|
Perry Mason Jar posted:Capitalism is the enemy because the profit motive erodes trust and trustworthiness. All meetings can be done remotely. May someone carefully explain and in layman’s terms how... 1. Capitalism is the root cause of global warming. 2. The solution to global warming isn’t just being greener but the elimination of capitalism but the entire restructuring of society for socialism or even communism.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 03:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:If you want to stay under 2C then you better elect an authoritarian that restricts air travel to emergency use only or authorized by permit. I’d move to and live in the same as my client. Probably wouldn’t go into the office everyday but there would be face-to-face meetings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 03:23
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:May someone carefully explain and in layman’s terms how... Scale.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 03:31
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:The solution to global warming isn’t just being greener but the elimination of capitalism but the entire restructuring of society for socialism or even communism. Ignoring capitalism for a moment, just “being greener” is a very whitewashed view of the social and economic changes we must undergo just to respond to climate change. Even if we still keep capitalism somehow, we must transform society faster than ever before seen in human history. This isn’t about “being greener” this is about the complete restructuring of modern society so that the things we call “green” now are banned by law. We need to end gasoline and diesel fuel use within 20, 30 years, tops. At the same time as we’re rebuilding the entire heating and electrical infrastructure. At the same time as we’re radically transforming and sometimes curtailing plastics and chemicals use. At the same time as we’re also going to have to likely end mainstream beef and pork. At the same time as the effects of our new climate Hell hole get worse and worse.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 03:31
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:May someone carefully explain and in layman’s terms how... There is no market for less.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 03:37
|
|
|
I know there are bigger things to worry about, but depending on where you're flying it's also a nontrivial amount of exposure to solar radiation. But I guess everything these days increases your risk of cancer by a hundredth of a percent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 03:39
|
|
|
CmdrRiker posted:I know there are bigger things to worry about, but depending on where you're flying it's also a nontrivial amount of exposure to solar radiation. But I guess everything these days increases your risk of cancer by a hundredth of a percent. I think that things which cause cancer now caused cancer in the past too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 03:59
|
|
|
tuyop posted:There is no market for less. I know this probably sounds stupid and naive but here's one thing I really don't get about modern society. Take the Sackler whom are largely responsible for the Opioid crisis. There's no doubt legitimate medical value in Oxycontin and if it were prescribed correctly they'd still be insanely rich. So why bother? Hell, what's going to happen that's so bad every company must always earn more? What are shareholders whom are likely already making a killing going to do? Scream over the quarterly conference call?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 04:03
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I guess you aren’t familiar with business travelers. It’s a thing. A big thing. I think I spent 150+ days last year in a hotel visiting clients in whatever city. I work in LA. Those poor dears should use metro (subways etc.). It’s quite decent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 04:13
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I know this probably sounds stupid and naive but here's one thing I really don't get about modern society. Take the Sackler whom are largely responsible for the Opioid crisis. There's no doubt legitimate medical value in Oxycontin and if it were prescribed correctly they'd still be insanely rich. That’s because capitalism restructured society until those decisions are the only ones that don’t get you fired.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 04:14
|
|
|
CmdrRiker posted:I know there are bigger things to worry about, but depending on where you're flying it's also a nontrivial amount of exposure to solar radiation. But I guess everything these days increases your risk of cancer by a hundredth of a percent. Cosmic Rays to be precise. 80k miles a year of air travel puts you at risk.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 04:15
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I loathe the day I’m forced to go back to dozen person conference call bingo. Dogs barking, babies crying, people speaking over each other. Yeah but since the choice is between global death, war and famine for a century or two OR listen to conference call bingo, I hope we pick the latter. Even if it annoys you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 04:17
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:Cosmic Rays to be precise. 80k miles a year of air travel puts you at risk. I get more radiation when I have to fly than when have to be around Cobalt 60. Atleast that's what my dosimeter badges results imply.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 04:21
