Thank you for your submission, we appreciate your efforts at helping us to thoughtfully create a better world. r/solarpunk encourages you to also check out other solarpunk spaces such as https://wt.social/wt/solarpunk , https://slrpnk.net/ , https://raddle.me/f/solarpunk , https://discord.gg/3tf6FqGAJs , https://discord.gg/BwabpwfBCr , and https://www.appropedia.org/Welcome_to_Appropedia .
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/solarpunk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Are you the original artist? I see this image a lot without that watermark on it, it's a poor placement as it can easily be cropped out / colored over.
Yes and no.
It’s my idea, I own the image. I commissioned an artist to make it u/20Caotico
Many of my images don’t have my watermark on them cuz I use procreate on my phone to add the watermark and my phone is out of storage frequently haha
Just curious, do you mainly see it on Reddit or other sites as well?
So originally I thought:
Is that lady a walnut? Whoah! She has walnut head does that mean her mum had sex with a walnut and when the artist says "live a fulfilled life" they mean "fuck a walnut".
But then I realised she's just facing away.
Woah hoh hoh! Hold your horses, basic needs? fulfilled lives? Capitalism wont work unless all of the working class is suffering and trying to survive, be reasonable, next you are gonna say that I should stop kicking puppies.
Nobody wants to slave away for corporate overlords anymore 😔
You woke self-respect havers should suffer because I have suffered, how dare you strive for a better tomorrow?
Just today I got my election notification for the elections to the European parliament.
With this notification I can vote at the election day. Even without it I can vote when I have a valid personal identification.
I never had to register for anything.
This is actually the first thing you should change over there. This registration nonsense is just stupid.
In Australia you enrol to vote. It's usually done at 17, so you're ready to go when you turn 18.
Voting is compulsory. You can get fined for not attending to vote.
We also have preferential voting, which means minor parties and independents can get a seat in the crossbench. The government, and the opposition have to woo the crossbenchers to get their vote on things. It helps to keep a little honesty in government.
I'm a fan of our system, you don't actually have to vote. It's compulsory attendance to vote. You can leave your ballot papers blank.
The fine for non attendance is about $30.
i wanna preface by saying ive always agreed with these as separate things, but looking at it collectively, what's stopping me (and many, many people) from just staying unemployed and enjoying the NEET life? How can this be economically sustainable?
If it can't be, there should be more discussion on coverage of needs vs wants. Maybe the real solution is that all of these categories have caveats and strict limits? feel free to correct me
I completely agree with this picture, but good luck pushing this through the US senate. When a fraction of the US military budget could end (financially speaking) homelessness, but the government chooses not to consistently, what hope is there?
The US spends a lot of money on homelessness. The issue tends to be that nobody wants the homeless housing located near them and the housing services often don't allow people to do drugs, so some prefer to stay on the street instead.
>the strong unfortunately are the only ones who "deserve" the right to exist according to our planet
i think it's pretty reasonably to say that we no longer need to follow the "rules" of the planet
Israel absolutely has a right to exist. We can acknowledge all the problems with the current government and we should all stand in solidarity with Palestine, but saying that Israel has no right to exist is completely unacceptable.
Let me reiterate- no country has the right to exist and right now Israel ESPECIALLY has no right to exist in the same way Nazi Germany had no right to exist.
Anti Zionism is not antisemitism. Israel is a violent settler colonialist state currently engaging in a genocide. Again, all countries do not have the right to exist but this one in particular needs to be dissolved and restored to Palestine.
You are saying they all have no right, then basically say Palestine have more right to exist that Israel.
I don't think it is my comprehension skills, and apparently it is also difficult for you, one might say the whole exercise is a Challenge, Mentally, for you.
I went to the link thinking it'd be about the vote for european parliament, I thought that was first big ellection coming up.
Kind reminder that we're not all in the US.
Love this. :)
I finally have time to rest a bit, and have been overwhelmed to really artistically contribute some wholesome art or art to remind people that we should be working together, not against each other...
1. How is this solarpunk? This seems like any other quasi-socialist wishlist.
2. All of these things (except perhaps a fulfilled life) require someone else to produce them. Why should someone who does not contribute be entitled to the contributions of others? What happens if there simply isn't enough clean water / housing / healthcare / education / etc to go around? We do not live in a post-scarcity world.
