• 0 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 22nd, 2023

help-circle


  • I can sit here and spin the exact same question about reducing global exploitation.

    Reducing global exploitation would implies self sustainability and with the west, particularly the US, they never reach self sustainability with their current economic model of giving 95% of their production/wealth to the top 1% while a very large portion of its population is struggling economically/mentally/physically.

    It’s a stepping stone in the problem of global exploitation, but it can’t happen overnight nor independently.


  • Sl00k@programming.devtoMemes@lemmy.mlThe Nordic Model
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    It is unreasonable to assume a model outside of this will be attainabille within the next two centuries.

    Instead let’s focus on drawing back the exploitation within our own country this century then we can shift our perspective. We will never stop exploiting the poorest countries if we’re still exploiting our poorest citizens.









  • Unfortunately NASA is not being transparent here. They created a UAP task force and would not reveal who was heading it and when it is released it turns out to be someone who’s spent his career with the DOD/Defense contractors. Not a scientist. Why are we not letting scientists handle this matter?

    NASA also says they want to work to destigmatize UAPs and NHI, yet Bill Nelson slanders Grusch (highly decorated US military serviceman) and speaks down on anyone promoting more transparency here. The minimization of Grusch’s testimony all while the DOD is withholding Grusch’s security clearance and essentially stonewalling congress. Lots of reasons enough for us to be suspicious of foul play behind government figures here.


  • Except NASA is not being transparent here. They created a UAP task force and would not reveal who was heading it and when it is released it turns out to be someone who’s spent his career with the DOD/Defense contractors. Not a scientist. Why are we not letting scientists handle this matter?

    NASA also says they want to work to destigmatize UAPs and NHI, yet Bill Nelson slanders Grusch (highly decorated US military serviceman) and speaks down on anyone promoting more transparency here. The minimization of Grusch’s testimony all while the DOD is withholding Grusch’s security clearance and essentially stonewalling congress. Lots of reasons enough for us to be suspicious of foul play behind government figures here.


  • Ontop of this, that’s totally aside from safety, things just get done much much quicker due to less bureaucracy. Take any sort of rail system for instance, they’ve built ENTIRE rail systems (light and heavy) in the time it’s going to take Seattle to build 2 miles of lightrail.

    It’s both cheaper and faster, while I don’t know the safety statistics I certainly don’t see train derailments happening left and right.

    It turns out when you don’t cater to businesses and can relocate residents at their whim it has some advantages for better or worse depending on your perspective.





  • These loans are out right predatory. I was offered a 12% interest rate 7 years ago and have friends who’ve been offered 16%!!!

    Yes you can say just don’t sign it, but we’re 17 years old we can’t comprehend how much affect a 16% interest rate will have on you in 8 years and you’ve been told all your life college is the goto life path and you have to do this to get a “good job” and live a good life.

    I agree we should payback the money we loaned, but taking advantage of genz via predatory loans for wanting a higher education is downright criminal in itself.


  • Really your only answers are going to be based in economics.

    A society can absolutely thrive with a 1:1 ratio, but not built around a capitalistic mindset. Quite frankly China’s probably the best person to have this problem and they ignore the whims of capitalism for their countries residents quite often.

    Possible non-economic considerations could be not having enough people to build a military and lack of cultural exportation. Both of which China doesn’t really have any problems with.