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:May someone carefully explain and in layman’s terms how... Climate Change, at its most basic, is the result of externalizing costs - offloading the economic/ecologic impact of carbon emissions worldwide and to future generations. It's late-stage capitalism. We live within a socioeconomic system that thrives on, that is structurally incentivized to hide its costs as best as possible, where its major actors are abstract, amoral entities whose driving principle is a focus on short-term benefits, and whose human component is insulated from the consequences through both wealth and diffusion of responsibility. Capitalism is incompatible with Climate Change solutions. This is not an advocacy towards communism or anarchism, it's just a loving fact. Any effective action against Climate Change, on top of all other ethical and technical problems it faces, has to be done in opposition to moneyed interests. We have to de-link politics from money. We have de-link "truth" from money. Necessary action shouldn't even be discussed in costs. Why is it discussed in terms of costs? What does it matter how many dollars a nuclear plant costs? Renewables+nuclear need to form the basis of the grid in any pathway where reach net zero emissions, we know this, it's an indisputable physical fact, so why do we allow coal and natural gas plants to exist? Why does it matter if a plant has already been built? Return on investment? Trabisnikof posted:That’s because capitalism restructured society until those decisions are the only ones that don’t get you fired. Yeah, executive board members are required to not only turn a profit for the shareholders, but to grow and increase the rate of profits. That's what they are hired to do, and replaced when found inadequate. Capitalism is amoral and profit-driven, with investment horizons measured in months. I've already posted about this. Conspiratiorist fucked around with this message at 04:40 on Mar 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 04:37
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Capitalism is incompatible with Climate Change solutions. This is not an advocacy towards communism or anarchism, it's just a loving fact. Any effective action against Climate Change, on top of all other ethical and technical problems it faces, has to be done in opposition to moneyed interests. We have to de-link politics from money. We have de-link "truth" from money. Necessary action shouldn't even be discussed in costs. Why is it discussed in terms of costs? What does it matter how many dollars a nuclear plant costs? Renewables+nuclear need to form the basis of the grid in any pathway where reach net zero emissions, we know this, it's an indisputable physical fact, so why do we allow coal and natural gas plants to exist? Why does it matter if a plant has already been built? Return on investment? A healthy mix of propaganda, lobbying, and ptsd. There's also folks who just wont accept anything less than fixing the whole world at once.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 04:44
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I know this probably sounds stupid and naive but here's one thing I really don't get about modern society. Take the Sackler whom are largely responsible for the Opioid crisis. There's no doubt legitimate medical value in Oxycontin and if it were prescribed correctly they'd still be insanely rich. Because "we have enough, we don't need more" isn't really how capitalist economies function at all. There's nothing forcing individual players in the system to behave that way, but it's the direction that the system pushes you in. If everyone actually did decide that growth wasn't important that would probably lead to bad outcomes for a lot of people, because the crumbs that trickle down to the middle and lower classes are extremely dependent on steady economic growth. Climate changes raises questions about whether steady, long-term economic growth is actually possible, and that's bad loving news if we aren't willing to drastically change how society and the economy function.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 05:04
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:gently caress the cows. Seriously, we can't afford to raise animals if this report is true. The article says: quote:The causes of soil destruction include chemical-heavy farming techniques, deforestation which increases erosion, and global warming. The earth under our feet is too often ignored by policymakers, experts said. So it seems to talk about land being used intensively for production of grain without proper long term thinking (crop rotation, letting fields stay fallow etc) and a lot of this land is probably farmed for feeding cows. But just stopping growing these areas to feed cattle is a half.solution and infact cow dung and other animal feces are actually a very important part of producing healthy soil in the long run, Non-petrochemical fertilizer is an important part of the cycle of ecological farming, fields when not farmed would be used for grazing and the cows/sheep/etc pooping on the place creates manure for the very place, and manure is different from petrochemical fertilizer, a much more complex product made of organic material and not just fertilizer, so it contains what the soil needs to become soil, fertilizer just depletes the soil in the long run. So in a sustainable future there needs to be a reduction and switch to more environmentally friendly modes of farming (usually what was done by traditional, smaller scale farms, and is done a lot here in scandinavia today) we can't get rid of cows or animals either, they play an important part. Artificial fertilizers need to be restricted as well. Corporations and big farms and the short sighted practices they employ are the enemy as usual.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 05:29
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Wouldn’t it be better to just relocate these remote communities to urban areas? Just want to point out that this would be extremely problematic morally for Canada. Remote fly-in communities are predominantly indigenous and located in places that their ancestors have been occupying for thousands of years. They've already been starved off the land and onto reservations to make way for settlers, I don't think they'd be keen to participate in something that looks like a continuation of the colonial genocide program.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 05:31