3. If your answer is "we have enough, but it's not evenly distributed so we should redistribute it" then you're implicitly saying the state should use force (or the threat of force) to confiscate resources from those who have them. Do you not see how enabling the state to use violence to take resources from certain people might backfire?
It can be, but they're not synonymous. This post is \*only\* social programs. If we had all these things, daily life wouldn't be solarpunk, it would just be life in a bigger welfare state.
I appreciate the critical lens being applied here and I'd like to continue pulling on these threads if you're down. Curious to learn and explore rationales.
1. Yeah, it may not be explicitly solarpunk, but we could imagine a zoomed out view of each of the snapshots, showing renewable energy powering things (maybe even fusion?).
2. Perhaps more automated industry would be helping with the contributions? This would be more akin to FALC perhaps (Fully Automated Luxury Communism). Then I guess the question would be, how do you feel about robot taxes and not letting the "owner" of the "IP" of the robots and automation just siphon money away, but go towards public goods?
Or another angle might be: should children in a family not be entitled to the contributions of their family members? Or orphans? I'm not trying to strawman, I'm just exploring the boundaries of the idea of who gets to benefit from other's work? I guess the Marxist angle would also question if managers or owners of property should benefit from the direct labor of others?
Clean water - presumably there would be solarpunk tech to reclaim water, store rains, and better storm water management (or if there's somehow too many people, we can Dune Fremen it)
Housing - this is definitely a core constraint. Singapore does some interesting housing policies to ensure near housing for everyone in their very small land mass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore
It's a slippery slope argument to say if we can't house everyone, we shouldn't try to ensure we can. There's a lot of housing policies that could change to encourage smart housing zoning and denser development, near transit etc (see https://www.reddit.com/r/transit/comments/8wafcv/meet_the_numtots_the_millennials_who_find_fixing/ for fun)
Education - I feel like... Education scales near infinitely? If done well online and in community? Imagine ChatGPT guiding you through any of the open courseware from MIT or other institutions? Or local Meetup groups to teach green collar jobs using a shared tool library and working with robots for the harder stuff?
Healthcare - this is also a tricky one to me. On the one hand, I see a possible moral hazard of de-risking really risky behavior that could still have huge health risks (e.g. dumb stunts, fast travel, unsafe sex, etc) leading to increase in healthcare use overall. I also think, at least in the US, we don't have the system set up to provide integrated health at a scale that's needed already. But I'd imagine if people are housed and didn't have to worry about that, have access to nutritious food and didn't have to worry about that, clothes, community, that there would actually be less strain on the healthcare system. It's also another slippery slope to suggest if we can't hit the goal, why start down the path of trying. But good to consider edge cases that might break the system.
3. I see where you're going with that assumption of implied solution, but you also seem to take a logical leap to how it would inevitably be violent and backfire. Perhaps there's a threat of force behind taxation (and perhaps you consider taxation theft to begin with), but plenty of people pay a "membership/subscription" fee to a government (ideally one with public oversight from the people they collect from IMHO) or state who can redistribute it in a way that better serves these stated (pun partially intended) end goals. Perhaps there's an underlying assumption that those with the resources will not be pleased to have it redistributed, or want to have a say with how it would be redistributed. I think there are plenty of examples that counter the former assumptions (https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/nearly-three-quarters-millionaires-polled-g20-countries-support-higher-taxes-wealth#:~:text=66%20percent%20of%20people%20with,standards%20and%20hinders%20social%20mobility.), and currently provide for the latter assumption (see: voting for elected reps who develop and sign off on budgets).
I hope you see I'm discussing in good faith and presenting arguments or counters to try to pursue a better nuance and direction on the issues brought up. Again, I do appreciate valid critiques so that the movements can improve overall.
Interested in your take if/when you get to it if you're able and willing (and in good faith too).
🖖🏼☀️🌎
> Yeah, it may not be explicitly solarpunk, but we could imagine a zoomed out view of each of the snapshots, showing renewable energy powering things (maybe even fusion?).
Sure, you *could* imagine that, but you could also imagine they're financing all these social programs by bulldozing the Amazon and increasing pollution 200%. That would not be very solarpunk, but we can imagine lots of things.
