It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Unless It Changes, Capitalism Will Starve Humanity By 2050

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 12:51 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I have expressed one opinion about the COTUS. I'll say it again. The COTUS & Bill of Rights are incompatible with this Industrial Age. Is that where we are in odds for that subject? I am an American myself and I do not dispute the historicity of the documents. As to the rest - no, I don't have better system to offer. I am one man; it is said that one man can alter the course of history but that is not the truth. Even the greatest historical figures had contemporaries, collaborators and so on that made events possible. "It takes a village" so it is said.

Is there something inhernetly special about Americans that I am missing?




posted on Feb, 21 2017 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Christosterone
Yep...communism does a great job sustainability wise...

Stalin and Mao killed around 100 million people...and that's just 2 people...

Go communism!!!
Saving earth one genocide at a time since 1917...

-Chris
I know that you're being facetious, but from an environmental standpoint, yeah they were more eco friendly. As a species we are one natural disaster away from starvation, & it's only getting worse.



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Rookseven

Communism and capitalism both rely on the corporate model and structure - and put profits before ALL other considerations.

They are the same, imho.



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: soficrow
a reply to: Rookseven

Communism and capitalism both rely on the corporate model and structure - and put profits before ALL other considerations.

They are the same, imho.




You need to reed Carl Marx and also understand how factories were organised after the Russian revolution for the three years until the rise of Stalin.

Ironically enough the USA could have destroyed Russia in the seventies by not selling them grain!



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Tiger5

Maybe you could address my point about corporatocracy?



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: RooksevenAs a species we are one natural disaster away from starvation, & it's only getting worse.

Speak for yourself. I'm good for a couple of years and they I have to start to work out the little details.






posted on Feb, 26 2017 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Capitalism will be necessary until Earth reaches a level of technological development that eliminates certain basic needs, services, and goods.

We are still 50-100 years away from that stage. I'm for economic liberty for as long as necessary in order for humanity to reach that stage.

Morons who speak about capitalism "killing millions" has no idea what capitalism is and what we have managed to achieve with it for the last 500 years. That said, it is only temporary. There will come a time where technology will remove the logic of a medium of exchange, at least on Earth.



posted on Feb, 26 2017 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp

originally posted by: jjkenobi
So Capitalism is to blame for species going extinct? And deforestation? That's a stretch. Human greed has always existed, and will always exist.


Capitalism creates unnecessary goods (toys, video games, 'expensive' cars, etc, etc.) at unsustainable rates to gain control of the goods that really matter. Wood, water, housing, metals, etc, etc. And it's a cycle that will eventually eat itself like a snake eating it's own body. The ones to suffer are where the goods come from and the people purchasing them.

You can't make iPhones without mining precious metals, or creating plastics, you can't build giant houses at ridiculous prices without wood, you can't feed humans obsession with beef without land. Where do you think all that begins? Where do you think will suffer the most at the beginning of the chain?


This thought process is weak, blaming manufacturers for making useless products that people want to buy.

It's people, your next door neighbors, small town large town city people, you, me who are buying all these unnecessary goods. If there were no market for these goods, there wouldn't be product. So each of us supports and is responsible for capitalism. But, all the production of unnecessary goods goes on in socialist countries as well. So capitalism isn't the culprit.

It's humans and their irresponsible, greedy and wasteful use of products. We have only ourselves to blame.



posted on Feb, 26 2017 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Forget Capitalism, Communism, Socialism, fascism, What ever happened to HUMANISM?

Why the hell are the few making rules for the many?

Especially when these rules don't make sense or have any merit in our bigger scheme of things.

I've had a theory for a bit now that A.I. will see this as well and make it's own solutions to get us there or possibly see that we may even need to be babied, as many cannot do the right thing if it's the only other thing to do, for some reason.

We might very well become prisoners on our own planet due to the inability of our leaders now to do what is needed.

I mean you have to look at this whole thing logically and you quickly get to the point that there is a good chance humanity is brain damaged, at least a good chunk of us, equality and justice is akin to self preservation and we don't really have that being a commonality worldwide.

Humanity might need A.I. to even function as we're supposed too.

Even if we were to be enslaved and forced to do what is needed would that work, because of the immense amount of concepts and innovations we'd fail to come up with as individual thinkers.

In closing, we either need to be free, equal and on the same page or this humanity thing just won't last as it's supposed to be. Sure a handful will survive maybe, but that's not humanity, that's a group of people, humanity is an entity as a whole that dynamically does much more than we've really understood so far. We need all of us not just a handful.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Tranceopticalinclined



Check this out:

$5 Million Prize For Reimagining Global Governance


edit on 1/3/17 by soficrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: soficrow
This from Forbes:


Unless It Changes, Capitalism Will Starve Humanity By 2050

Capitalism has generated massive wealth for some, but it’s devastated the planet and has failed to improve human well-being at scale.