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:
A fraction of the cows (pigs too) that we have now, grazing on grasses, and using their poop for fertilizer. But nothing like factory farming.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 06:17
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Hell, what's going to happen that's so bad every company must always earn more? What are shareholders whom are likely already making a killing going to do? Sell their shares and buy others that give a better ROI.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 10:02
|
|
|
The past couple pages of "business folk" chiming in are a pretty great example of why I posted That Post back in January. loving Imbeciles. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 12:40
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:May someone carefully explain and in layman’s terms how... Conspiratiorist's answer was good so that's my answer, but I want to add a little to his response to (2) since the (my) post you're responding to isn't talking about the impossibility of profitable solutions. What Marx wrote extensively about, what features most prominently in every instance, and what I'm talking about, is alienation. The alienation, alienization, and atomization, really existing in our society, is an outgrowth of capitalism. I'm drawing in that post on my experience in the corporate world, where flights to the factory to oversee testing are routine. So, what's going on? The factory performs testing of the company's machines before delivery (this is on the other side of the Atlantic). This shouldn't be something requiring witnessing by other parties, yet my company sends a representative, the client sends a consultant and a representative. This occurs predominantly because a profit motive encourages corner-cutting such that it's unwise to assume thorough testing by the manufacturer. Moreover, the profit motive stretches the capacity of the factory such that production can barely sustain demand, causing a greater likelihood in defects. Hence, "The erosion of trust and trustworthiness." All this for machines that will sit atop largely empty skyscrapers filled with private condos owned by people who in all likelihood have other properties, and office space for companies that are already profitable but demand continued growth (capitalism demands continued growth). Another reason we're in this crisis with no real possibility of redress is due to inequality and regulatory capture (only possible with inequality). Redress, however, is not precluded by inequality alone; if it weren't also for alienation - i.e., people not having the time or will to organize for revolution - capitalism could not sustain itself and this crisis. Perry Mason Jar fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Mar 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 13:42
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:Conspiratiorist's answer was good so that's my answer, but I want to add a little to his response to (2) since the (my) post you're responding to isn't talking about the impossibility of profitable solutions. What Marx wrote extensively about, what features most prominently in every instance, and what I'm talking about, is alienation. The alienation, alienization, and atomization, really existing in our society, is an outgrowth of capitalism. I'm drawing in that post on my experience in the corporate world, where flights to the factory to oversee testing are routine. So, what's going on? The factory performs testing of the company's machines before delivery (this is on the other side of the Atlantic). This shouldn't be something requiring witnessing by other parties, yet my company sends a representative, the client sends a consultant and a representative. This occurs predominantly because a profit motive encourages corner-cutting such that it's unwise to assume thorough testing by the manufacturer. Moreover, the profit motive stretches the capacity of the factory such that production can barely sustain demand, causing a greater likelihood in defects. Hence, "The erosion of trust and trustworthiness." All this for machines that will sit atop largely empty skyscrapers filled with private condos owned by people who in all likelihood have other properties, and office space for companies that are already profitable but demand continued growth (capitalism demands continued growth). OP asked for layman's terms, so here's my translation: In our current system, people are separated from their work and the results of their work, both negative and positive. First, let's talk about being separated from your work. In the quest for profits, people have an interest in direct competition with capital. A capitalist, or a system, has an inherent need to minimize costs and maximize profit. The system does this by lowering working conditions and the costs of negative externalities. So they ask you to work constantly more hours, in constantly less individualized or skilled work, for constantly less pay, while refusing to pay for any mess that they cause. This is obvious in factories where humans become as industrialized as the machines they work with, they need to be doing work that is so rote and repetitive that they can be replaced as quickly as possible and governments are left to pay for cleaning up toxic waste sites. If people become aware of this conflict, the system automatically works to hide the conflict by pushing it to the boundaries of society. So businesses adapt to pressures from workers only as much as can secure more profit, and when more profit can be had elsewhere, they move and exploit people who "deserve" to be exploited, or whose exploitation is very hard to see. This separates us from our work