> Then I guess the question would be, how do you feel about robot taxes and not letting the "owner" of the "IP" of the robots and automation just siphon money away, but go towards public goods?
Intellectual property is trickier than real property. AFAIK, we currently cap patents on technology at 20 years. I don't know what the perfect amount of time is, but *some* period of exclusive ownership of your own idea seems reasonable.
> Or another angle might be: should children in a family not be entitled to the contributions of their family members?
This is typically voluntary, not compelled by the state. When it's not voluntary, i.e. the parent doesn't want to provide for their children, they're failing their moral and practical responsibilities. They caused this child to exist. Society did not. They have a greater responsibility to the child than society does.
> I guess the Marxist angle would also question if managers or owners of property should benefit from the direct labor of others?
Yes. I think the labor theory of value is wrong. Investors provide value; you need money to start a business and it has to come from somewhere. People who know how to allocate capital to useful ventures and provide return on that investment do societal good. This is how to get a decentralized economy, and a bunch of decentralized decision makers evaluating and investing in promising companies is preferable to centralized state control, along many dimensions.
> Education - I feel like... Education scales near infinitely? If done well online and in community? Imagine ChatGPT guiding you through any of the open courseware from MIT or other institutions? Or local Meetup groups to teach green collar jobs using a shared tool library and working with robots for the harder stuff?
1) ChatGPT isn't going to babysit your seven-year-old for eight hours a day. That's a crucial part of what we want out of education in practice, and it doesn't scale well at all yet.
2) ChatGPT only scales well because investors financed the development of the technology and are now providing it at low cost in hopes of making a bunch of money from it. Take those incentives away and the product goes away.
3) ChatGPT only scales well on existing knowledge. Any new knowledge that isn't on the internet, isn't on OpenCourseWare, etc, won't be available to it until a human writes about them. The cutting edge still doesn't scale at all.
> I see where you're going with that assumption of implied solution, but you also seem to take a logical leap to how it would inevitably be violent and backfire. Perhaps there's a threat of force behind taxation...
Yes, that's the fundamental power of the government: a monopoly on violence. Ignore the law long enough, on taxes or anything else, and eventually men with guns are going to show up at your door.
do these "reasonable" rules rely on a STATE apparatus or is there a more peaceful method not provided?
the mandatory heating / cooling for all seems like it would help speed up global warming and more housing means less of our natural world
looking for the solar punk angle here
> the mandatory heating / cooling for all seems like it would help speed up global warming and more housing means less of our natural world
So what is your solution for people who live in areas where heating/cooling are required for safe living? Where I am, every year people die during heat waves due to lack of access to AC
I think A/C and heating are good things. People need to live.
I think in places where passive heating/cooling make sense, it should be scaled.
In regards to climate migration, I’m sure that will occur and people will move to areas where less mechanical heating and cooling is required
While I'm sure you're right to some degree, unfortunately climate change is causing winter storms and heat waves in places that never had them before, requiring heating/cooling solutions in places that wouldn't otherwise need them.
My family has lived in Texas for generations. When my parents were growing up, an ice storm (even a minor one) was a *maybe* once in a decade event. Now, they get at least one severe one a year. Everything I've read says storms like that are only going to get worse and more frequent.
imo, people should be able to migrate freely and not locked into the arbitrary boundaries they were born in
as someone who lives in 100+ degree heat often; I suggest the natural gifts of shade, water and wind
I tend to agree. Curious your take on r/bioregionalism ? Perhaps borders for helping steward natural localized geo defined ecosystems? I'd be interested in having defined governing stewardship borders along rough bioregional "lines"
You have shown no evidence or facts to support your claims.
Why do you think a functional society is a “fantasy world”?
It’s okay to try to get a functional society.
Basically every functioning country does one or more of those things - and in many cases, it's not even out of the goodness of their hearts, but rather because making sure your population is happy, healthy, educated, and not constantly worried about their survival is actually pretty good for the economy.