• Species are going extinct at a rate 1,000 times faster than that of the natural rate over the previous 65 million years (see Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School).

• Since 2000, 6 million hectares of primary forest have been lost each year. That’s 14,826,322 acres, or just less than the entire state of West Virginia (see the 2010 assessment by the Food and Agricultural Organization of the UN).

• Even in the U.S., 15% of the population lives below the poverty line. For children under the age of 18, that number increases to 20% (see U.S. Census).

• The world’s population is expected to reach 10 billion by 2050 (see United Nations' projections).


Capitalism is unsustainable in its current form.

...MORE...





Of course there are those who say it's humanity that's unsustainable, not capitalism.

What say you?



I say that Capitalism is saving the planet if it does starve humanity by 2050. LOL



posted on Mar, 2 2017 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: soficrow

That may well be its intent.

Sooner or later it will dawn on people that with ever increasing automation and robots in particular, the vast majoirty of jobs people now have will be eliminated beecause they will be done by robots.

This will leave the industrialised humanity with a choice between either paying people an income and a decent one at that, not to work or, reducing the number of peope to a point where the number of people = the number of avaiable jobs.

Big business, TPTTB, the global agenda call it whatever you like, will never agree to paying people not to work and paying them a decent wage not to work in particualr, so the population reduction choice will be the automatic default decision.



posted on Mar, 2 2017 @ 02:12 AM
link   
I know what is edible in the Appalachian region. I also know how to build a proper winter shelter. I can survive without modern amenities.


Bring it on, test me mother nature!!



posted on Mar, 2 2017 @ 08:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Azureblue
a reply to: soficrow

That may well be its intent.

Sooner or later it will dawn on people that with ever increasing automation and robots in particular, the vast majoirty of jobs people now have will be eliminated beecause they will be done by robots.

This will leave the industrialised humanity with a choice between either paying people an income and a decent one at that, not to work or, reducing the number of peope to a point where the number of people = the number of avaiable jobs.

Big business, TPTTB, the global agenda call it whatever you like, will never agree to paying people not to work and paying them a decent wage not to work in particualr, so the population reduction choice will be the automatic default decision.





Do you not think ordinary people have the power to influence automation's obvious outcomes? As in, tweak them to benefit the whole population, not just the 1% and a few select lackeys?







posted on Mar, 2 2017 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: soficrow

Humanity requires a paradigm shift the likes of which we have never experienced in recorded history if we are to survive the next 100 years without stagnation and devolution of our current respective societies.

Fact of the matter is the capitalism just like Communism and monarchic rule is flawed beyond repair.

We need a system of rule that distributes our nations wealth rather more evenly amungst our respective populations else the rich will simply get richer while the rest fight over the scraps "They" fling from the table.
edit on 2-3-2017 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2017 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: soficrow

Humanity requires a paradigm shift the likes of which we have never experienced in recorded history if we are to survive the next 100 years without stagnation and devolution of our current respective societies.

Fact of the matter is the capitalism just like Communism and monarchic rule is flawed beyond repair.

We need a system of rule that distributes our nations wealth rather more evenly amungst our respective populations else the rich will simply get richer while the rest fight over the scraps "They" fling from the table.


Yup. Nothing else to add except to say I'm thinkin' the next 5 and 10 years are going to be ...disruptive.






posted on Mar, 2 2017 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: soficrow

Yes i imagine Mr Trumps time as POTUS will be rather disruptive not just to the US but also to the rest of the world.

Hillary would have been just as bad all the same.

Problem being the people put forward for the position of POTUS because lets face it a choice of the lesser of two evils is still a poor choice.



posted on Mar, 2 2017 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Hmm. Wasn't a political statement on my part. Was thinking this:

Disruptive Change - Humans Need Not Apply.





posted on Mar, 3 2017 @ 02:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: soficrow

originally posted by: Azureblue
a reply to: soficrow

That may well be its intent.

Sooner or later it will dawn on people that with ever increasing automation and robots in particular, the vast majoirty of jobs people now have will be eliminated beecause they will be done by robots.

This will leave the industrialised humanity with a choice between either paying people an income and a decent one at that, not to work or, reducing the number of peope to a point where the number of people = the number of avaiable jobs.

Big business, TPTTB, the global agenda call it whatever you like, will never agree to paying people not to work and paying them a decent wage not to work in particualr, so the population reduction choice will be the automatic default decision.





Do you not think ordinary people have the power to influence automation's obvious outcomes? As in, tweak them to benefit the whole population, not just the 1% and a few select lackeys?



Thanks

Its like everything else, the ordinary people have overwhelming power to make all the rules in the nation.

We the people are the soverign power in the nation - NOT govt! ...... but how many times have we united, flexed our muscles and FORCED the house or the senate to withdraw some existing law or take some specific action on our orders, because it does not pass OUR fair and just law test?

So yes sure, we certainly can, but are we going to?



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join