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.
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.
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
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
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?