Save the Planet!

[Krogensailor]

"With you up to the healthcare thing...", I agree with you. Buy if we have to pay it would be functional to have the money to pay and it would come down to the same thing in the end.
I have a metaphor for the recommendations I put forth above. I have a ridiculously fast car that I built a dozen years ago, a Shelby Cobra, (a little lumpy shaped thing with no roof, for those not into cars). It's scary fast as it is, but like our economy, I can make it go faster. I can super charge it. Just keep adding more horse power. I can also lighten it up to make faster still. Hell take the brakes off, dead weight. Drill holes in the frame and so on. In the end, some one is going to get killed. We have to set limits on both ends of the enonomy and whatever other en devours we pursue.
No one has a license to freedom. Every individual is entitled to freedom; an excess of freedom constitutes license. Freedom deals with the rights of the individual; license constitutes trespassing on the rights of others." A.S.Neil. And by the by, half the world has "freedom" and their still as screwed as we are. Temperamental language is not the solution to saving the world, it's an impediment.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

What I find funny is that here I am, saying don't panic and that it will be ok and I'm the crazy guy?

A pleasant, God-fearing man lived in a house by the river.

One day, the NWS determined that an oncoming rainstorm would probably cause the river to overflow its banks. When the sherriff stopped by the house to warn him, the man thanked the sherriff, but felt certain that God would provide for him.

The rain came, the river overflowed and surrounded the man's house. A neighbour rowed over, and urged the man to come away. No thanks, the man said, God will provide and he will be ok.

The river continued to rage. The house was swept from its foundations and was carried downstream. The man perched on the roof. A SAR helicopter tried to approach with a sling, but the man just waved it away.

Later the house broke apart and the man drowned.

The man was transported through the Pearly Gates to an audience with God. He expressed bewilderment that God had let him drown. "Why did you forsake me?"

God said "You twit. I sent the sherriff to warn you, I sent your neighbour to fetch you, I even risked the life of the helicopter crew to save you".

[transmitterdan]

These threads are interesting but in the end no one's mind is ever changed. I know and not through blind faith that the planet is not doomed. We definitely do not need central controls on the economy. We need government to control the crooks and provide recourse for disputes. The planet and it's sun will sustain us for millions of years. The biggest threat we face is not from people consuming too much (read up on conservation of matter theory) but rather from our unfounded fears of one another. If we don't kill ourselves in stupid wars for silly reasons we'll be just fine. This irrational fear being promulgated that we are all doomed will be thought utterly ridiculous in 500 years much as we look back on the dark ages now.

[Pelagic]

It has been an interesting discourse on the challenge of Saving the Planet, once the option of Benevolent Dictatorship is allowed.

It seems that we have 3 main camps of thought:

1…… Optimistic Faith: in the resiliency and technical abilities of us humans to solve the problem… (Although I suspect that they factor in some form of natural pandemic or Space exploration as part of the Solution)

2…… Dictatorial Tweaking: Soft strokes of benevolent legislation to even the playing field while maintaining cultural and regional rights to exist unchanged.

3….. Global Restructure: A commitment to change all the existing Tribal Biases of nations and cultures into one Global Village, by wholesale redistribution of existing Family Units into new world melting pots of extended family communal living.

Accepted Truths: (for the sake of this discussion)

• Democracy only works when the majority of the Masses are well fed.
• History shows that Marshall Law is always imposed whenever the Masses are frightened and fighting amongst themselves over limited resources.
• Reducing the world pop down from 7 Billion to 4 Billion is part of the Challenge.
  Restocking the planet with healthy natural food stocks and stabilizing the planet in a sustainable way for the 4 Billion must be achieved within the next 100 years

I favor Camp 3, since I see that as the only sure way to STP.

By dictatorial decree, we purposely mix and relocate diverse family units into new order communities that must be codependent on each other to survive.

Schools preach the common religion of goodness rather than anyone's god and students study the New Book of Mankind that illustrates all the murders and genocides done in the name of various gods or ethnic superiority.

Oh yes… and the Chairman of this Association of Benevolent Dictators can only be a Woman who has 3 breasts…. (who can identify the origin of that reference??)

Seriously…What Camp are you in and HOW would you specifically solve an existing problem within a 25 year time limit, without resorting to genocide?

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

HOW would you specifically solve an existing problem within a 25 year time limit, without resorting to genocide?

Answering the question assumes the false set-up to be correct, kind of like "have you stopped beating your wife".
* we don't need a new system
* we are not dealing with an over population problem

As much as I hate to get this back to something cruising related, if everyone lived like cruisers in terms of energy usage, self sufficiency, and the ethos of the cruising community. 95% of the complains we have seen in this thread about the end of the world would simply vanish.

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

... unfounded fears of one another. If we don't kill ourselves in stupid wars for silly reasons we'll be just fine. This irrational fear being promulgated that we are all doomed will be thought utterly ridiculous in 500 years much as we look back on the dark ages now.

Change is the Natural State of the Earth and Man...yet as we can see from this thread it literally scares people enough that they would give away freedoms and liberties to protect themselves from the natural state of the universe: Change.

[tropicalescape]

We must forget everthing we once knew,like when the automobile,telephone and electricity were first introduced,we must change...