in three ways: First giving us only a minuscule portion of the value we create. Second by asking us to work in progressively less creative and rewarding ways. Third, by erasing all the distinction of our cultures, places, and individual needs so that these needs can be satisfied wherever the cheapest labour can be found (you would find that working in a McDonald's in Istanbul is identical to working in a McDonald's in New Jersey, and you can get food in both places that doesn't come from anywhere in particular and tells you nothing about what it is to be a human in that particular place and time). Second, we're separated from the results of our work. The first and most obvious way is in payment. The ultimate goal is to pay only as much as allows us to: 1. make new workers, 2. train those new workers sufficiently, and 3. buy a portion of the products that we create. However, we're also separated from the negative outputs of our work. As part of, say, a mining company, the toxic fallout and cleanup from our labour is pushed onto local peoples and institutions that, since we are made into an interchangeable globalized cog, almost definitely have nothing to do with us. In this way we become complicit in their oppression and defensively separate ourselves from the obvious moral consequences of our work. When the work and product is local to us, we are so beaten down by the conditions under which we work that survival clouds our foresight into the impacts of our work. If we somehow see past that fog and demand better, we can always be replaced so we either shut up or get shut out. Climate change needs all of this to be addressed. Mitigation and adaptation is extremely place-based and localized and needs a localized workforce to implement. People need to have a direct relationship to the results of their work and be able to do the work and make meaningful changes to the organizational direction because they will live where the product matters most. They also need to be able to live in their places in meaningful ways to give a gently caress at all, so you can't make them build windmills or breakwaters 16 hours a day for 25c/hr. There can no longer be some "other" onto which we push our negative consequences because we will all experience existential harm from those negative consequences.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 14:29
|
|
|
Climate change doesn't care about any of that poo poo and all this "fix everything bad about humanity" makes it harder to fix climate change. I agree with you about everything you said Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 14:42 on Mar 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 14:39
|
|
|
tuyop posted:OP asked for layman's terms, so here's my translation: Well this explanation is particular to localization whereas the problems with alienation are myriad, I tried to touch on a couple in my post. I can only post a primer, Tab will need to investigate alienation himself to understand the totality of the problem. Nevvy Z posted:
"Keep[ing] capitalism" and "socializ[ing]/nationaliz[ing]" is a literal description of fascism. Edit: Nice ninja edit, didn't even notice the strikethrough was already in my quote. Abolish capitalism!
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 14:44
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Climate change doesn't care about any of that poo poo and all this "fix everything bad about humanity" makes it harder to fix climate change. I agree with you about everything you said I think that you make a really good point in that climate change is also amoral and we could easily pull through with some hideous ecofascism or whatever. The problem is that at some point (soon) the purely financial consequences of the disasters we face will be greater than the possible productive capacity of the entire planet and capitalism will have no answers. The diminishing wealth of the world will be consolidated with a dwindling few while the rest of us have no ability to survive AND have our children AND train our children AND buy stuff. Without those conditions, you simply can't have capitalism because there's no demand for your supply. Edit: oh, and no supply because there will quickly be no workers with the skills required by our globalized economy. tuyop fucked around with this message at 14:49 on Mar 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 14:46
|
|
|
tuyop posted:I think that you make a really good point in that climate change is also amoral and we could easily pull through with some hideous ecofascism or whatever. The problem is that at some point (soon) the purely financial consequences of the disasters we face will be greater than the possible productive capacity of the entire planet and capitalism will have no answers. The diminishing wealth of the world will be consolidated with a dwindling few while the rest of us have no ability to survive AND have our children AND train our children AND buy stuff. Without those conditions, you simply can't have capitalism because there's no demand for your supply. You can expropriate wealth without selling a single thing. But yes, eventually it will collapse on itself.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 14:56
|
|
|
not one of you loving idiots has even stolen a stapler from the office in the name of climate change yet
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 14:58
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:"Keep[ing] capitalism" and "socializ[ing]/nationaliz[ing]" is a literal description of fascism. Edit: Nice ninja edit, didn't even notice the strikethrough was already in my quote. Abolish capitalism! Fascism is more than just "socializing energy" actually. We socialize lots of sectors of society, we could socialize lots more of them without it being fascism and without entirely killing capitalism. In theory. But capitalism probably won't let us. Imagine if instead of burning oil we just turned it into more plastic. So eco-concious. 
Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 15:14 on Mar 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:11
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:We socialize lots of sectors of society, we could socialize lots more of them without it being fascism and without entirely killing capitalism. This is roughly Keynesianism, which doesn't work because of regulatory capture. And Keynesianism's implementation, in the first place, requires the workers to be a mobilized power, but we live at a time where workers are socially, politcally, and economically dispossessed in a world with no communist superpower. It's not gonna happen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:26
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:This is roughly Keynesianism, which doesn't work because of regulatory capture. And Keynesianism's implementation, in the first place, requires the workers to be a mobilized power, but we live at a time where workers are socially, politcally, and economically dispossessed in a world with no communist superpower. It's not gonna happen. I mean, none of this is going to happen (there’s what, like a <5% chance of any meaningful course correction re: climate change? And that 5% also requires loving magic?). Dude just asked why capitalism bad wrt climate change. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
Agreed. Capitalism needs to go to avert climate disaster (or minimize it) but it won't, so we won't. But hey. We'll hit that quarterly bonus and get those dividends for our shareholders! Nail Rat fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Mar 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 15:35
|
|
|
tuyop posted:I mean, none of this is going to happen (there’s what, like a <5% chance of any meaningful course correction re: climate change? And that 5% also requires loving magic?). Dude just asked why capitalism bad wrt climate change. Sure but the understanding that capitalism cannot be reformed, and that reforms which prolong its life are not in themselves climate change solutions, is still important to know for that minuscule chance. Posting in this thread at all is just for fun, End of Humanity: Hell World 2: The Heat Saga has already been sealed and greenlighted, slated for wide release before 2040.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 16:10
|
|
|
So... Basically rich people destroyed planet earth. gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 16:57
|
|
|
Yes, aided by people acting counter to their class interests (but that happens/happened by design).
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 17:06
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:Yes, aided by people acting counter to their class interests (but that happens/happened by design). Could you expand upon this? It is really weird seeing the poor vote Republican. Continually.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 17:13
|
|
|
Anti-communist propaganda is folded into every aspect of our society, from education to media to employment. Anti-communist warfare and/or imperialism has been the modus operandi of US intelligence and military since the end of WWII. Anti-communist legislation is in operation (think At Will employment). Anti-organizing legislation is in operation. Alienation was always going to be a consequence of capitalism but it has been aided - think shrinking public spaces, community centers, etc. Students are saddled with tens of thousands of dollars of debt for a reason. You work 40 hours a week for a reason. Welfare is inadequate for a reason. And so on. Edit: a little more on alienation aided by media: those nightly news specials, the myriad TV shows, movies, that teach you to fear your neighbor? That's for a reason. I bet you don't know your neighbor's last vacation. Blaming minorities? That's for a reason. Sure we want better conditions for us but not for them because they're the ones hurting us. All manner of individualist programming. Perry Mason Jar fucked around with this message at 17:24 on Mar 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:Sure but the understanding that capitalism cannot be reformed, and that reforms which prolong its life are not in themselves climate change solutions, is still important to know for that minuscule chance. Which megalopolis becomes unlivable first? New Dehli? Mumbai? They're already getting their first heatwave of the year. Mass migration anywhere in that region is potentially catastrophic. New York wiped out by a storm bigger than Sandy?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
Failson posted:Which megalopolis becomes unlivable first? New Dehli? Mumbai? They're already getting their first heatwave of the year. Mass migration anywhere in that region is potentially catastrophic. karachi
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
i am a mangrove
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 17:46
|
|