Its strange to me that so many people in here talking about eugenics when neither eleitl nor the paper posted had anything to do with eugenics. This place is a dimwitted mob of barely literates arguing with imaginary ideological enemies. actually i probably shouldn’t use the word “arguing” since that requires something like a chain of claims-reasoning-evidence etc…

https://lemm.ee/c/collapse

less censorship

People fail to understand we are in fiscal dominance rather than monetary dominance now and interest rate increases wont throttle inflation. Interest rate increases can actually create inflation now because that money is printed and paid to bondholders who then use it in the actual economy therefore creating more money chasing the same amount of goods , therefore inflationary. this is like the 40s not the 70s.

I doubt this shit even moves the needle any more than the general neoliberal greenwash bullshit. All the parties are pro-human growth and anti-nature if it comes to asking for sacrifice to standard of living for humans

tldr the bond market is about as distorted as soviet economy, this eventually meets reality

Come on. If we don’t dig it up and burn it, it’s going to stay under the ground.

Those who think we should continue using fossil fuels despite the climate change and weather effects we’re already seeing do not understand the physics of how the world works.

our energy requirements for being alive are much higher than a population that didn’t get itself on a hockey stick shaped population chart. we are in an intensification trap. we must continue to use fossil fuels to maintain the population and standard of living, unless we are willling to sacrifice the population and standard of living and/or renewables grow so much they take up the slack.

so any talk of leaving it in the ground needs to also include talk of how we are going to allocate the misery that comes from such.

as of 2024 meaningful carbon capture is still hopium and copium

Researchers and practitioners have questioned society’s ability to reach Gt-scale CDR from novel approaches such as BECCS and DACCS, given the small role these technologies play in climate change mitigation today

Others have highlighted the potential environmental (10–12) and social [e.g., food prices (11)] impacts of CDR, particularly for BECCS due to its high land and water requirements but also for DACCS.

They have also critiqued the role that CDR plays in net-zero policy narratives, arguing that optimistic assumptions about CDR in the future may be used to delay action today and represent a moral hazard whose risks are disproportionately borne by low-income countries and future generations .

… institutional, behavioral, and social barriers …, experience with related technologies suggests that they may be substantial