then? Why do you think soldiers who have saved eachother lives in combat, or gangs that have tough initiations become some of the tightest knit groups of people? Do you think shared trauma brings people together in a meaningful way, do you think that shared trauma increases the "sanctity" of those individuals to eachother? Also yeah, childbirth is an ordeal, and if you watch enough nature documentaries you can see its not easy for most organisms. I dont think childbearing needs to difficult to be meaningful, this is essentially a technological egg, but I also think we appreciate things more if we had to make sacrifices to get it. Easy come, easy go. For the future it may mostly be an economic sacrifice, but that's a step removed from corporeal sacrifice. Also, I wonder if a family so tied to their careers would make good parents in the first place? I hear some of the richest kids have better relationships with their nannies than tr heir actual parents.
    4
  96. 4
  97. 4
  98. 4
  99. 4
  100. 4
  101. 4
  102. 4
  103. 4
  104. 4
  105. 4
  106. 4
  107. 4
  108. 4
  109. 4
  110. 4
  111. 4
  112. 4
  113. 4
  114. 4
  115. 4
  116. 3
  117. 3
  118. 3
  119. 3
  120. 3
  121. 3
  122. 3
  123. 3
  124. 3
  125. 3
  126. 3
  127. 3
  128. 3
  129. 3
  130. 3
  131. 3
  132. 3
  133. 3
  134. 3
  135. 3
  136. 3
  137. 3
  138. 3
  139. 3
  140. 3
  141. 3
  142. 3
  143. 3
  144. 3
  145. 3
  146. 3
  147. 3
  148. 3
  149. 3
  150. 3
  151. 3
  152. 3
  153. 3
  154. 3
  155. 3
  156. 3
  157. 3
  158. 3
  159. 3
  160. 3
  161. 3
  162. 3
  163. 3
  164. 3
  165. 2
  166. 2
  167. 2
  168. 2
  169. 2
  170. 2
  171. 2
  172. 2
  173. 2
  174. 2
  175. 2
  176. 2
  177. 2
  178. 2
  179. 2
  180. 2
  181. 2
  182. 2
  183. 2
  184. 2
  185. 2
  186. 2
  187. 2
  188.  @Orinatl  I'm talking about interest for the child, you are talking about the self interest of the parents or yourself as a woman or for a feminist agenda. As a male, I would have kids personally but the parts I have means I would need to have it cut out of me and no man could give healthy birth since the baby has to be forced through such a narrow passage. Sorry your body has to be the one that goes through it, somebody has to do it. Society is different now, but men had to go through as much garbage to get a child on this earth by just having to compete with other men and protect their families in war (I'm sure your view of history is just one of pure exploitation, but that's just innaccurate). I know with technology the idea of men and women will probably become irrelevant as we get our genetics harvested and then we just have two dads (or two moms) around the house, maybe parents will just be specialized nannies (or robots) who know more than parents and it would actually be worse if we just let parents raise kids willy-nilly. I mean, the idea of just fertilizing a pile of eggs and then have those eggs hatched to be raised by super intelligent AI robots sounds pretty convenient, wouldn'teven have to be a good father or mother like reptiles. At that point, why even get married? I would rather choose to most intelligent, caring, and attractive woman at the egg bank and have my child to be raised by an expert than some lady who could potentially take half my money if things dont go right. The thing about getting married to the woman I'm with now is that she's taking a risk on her life and I'm willing to risk losing future earnings for the good of that child and the irreversible damage that childbirth can do to her body, so on a moral level risk/compensation pans out. I'm not saying this tech won't be a more morally sound process once all the kinks are figured out, it may eventually be illegal to biologically have kids because of the risks involved would just be too abusive to all people involved given how superior the technology would be. It's like self driving cars, once they drive better than us, it's really just an unnecessary risk to allow us to drive and insurance companies will make sure its cost prohibitive since their best customer is a driver (the car) who never gets distracted and is always following regulations. Also, there are surrogate mothers out there who will do this for people already (and they make more than double what I make in year based on the resulting adds I see on google) and it's not any more risky than catching crab up in Alaska or being a lumberjack (something men do to have a successful family).