[Pelagic]

Not sure if I agree Rick, that if we could get about 4 Billion people onto sailboats, it would solve the planets problem of starvation and genocide.

But great opportunity for you to come up with the new Trinity RO that changes sea water into wine ..LOL

Seriously I applaud your optimism, wish I shared it rather than my belief that we are observing a global calamity of our making.

Fatalism is accepting any Change as part of the process
Liberty first starts with a full stomach and a roof over your head

Can you share with us how mankind can make those technical changes without changing the mindset of tribal bias?

[ReMetau]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Seriously…What Camp are you in and HOW would you specifically solve an existing problem within a 25 year time limit, without resorting to genocide?

I am in the camp that the problem trying to be solved is a cultural problem not a people problem. If people walked away from the cultural thinking that is causing the problem, then the problem would solve itself. The hard part is giving up a culture that makes life easier for us and harder for the rest of life.

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by ReMetau

I am in the camp that the problem trying to be solved is a cultural problem not a people problem. If people walked away from the cultural thinking that is causing the problem, then the problem would solve itself. The hard part is giving up a culture that makes life easier for us and harder for the rest of life.

+1

[hpeer]

I'm pretty stuck on going from 7 billion to 4 billion in 25 without resorting to genocide. IIRC a 7 % annual change yields a halving or doubling in 10 years. You need about a sustained 3% annual population drop. We have about 1.5%, call it 2% for easy math, growth, right now. So we need about 5% excess deaths (over what we now have) each year to off set new births and generate a population decrease.

That's an additional 350 million deaths per year.

That's gonna be tough, without genocide.

The horsemen could do it, will eventually. But nothing here pretty.

My math about right?

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

While we do appreciate your honest anser, the unfortunate thing Mike is that these "solutions" have already been tried and proven to fail.

It's also very telling about the "Save the Planet" folks mindset. Any "solution" that requires Governmental FORCE to make it happen is not only doomed to fail in search of Utpoia has been called many things in the past: Communism, Facists, Totalitarian, etc. Hitler had his final solution also and what surprises me is that educated people can't see that what they are calling for, again to solve the "problem" would make the Dicators and mass murders of people quite happy.

Me...I see no doomsday coming, all I see is oportunity. The panic pushers have been predicting the end of the world for as long as there was recorded history and yet here we are despite the panic pushers prognostication. Technological innovation and advancements tend to make the doomday predictions look pretty silly at the end of the day.

I see we approached the Godwin event horizon, Hitler was widely regarded as a champion of free market economics. Made the cover of Time magazine in 1938. Etc.

I hope your fate in technology is justified, because we are approaching various tipping points at an increasingly faster rate. Doesn't give all that new technology much time to be developed. I mean we are still waiting 100 years to approach the Wh/kg of gasoline in electrical storage , as yet were about only at 1/10. Nor has " technology" really fixed any reliance on hydrocarbons or precious metals etc



Dave

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by hpeer

I'm pretty stuck on going from 7 billion to 4 billion in 25 without resorting to genocide. ....
That's an additional 350 million deaths per year.

My math about right?

For discussion purposes I vote we accept Hypeer’s math and I agree…. Genocide is not on the table.

So the only way we can humanely manage a negative growth trend of 5% excess deaths is to dramatically reduce the present birth rate.

I am thinking a birth lottery per new world regions and the cultural re-indoctrination towards an extended family, so we are in fact the parents and advisors of all the children born.

What then is the allowed reciprocal birth rate per 100 people to bring it down to 4 Billion in 25 years?
Or is there a better way of presenting that number to the masses?

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I see we approached the Godwin event horizon, Hitler was widely regarded as a champion of free market economics. Made the cover of Time magazine in 1938. Etc.

And the Progressives in the US hailed his Idea of Eugenics.
And started forced Sterlizations...yep...here in the US.
http://hnn.us/article/1796

Originally Posted by Pelagic

What then is the allowed reciprocal birth rate per 100 people to bring it down to 4 Billion in 25 years?
Or is there a better way of presenting that number to the masses?

Lets ask the Angles dancing on the head of a pen to help break the news to those poor unwashed masses out there that their Mastermind overlord, lets call them "Kim dong Kill", has decided on a a one child policy to solve the problem.

Na...on second thought that's a crazy idea...who would even try such a thing...
I love my Iphone...made in China with Slave Labor.

[hpeer]

From wiki my birth rate is high, shoul be 1.1% per year. That makes the number at about 4% per year! or 280 million, lets call it an even 300 million.

are now expected to remain essentially constant at their 2011 level of 134 million, while deaths number 56 million per year, and are expected to increase to 80 million per year by 2040.[10]

So, right now we are growing at 80 million per year. We need to decrease at about 300 million per year. If we stop ALL births we would decrease at 56 million per year. We still need to find some way to rid ourselves of an additional 250 million-ish per year.

So even stopping births won't do the trick. Well it would eventually, but not in the stated 25 year time frame.

Obviously very round numbers. Doing it more carefully would totally creep me out.

BTW.... Are there ANY ladies in this morbid thread!

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by hpeer

We still need to find some way to rid ourselves of an additional 250 million-ish per year..

Easy...here's the Plan