Uno Mundo
-
By the way, the hook in Soylent Green is that in the dystopian world food is really scares, the economy is in shambles but the government provides food for everyone in a variety of forms called Soylent which come in different colors. Kind of like C rations or space meals but the most popular of the Soylent series is Soylent Green. As it turns out in this society where suicide is encouraged to keep down the population, the corpses are processed into... Soylent Green.
(feel free to ponder if that is right or wrong)
WSS
-
Personal morality is subjective, and subjective things are difficult to prove. However, when something that is subjectively agreed upon by the overwhelming majority, you can move that in to the objective world. For example, you ask someone if it's OK to kill someone and take their money/other, you will find most people in the world will say no. Probably some would say yeah, no problem, sure, but you have such an overwhelming majority that you can call it objective morality.
Religious morality is not objective, but taught. There's a lot of crossover with objective morality, and you can see that with the the law of the land. But there are things that are 'fine' in various parts of the bible that most people would object to today - that's been covered ad nauseum so there's no point going over it, but it means that at some point in time, religion was teaching people that it's OK to stone people as punishment, while today, even Walter thinks that makes you a savage.
At best you're saying religious morality is no different from personal morality.
-
I vaguely recall the plot of Soylent Green now you say it. But that goes back to the point about building a sustainable world.
We have so much food in the western world that we could feed the world I don't know how many times over, yet people in africa or wherever starve because we haven't learnt to share.
We have the capability to build enough sustainable energy generators that the world could be powered for free within the next ten years, but we aren't - think about why not, and I mean really think about it. Why are we not doing that? Companies like Tesla, Nissan, Toyota and others have shown that you can have a car running perfectly well on electricity, that could be produced cleanly, sustainably and for free, yet we're not doing that, why not?
-
I vaguely recall the plot of Soylent Green now you say it. But that goes back to the point about building a sustainable world.
We have so much food in the western world that we could feed the world I don't know how many times over, yet people in africa or wherever starve because we haven't learnt to share.
We have the capability to build enough sustainable energy generators that the world could be powered for free within the next ten years, but we aren't - think about why not, and I mean really think about it. Why are we not doing that? Companies like Tesla, Nissan, Toyota and others have shown that you can have a car running perfectly well on electricity, that could be produced cleanly, sustainably and for free, yet we're not doing that, why not?
I vaguely recall the plot of Soylent Green now you say it. But that goes back to the point about building a sustainable world.
We have so much food in the western world that we could feed the world I don't know how many times over, yet people in africa or wherever starve because we haven't learnt to share.
We have the capability to build enough sustainable energy generators that the world could be powered for free within the next ten years, but we aren't - think about why not, and I mean really think about it. Why are we not doing that? Companies like Tesla, Nissan, Toyota and others have shown that you can have a car running perfectly well on electricity, that could be produced cleanly, sustainably and for free, yet we're not doing that, why not?
Because thowe companies are making us pay far out the ass for their cars.
-
I vaguely recall the plot of Soylent Green now you say it. But that goes back to the point about building a sustainable world.
We have so much food in the western world that we could feed the world I don't know how many times over, yet people in africa or wherever starve because we haven't learnt to share.
We have the capability to build enough sustainable energy generators that the world could be powered for free within the next ten years, but we aren't - think about why not, and I mean really think about it. Why are we not doing that? Companies like Tesla, Nissan, Toyota and others have shown that you can have a car running perfectly well on electricity, that could be produced cleanly, sustainably and for free, yet we're not doing that, why not?
Because thowe companies are making us pay far out the ass for their cars.
Because thowe companies are making us pay far out the ass for their cars.
Not the point, the point is that the proof of concept has been done, the cars are working fine and have been for years. They could be produced quite cheaply (profit margins aside) and run basically for free, and cleanly. Besides, Tesla's design plan is open source, so anyone can copy it and undercut them, but they're not.
So why hasn't Tesla been more successful? Well, for a start you can look at the traditional car manufacturers' response. Instead of embracing it, trying to get ahead of the curve and compete with Tesla, they've doubled down on fossil fuel cars, and tried to stop Tesla effectively selling in various states.
-
Not necessarily true. Chevy has the volt Nissan has something...the leaf? I don't know. But there's still some limitations that need to be overcome
-
So, what do you folks think about one world government? Who here believes it would be beneficial for mankind to have one president of the world with representatives from each country, kind of the United Countries of Earth?
WSS
So, what do you folks think about one world government? Who here believes it would be beneficial for mankind to have one president of the world with representatives from each country, kind of the United Countries of Earth?
WSS
Impractical for a variety of reasons, as we all know.
Hypothetically, I'd lean to more local control, rather than less.
-
So, what do you folks think about one world government? Who here believes it would be beneficial for mankind to have one president of the world with representatives from each country, kind of the United Countries of Earth?
WSS
Impractical for a variety of reasons, as we all know.
Hypothetically, I'd lean to more local control, rather than less.
No doubt, I'm talking about centuries from now.Impractical for a variety of reasons, as we all know.
Hypothetically, I'd lean to more local control, rather than less.
But I would bet there are many around the world who would like to see the United Nations or something like it in charge
WSS
-
No doubt, I'm talking about centuries from now.Impractical for a variety of reasons, as we all know.
Hypothetically, I'd lean to more local control, rather than less.
But I would bet there are many around the world who would like to see the United Nations or something like it in charge
WSS
No doubt, I'm talking about centuries from now.
But I would bet there are many around the world who would like to see the United Nations or something like it in charge
WSS
Well, would The Rapture qualify? I guess not, given the following 1,000 years of war and horrible living conditions.
PS This discussion is way to conceptual for somebody like me. My wife calls me "Concrete Sequential" - among other things.
I live in a flat file world.
-
No doubt, I'm talking about centuries from now.
But I would bet there are many around the world who would like to see the United Nations or something like it in charge
WSS
Well, would The Rapture qualify? I guess not, given the following 1,000 years of war and horrible living conditions.
PS This discussion is way to conceptual for somebody like me. My wife calls me "Concrete Sequential" - among other things.
I live in a flat file world.
Well, would The Rapture qualify? I guess not given the following 1,000 years of war and horrible living conditions.
I suppose it could.
It's not like we have reached the zenith of technology nor the advancements of weapons systems that make the nuclear bomb look like a slingshot.
WSS
-
I think space exploration, just like auto and aviation industries, is going to be pioneered by private industry, not governments.
I hope that doesn't mean private sector mining of asteroids, raping the rest of the universe as they have the earth, but I suspect that's going to be very much the reality. The groundwork is already in place.
I hope that doesn't mean private sector mining of asteroids, raping the rest of the universe as they have the earth, but I suspect that's going to be very much the reality. The groundwork is already in place.
The primary motivation will be $$$, so in order for private industry to be motivated to go to space, it has to be profitable or have the expectation of future profitability. So that probably does mean mining asteroids/other planets for resources. I've always wondered if space travel becomes cheap enough if we could start launching all our waste at the sun (the great incinerator in the sky!) to clean up the planet.
As for the one-government-to-rule-them-all idea, I would like it to happen eventually but it isn't realistic.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login