    2
  189. 2
  190. 2
  191. 2
  192. 2
  193. 2
  194. 2
  195. 2
  196. 2
  197. 2
  198. 2
  199. 2
  200. 2
  201. 2
  202. 2
  203. 2
  204. 2
  205. 2
  206. 2
  207. 2
  208. 2
  209. 2
  210. 2
  211. 2
  212. 2
  213. 2
  214. 2
  215. 2
  216. 2
  217. 2
  218. 2
  219. 2
  220. 2
  221. 2
  222. 2
  223. 2
  224. 2
  225. 2
  226. 2
  227. 2
  228. 2
  229. 2
  230. 2
  231. 2
  232. 2
  233. 2
  234. 2
  235. 2
  236. 2
  237. 2
  238. 2
  239. 2
  240. 2
  241. 2
  242. 2
  243. 2
  244. 2
  245. 2
  246. 2
  247. 2
  248. 2
  249. 2
  250. 2
  251. 2
  252. 2
  253. 2
  254. 1
  255. 1
  256. 1
  257. 1
  258. 1
  259. 1
  260. 1
  261. 1
  262. 1
  263. 1
  264. 1
  265. 1
  266. 1
  267. 1
  268. 1
  269. 1
  270. 1
  271. 1
  272. 1
  273. 1
  274. 1
  275. 1
  276. 1
  277. Ben Warren​​​ first I will ask where this supposed "violence" was during the encounter? nobody is being charged with anything and it was all caught on film. funny, it does't seem to be that big of a deal to security or law enforcement, just to people online looking to demonize the opposition. About the bear stuff, obviously bears are different creatures. To say they don't know restraint is poorly thought out, ever seen a trained bear? Perhaps you think there is a restraint center in the human brain, well there isn't, it has to do with conditioning during childhood or the fear of punishment. Bears have mammalian body types like us, have similar brain structures, hypothalamus and amygdala included as well as many of same hormone driven drives. Still needs to eat and sleep and will exploit the niches in their environment to do so. Our main benefit is we can pass down knowledge through cultural transmission. But without that we are the pretty much the same. Look up neglected children that never grew up in a society or parents, totally instinctual creatures with some capacity for symbolism, but that could just be pavlovian learning. I think your outlook is based in this notion that humans are special compared to all other animals, and I'm sorry to tell you, but that's just egotistical. It's based ideology that we created ourselves. Don't get me wrong, humans are clever and have done much to effect the world, to the detriment of other living creatures many times as we expand. 
    1
  278. 1
  279. 1
  280. 1
  281. 1
  282. 1
  283. 1
  284. 1
  285. 1
  286. 1
  287. 1
  288. 1
  289. 1
  290. 1
  291. 1
  292. 1
  293. 1
  294. 1
  295. 1
  296. 1
  297. 1
  298. 1
  299. 1
  300. 1
  301. 1
  302. 1
  303. 1
  304. 1
  305. 1
  306. 1
  307. 1
  308. 1
  309. 1
  310.  @patchwurk6652  I'm not a republican, I would just appear like one because of my loose stance on this issue, based on my background growing up with people who had circumstantial problems in their life that had nothing to do with people above them exploiting them, and yeah, maybe we shouldn't tax child labor, how about that for starting the solution train. I started working at Dairy Queen when I was 14 turning 15 soon and because of that I could get my life started economically before my peers, the only other way was drug dealing or if your family bought you stuff and gave you allowance. If society utterly fails you, then stops you from doing anything that could help out your situation, then your just handcuffed to more bullshit. Again, this isn't slave labor, nobody is forcing a 15 year old to work in a mine and if they are there is CPS for that, or make a public post and I'm sure a lawyer would take interest "for the sake of our children". I think the fact that you served in the military for so long gives you this idea that all of society is about being exploited by a superior who is lazy (which when we are older is how young people will probably view us). There are great hardworking people in the private sector up and down the ladder and there are also very lazy people who want to do the bare minimum or less if they can get away with it. Kyle is self employed, so I take that narrative into account, he says "guillotine shears!" like it's the most unsafe thing in the world, Google it it's just metal cutting shears (don't put your fingers in the cutting part and you'll be fine). Garbage compactors can't even be run by people under 18 for OSHA regulation. Also, let's say you have a kid working in a mine, which is mostly using industrial equipment (nobody uses pickaxes anymore), they will likely have a job that is safer than the other jobs because the last thing you want is for some high schooler dying in your mine and having that get out to the public, which would definitely happen in this day and age, mind you, this isn't the 1800s where there are no legal protections around youths. In the same way that there are polically active young people who would love to vote, there are young people with agency and their own desire to start making money with a job for whatever reason. Let "kids" or young adults work if they want, make those jobs safe entry level jobs or apprenticeships, compensate them with at least 80% minimum wage but tax free and have limited work time, say 24 hours maximum per week. If you really dig into whats happening, they are just opening up sectors people under the age of 18 couldn't work in to younger people, that's it, again, nobody is forcing anyone to do anything unsafe here.