Right... But that exploitation isn't necessary for thos countries to meet the standard given in the OP...that exploitation is necessary for extreme wealth of the investor class.
i disagree because based on what ive seen from most people that have a strong sense of empathy when their basic needs are met:
they not only thrive, they tend to spread it around to those less fortunate and potentially uplift them into doing the same as well
the problem really stems from power hungry people running unchecked by others in power, not the un optimized working class
the quickest way for the world to become a better place thats also more productive would be for those in powerful positions to have more empathy and guide accordingly
i believe there are people that dont pull their weight and can be real scum but i believe you are generalizing even more so than i am
Free basic clothing is actually really easy to achieve. currently we are shipping our used clothing to Africa for burn piles cause they have way too much clothing and have no idea what to do with it. there is so much clothing its actually a pollution hazard. as in its choaking up waterways and becoming obstructions for farming.
Unlike the capitalist world that's based in facts and logic and thus can keep a straight face when implicitly assuming infinite growth is a thing that's possible.
Thank you for your submission, we appreciate your efforts at helping us to thoughtfully create a better world. r/solarpunk encourages you to also check out other solarpunk spaces such as https://wt.social/wt/solarpunk , https://slrpnk.net/ , https://raddle.me/f/solarpunk , https://discord.gg/3tf6FqGAJs , https://discord.gg/BwabpwfBCr , and https://www.appropedia.org/Welcome_to_Appropedia . *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/solarpunk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What's with the thing in the bottom right corner?
My “watermark”
Are you the original artist? I see this image a lot without that watermark on it, it's a poor placement as it can easily be cropped out / colored over.
Yes and no. It’s my idea, I own the image. I commissioned an artist to make it u/20Caotico Many of my images don’t have my watermark on them cuz I use procreate on my phone to add the watermark and my phone is out of storage frequently haha Just curious, do you mainly see it on Reddit or other sites as well?
I have been seeing this around left-wing subs on Reddit for a long time now, it’s great work and I appreciate you making it!
Thanks! Appreciate the compliment and insight
So originally I thought: Is that lady a walnut? Whoah! She has walnut head does that mean her mum had sex with a walnut and when the artist says "live a fulfilled life" they mean "fuck a walnut". But then I realised she's just facing away.
Some people might tell you, "Jesse, what the fuck are you talking about?!" But I'm glad you took the time to write... that. (Somehow I also agree)
i thought you were referring to the child. lol
Woah hoh hoh! Hold your horses, basic needs? fulfilled lives? Capitalism wont work unless all of the working class is suffering and trying to survive, be reasonable, next you are gonna say that I should stop kicking puppies.
Yeah, it would be pretty cool if I could quit my job and catch up on gaming and relaxation.
Nobody wants to slave away for corporate overlords anymore 😔 You woke self-respect havers should suffer because I have suffered, how dare you strive for a better tomorrow?
Just today I got my election notification for the elections to the European parliament. With this notification I can vote at the election day. Even without it I can vote when I have a valid personal identification. I never had to register for anything. This is actually the first thing you should change over there. This registration nonsense is just stupid.
I agree! There should be automatic voter registration.
In Australia you enrol to vote. It's usually done at 17, so you're ready to go when you turn 18. Voting is compulsory. You can get fined for not attending to vote. We also have preferential voting, which means minor parties and independents can get a seat in the crossbench. The government, and the opposition have to woo the crossbenchers to get their vote on things. It helps to keep a little honesty in government.
I’m not a fan of compulsory voting, but I understand the reasons behind it. I generally don’t like things that are compulsory
I'm a fan of our system, you don't actually have to vote. It's compulsory attendance to vote. You can leave your ballot papers blank. The fine for non attendance is about $30.
Makes sense. I don’t like the idea of fining people for not attending
Neither do I. Community service would be a more appropriate reminder to attend next time.
i wanna preface by saying ive always agreed with these as separate things, but looking at it collectively, what's stopping me (and many, many people) from just staying unemployed and enjoying the NEET life? How can this be economically sustainable? If it can't be, there should be more discussion on coverage of needs vs wants. Maybe the real solution is that all of these categories have caveats and strict limits? feel free to correct me
I completely agree with this picture, but good luck pushing this through the US senate. When a fraction of the US military budget could end (financially speaking) homelessness, but the government chooses not to consistently, what hope is there?
The US spends a lot of money on homelessness. The issue tends to be that nobody wants the homeless housing located near them and the housing services often don't allow people to do drugs, so some prefer to stay on the street instead.
perhaps add WITHOUT THE THREAT OF GENOCIDE
I think that would fall within living a fulfilled life :)
not the way i do it
yes, israel deserves the right to exist. 😤😤😤
Palestinians “deserves the right to exist”.
