TheDemonBuer

joined 2 years ago
[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

Which society? There are many societies on the Earth today, and I predict that some of them will experience relative peace, security and prosperity, while others will experience conflict and instability.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Yeah, I mean, duh. Of course it's too late to STOP climate change (barring some miraculous discovery). That's been true for some time. The globe will continue to warm and the climate will continue to change, rapidly. However, it is not yet determined how much the globe will warm, how much the climate will change nor how rapidly.

According to Climate Action Center, the most likely future emissions scenarios will result in warming of between 1.9C and 2.7C by the end of the century. The climate models aren't high enough resolution to project the next 75 years of every community on the planet, under each emissions scenario. We don't know how warm it's going to get or how much the climate will change, so we don't know which societies will collapse or exactly how many people will die in any conflicts that might start as a result of climate migration or disputes over land and resources, etc. We just don't know. We don't know what's over and what isn't.

It's looking like we're going to land somewhere between generally pretty bad but manageable to the collapse of all civilization. No one knows. I have a feeling we won't know for sure it's over until after it's well and truly over.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago (10 children)

I was born and raised here in the United States, just like my father, and his father, and so on for several generations. You fuck off. You and your disgusting fucking federal government. May you all rot in hell.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

I think most reasonable people would agree that there are many objectively good things about the modern world, but progress isn't a strict good/bad binary. Often, progress results in both good and bad circumstances.

For instance, I think most reasonable people would agree that modern medicine is a very good thing. Vaccines and antibiotics have saved countless lives. Also, more advanced agricultural technology has allowed us to grow more food and feed more people. However, progress has also resulted in significant ecological damage, depletion of natural, nonrenewable resources and a significant loss of biodiversity. I think most reasonable people would agree that these are very bad things.

I don't think the point is to ignore the very real, important positives about the modern world, but to point out that there are still things that need to improve, and unintended negative effects of progress that need to be dealt with.

I appreciate that for you the modern world is overall good, but that's not necessarily everyone's experience. Some people do feel purposeless, depressed and worn down, despite being relatively wealthy and comfortable, especially compared to humans of past eras.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"Well in those days Mars was just a dreary, uninhabitable wasteland - much like Utah - but unlike Utah it was eventually made livable"

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

We live in a rural area, outside any city boundary. The county doesn't have any building codes, and there were only a handful of state codes we had to adhere to.

I should have paid for a home inspection before we took the keys, but we were in a hurry to move in. The build took so much longer than we had planned for that the construction loan matured, went to long term, so we were paying both rent and a mortgage.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The problem is these builders don't want to pay for competency. They'd rather pay immigrants pennies on the dollar for shoddy work. They charge the same for the houses and just pocket the difference. We get a shitty house and the builder gets greater profits.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 59 points 2 weeks ago (11 children)

Oh man, let me tell you. We built our house a few years ago and it was an ordeal. After a while I just stopped asking the builder to fix things because I knew it would be faster and better to fix them myself or get someone else to fix them. It has added tens of thousands of dollars to the cost of the home, and all of that has come out of our own pocket, we didn't get to roll all those extra costs into the mortgage loan.

Some of the corners they cut were unbelievable. They didn't put any insulation in our attic. None. Our master shower drain was just draining directly into the crawl space, not hooked up the drain pipe at all. There was also no insulation in the crawl space, nor was there a vapor barrier. Poor workmanship everywhere, the floors especially are ass.

Several people have told me I should sue the builder, and I probably should, but I'd have to pay for a lawyer, and it would probably take months and months. It's an expense and a hassle I don't want, so instead I just tell everyone to never, ever use Taylor Homes of Nashville. Ever. Even though, every other builder is probably just as bad.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 27 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It's not just about winning, it's about ideology. Embracing demsoc candidates wouldn't just be a change in strategy, it would be a change in the party's core ideology. Ideology is why political parties exist. Political parties are usually based in ideology, that's why in other democracies there are liberal parties, conservative parties, socialist parties, Libertarian parties, etc. But here in the US we don't have a system of political ideology plurality, so the two parties that we do have are often fighting internally to determine what the core ideology of the party will be.

You know why so many Democrats don't like demsoc candidates? Because they're not demsocs. They're social liberals or neoliberals, and they want the Democratic party to remain an ideologically Liberal party.

If our democracy were more like most every other democracy on the planet, the neoliberals and the demsocs would each have their own party, and they wouldn't need to be engaged in this constant, zero sum fight for control of one party.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago
[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Well, neoliberalism is dead. Yet, the Democrats continue to cling to its bloated corpse. Many Democrats simply refuse to let go of the paradigm that took control of American politics in the 80s and 90s.

view more: next ›