    1
  311.  @patchwurk6652  So basically for you, if Republicans want to do something it must be bad because you know all about how they think and they are just the worst, okay. These people care about children, they just arent concerned with the same things you are in regards to children, they have different values. You come across as very protectionist (perhaps of yourself too since maybe the job you do could be done by a teenager, i know mine could they just arent allowed) while "they" come across as changing rules so a cheaper labor source can come in, its very much the same with immigration or letting women work since it floods the market with more labor thus depressing wages that a single worker household would have. I see your point about cheaper labor, but it is such a narrow slice and there is a larger story you are missing here: the boomers, our largest generational cohort on earth is retiring creating tons of jobs that they had occupied and we still need to fill. Combine that with deglobalozation with a lot of reindustrialization coming back to the US and taking Iowa's demographics in particular, this is why lowering the working age for certain industries makes sense in Iowa's case. I live in the Seattle area and there are so many jobs and unfilled positions it's crazy coming from somebody who graduated around the last recession in 2008. And a lot of kids (over 18 but kids in my eyes) don't care to work because their parents will let them hang out at home not gaining any skills outside of being chronically online. Trade skill jobs are coming back, office jobs (and their unpaid interns) are on the way out since they will be replaced with AI. Look at the industries talked about in the video, lines up doesn't it?
    1
  312.  @patchwurk6652  Yeah, I'm all on board for the social issues stuff, but this is more about economics. I seem to recall Republicans causing a big stink about what's being taught to their kids in schools, the crime rate, drugs, pedophilia and sex trafficking, and living up to classical moral standards. You can argue the specifics of how they want to change or enforce details around any those things being good or bad, but you can't say they don't care, that's just lazy thinking. Also, how are Republicans specifically benefiting from this "child" labor (i have a hard time thinking of a 17 year old as a child)? Are you implying that all these sectors are owned by Republicans and profits go right back to the people passing the legislation? Do you think the kids working these jobs might also be republican in nature and prefer they could start working early and they accept the risk? I mean, one could say 18 year olds signing up for the military are not fully aware of what could happen to them but they want to get out of their small stagnating town even though they know there is a risk involved. Taking out a huge college loan that you can't default on is also a huge risk since it's not guaranteed you'll get a job in your field of study and everyone around says "it's the best thing to do, work smart not hard". Also, I think I'm done with this conversation since you don't really have much to say about my substantive arguments and just want to expand on the petty remarks I make towards you, which is honestly just low hanging fruit that I put out to gage where my "opponent" is at in their thinking. Good luck out there, engage with things you disagree with as to avoid the tribalism that's pulling us all apart. Kyle is cool, but he is also a bubble as with Ben Shapiro and others, know the best arguments against you or you will be easily dismissed. Peace out ✌️
    1
  313. 1
  314. 1
  315. 1
  316. 1
  317. 1
  318. 1
  319. 1
  320. 1
  321. 1
  322. 1
  323. 1
  324. 1
  325. 1
  326. 1
  327. 1
  328. 1
  329. 1
  330. 1
  331. 1
  332. 1
  333. 1
  334. 1
  335. 1
  336. 1
  337. 1
  338. 1
  339. 1
  340. 1
  341. 1
  342. 1
  343. 1
  344. 1
  345. 1
  346. 1
  347. 1
  348. 1
  349. 1
  350. 1
  351. 1
  352. 1
  353. 1
  354. 1
  355. 1
  356. 1
  357. 1
  358. 1
  359. 1
  360. 1
  361. 1
  362. 1
  363. 1
  364. 1
  365. 1
  366. 1
  367. 1
  368. 1
  369. 1
  370. 1
  371. 1
  372. 1
  373. 1
  374. 1
  375. 1
  376. 1
  377. 1
  378. 1
  379. 1
  380. 1
  381. 1
  382. 1
  383. 1
  384. 1
  385. 1
  386. 1
  387. 1
  388. 1
  389. 1
  390. 1
  391. 1
  392. 1
  393. 1
  394. 1
  395. 1
  396. 1
  397. 1
  398. 1
  399. 1
  400. 1
  401. 1
  402. 1
  403. 1
  404. 1
  405. 1
  406. 1
  407. 1
  408. 1
  409. 1
  410. 1
  411. 1
  412. 1
  413. 1
  414. 1
  415. 1
  416. 1
  417. 1
  418. 1
  419. 1
  420. 1
  421. 1
  422. 1
  423. 1
  424. 1
  425. 1
  426. 1
  427. 1
  428. 1
  429. 1
  430. 1
  431. 1
  432. 1
  433. 1
  434. 1
  435. 1
  436. 1
  437. 1
  438. 1
  439. 1
  440. 1
  441. 1
  442. 1
  443. 1
  444. 1
  445. 1
  446. 1
  447. 1
  448. 1
  449. 1
  450. 1
  451. 1
  452. 1
