7 years ago, someone told me this isn't an issue because "everyone on Earth can fit on landmass the size of Texas."
So I take it they want everyone to live like caged animals? ROFL.
Have these people even been to Hong Kong or Jakarta? I sure as fuck would never settle in places like those. If you want to, be my guest.
Then when I called the person (and people like him) out for this gibberish, he replied "Well, it's not overpopulation, but resource consumption."
Ok, good luck with fixing that. :D Back in the 1970s, Carter told American people to stop using as much electricity, and to "wear a sweater during winter" instead of jacking up the thermostat. Even such mild suggestions (which don't even come close to what needs to be done) infuriated the sheep.
Back in reality:
Kyoto failed.
It's just eyewash for the masses to think "going green" and "corporate social responsibility" is somehow working. Anyone who can't see it for what it is (propaganda) is too stupid to reason with.
So now those retarded statements are out of the way, can anyone on WcR give me an actual reason/use sound logic to prove this is a non-issue? Did Elon Musk's cum mesmerize everyone into thinking tech will create some futuristic utopia where fossil fuels are obsolete?
Now MY theory for the pro-natalist (or at least anti-antinatalist) crowd's motives is that they desperately need to shore up the tax base to ensure government-funded retirement accounts stay solvent. But we already know there are trillions in unfunded liabilities in the US only (to say nothing of countries like Italy that are close to default.)
My guess is that the oligarchy will continue using financial engineering to transfer assets/wealth from the poor and currently working to the rich, parasitic, and retired. That's essentially what they have been doing since 2008 (it's been going on for longer, but since the crisis they feel they no longer need to "hide" their agenda from plain sight because ordinary people will take it up the ass).
So I take it they want everyone to live like caged animals? ROFL.
Have these people even been to Hong Kong or Jakarta? I sure as fuck would never settle in places like those. If you want to, be my guest.
Then when I called the person (and people like him) out for this gibberish, he replied "Well, it's not overpopulation, but resource consumption."
Ok, good luck with fixing that. :D Back in the 1970s, Carter told American people to stop using as much electricity, and to "wear a sweater during winter" instead of jacking up the thermostat. Even such mild suggestions (which don't even come close to what needs to be done) infuriated the sheep.
Back in reality:
Kyoto failed.
It's just eyewash for the masses to think "going green" and "corporate social responsibility" is somehow working. Anyone who can't see it for what it is (propaganda) is too stupid to reason with.
So now those retarded statements are out of the way, can anyone on WcR give me an actual reason/use sound logic to prove this is a non-issue? Did Elon Musk's cum mesmerize everyone into thinking tech will create some futuristic utopia where fossil fuels are obsolete?
Now MY theory for the pro-natalist (or at least anti-antinatalist) crowd's motives is that they desperately need to shore up the tax base to ensure government-funded retirement accounts stay solvent. But we already know there are trillions in unfunded liabilities in the US only (to say nothing of countries like Italy that are close to default.)
My guess is that the oligarchy will continue using financial engineering to transfer assets/wealth from the poor and currently working to the rich, parasitic, and retired. That's essentially what they have been doing since 2008 (it's been going on for longer, but since the crisis they feel they no longer need to "hide" their agenda from plain sight because ordinary people will take it up the ass).