  453. 1
  454. 1
  455. 1
  456. 1
  457. 1
  458. 1
  459. 1
  460. 1
  461. 1
  462. 1
  463. 1
  464. 1
  465. 1
  466. 1
  467. 1
  468. 1
  469. 1
  470. 1
  471. 1
  472. 1
  473. 1
  474. 1
  475. 1
  476. 1
  477. 1
  478. 1
  479. 1
  480. 1
  481. 1
  482. 1
  483. 1
  484. 1
  485. 1
  486. 1
  487. 1
  488. 1
  489. 1
  490. 1
  491. 1
  492. 1
  493. 1
  494. 1
  495. 1
  496. 1
  497. 1
  498. 1
  499. 1
  500. 1
  501. 1
  502. 1
  503. 1
  504. 1
  505. 1
  506. 1
  507. 1
  508. 1
  509. 1
  510. 1
  511. 1
  512. 1
  513. 1
  514. 1
  515. 1
  516.  @chojin6136  there is definitely poverty without wealth inequality, all of history looks like poverty when you look far enough back. Poverty is the natural state of the world and it's only through hard work and planning that we escape it. You don't have to keep dividing the pie if you can make it big enough where everyone feels full from their slice. Most intellectuals thought in the 70s that people would be starving to death from overpopulation and people found a way to generically engineer food for higher outputs and now we have a food surplus every year even while the population still keep getting bigger. Honestly, I did make you a straw man in my comments, you were just a bit clueless and I overreacted because I thought you were just being condescending. I thought you had considered the context of the other arguments I was defending against. Yeah, wealth inequality is part of poverty, but when people just want to focus on the red states, it's because they dont want to hold a mirror to the group they are apart of and I find the hypocrisy frustrating. Either way, best of luck out there, sorry I got you so upset and basically forced you to engage with things you weren't ready for. if you want an idea of how to fight poverty then you should look at encouraging ways for people to save money, buy assets that appreciate in value, make sure people have skills realvent to the economy, end the drug war, stop banks from buying up all the houses, stop allowing companies to ship jobs overseas (that's where the poverty in the red states comes from, the rust belt), prevent monopolies and price gouging from pharma and others, make it easier to vote, have a federal watchdog agency watch over gerrymandering, double down on family creation and stability, encourage trade and apprenticeship programs for people who dont do well with traditional schooling, and increase federal interest rates again to combat rising inflation (we need to buy back our debt).
    1
  517.  @chojin6136   poverty exists in nature, it's called a desert, and wealth inequality is like a rain forest. Let's take money out of the picture and focus on resources, if one tribe digs irrigation channels so that a nearby river can water more of their land naturally then they have increased the size of the pie for everyone versus a tribe who just keeps bringing buckets back and forth to their fields, inefficiency is part of poverty and solving inefficiencies makes the pie bigger (nothing to do with money). In none of my examples did I say flooding the market with money was a way to fix anything, in fact, I literally said we should increase interest rates and buy back debt to stop inflation (again, you have a hard time comprehending things). Also, in the US money isn't backed by gold its backed by trade agreements where other countries like the UK have to convert their money into dollars to buy what they want like oil from OPEC (we are what is call a reserve fiat currency), if you had to do that with Roblox Credits then Roblox Credits would be the new standard like USD and that is what all the cryptocurrencies are trying to do right now. Learning history might do you some good because you clearly dont know how we got where we are today. I'm sorry, your just too ignorant and you seem to purposefully misunderstand me so I'm done with this back and forth, it's a waste of my time. Read some damn books instead of wasting your time watching somebody with the same beliefs spout off on the daily noise, you aren't learning anything here, your just here to feel good about your preconceptions in a circle jerk with everyone else. Books: "The History of Energy" by Richard Rhodes "Debt: A 5,000 Year History" by Daniel Graeber "Wealth, Poverty, and Politics" by Thomas Sowell "Sapiens" by Yuval Noah Harari
    1
  518. 1
  519. 1
  520. 1
  521. 1
  522. 1
  523. 1
  524. 1
  525. 1
  526. 1
  527. 1
  528. 1
  529. 1
  530. 1
  531. 1
  532. 1
  533. 1
  534. 1
  535. 1
  536. 1
  537. 1
  538. 1
  539. 1
  540. 1
  541. 1
  542. 1
  543. 1
  544. 1
  545. 1
  546. 1
  547. 1
  548. 1
  549. 1
  550. 1
  551. 1
  552. 1
  553. 1
  554. 1
  555. 1
  556. 1
  557. 1
  558. 1
  559. 1
  560. 1
  561. 1
  562. 1
  563. 1
  564. 1
  565. 1
  566. 1
  567. 1
  568. 1
  569. 1
  570. 1
  571. 1
  572. 1
  573. 1
  574. 1
  575. 1