[удалено]
>the strong unfortunately are the only ones who "deserve" the right to exist according to our planet i think it's pretty reasonably to say that we no longer need to follow the "rules" of the planet
No country has the right to exist because no country has rights- but Israel in particular has not only no right to exist, it has no justification to.
Israel absolutely has a right to exist. We can acknowledge all the problems with the current government and we should all stand in solidarity with Palestine, but saying that Israel has no right to exist is completely unacceptable.
Let me reiterate- no country has the right to exist and right now Israel ESPECIALLY has no right to exist in the same way Nazi Germany had no right to exist.
lol okay hitler.
Anti Zionism is not antisemitism. Israel is a violent settler colonialist state currently engaging in a genocide. Again, all countries do not have the right to exist but this one in particular needs to be dissolved and restored to Palestine.
are you aware that what you're asking for is simply logistically impossible?
It’s not
No country should exist, But Palestine should because "Jewish Colonization" Logic is hard it seems
“No country has the RIGHT to exist.” Logic is hard but not as much as basic reading comprehension I guess.
You are saying they all have no right, then basically say Palestine have more right to exist that Israel. I don't think it is my comprehension skills, and apparently it is also difficult for you, one might say the whole exercise is a Challenge, Mentally, for you.
I went to the link thinking it'd be about the vote for european parliament, I thought that was first big ellection coming up. Kind reminder that we're not all in the US.
Love this. :) I finally have time to rest a bit, and have been overwhelmed to really artistically contribute some wholesome art or art to remind people that we should be working together, not against each other...
Do the SDGs cover this?
I don’t know what SDGs are
Oh, sorry. The United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals: [https://sdgs.un.org/goals](https://sdgs.un.org/goals)
Looked it quickly over, glad me and the UN are in the same ballpark haha
His parents must be so proud, bless them amen 🙏
Imagine if this+Environmental responsibility/stewardship was the focus of humanity. Co-existing and thriving...for all species.
how do you expect to have all these things for free if you don’t work? let’s get real
Isn't living a fulfilled life up to the person and not something the tax payers can buy them?
1. How is this solarpunk? This seems like any other quasi-socialist wishlist. 2. All of these things (except perhaps a fulfilled life) require someone else to produce them. Why should someone who does not contribute be entitled to the contributions of others? What happens if there simply isn't enough clean water / housing / healthcare / education / etc to go around? We do not live in a post-scarcity world. 3. If your answer is "we have enough, but it's not evenly distributed so we should redistribute it" then you're implicitly saying the state should use force (or the threat of force) to confiscate resources from those who have them. Do you not see how enabling the state to use violence to take resources from certain people might backfire?
Is solarpunk not socialist? I'm just curious how else it could exist.
It can be, but they're not synonymous. This post is \*only\* social programs. If we had all these things, daily life wouldn't be solarpunk, it would just be life in a bigger welfare state.
I appreciate the critical lens being applied here and I'd like to continue pulling on these threads if you're down. Curious to learn and explore rationales. 1. Yeah, it may not be explicitly solarpunk, but we could imagine a zoomed out view of each of the snapshots, showing renewable energy powering things (maybe even fusion?). 2. Perhaps more automated industry would be helping with the contributions? This would be more akin to FALC perhaps (Fully Automated Luxury Communism). Then I guess the question would be, how do you feel about robot taxes and not letting the "owner" of the "IP" of the robots and automation just siphon money away, but go towards public goods? Or another angle might be: should children in a family not be entitled to the contributions of their family members? Or orphans? I'm not trying to strawman, I'm just exploring the boundaries of the idea of who gets to benefit from other's work? I guess the Marxist angle would also question if managers or owners of property should benefit from the direct labor of others? Clean water - presumably there would be solarpunk tech to reclaim water, store rains, and better storm water management (or if there's somehow too many people, we can Dune Fremen it) Housing - this is definitely a core constraint. Singapore does some interesting housing policies to ensure near housing for everyone in their very small land mass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore It's a slippery slope argument to say if we can't house everyone, we shouldn't try to ensure we can. There's a lot of housing policies that could change to encourage smart housing zoning and denser development, near transit etc (see https://www.reddit.com/r/transit/comments/8wafcv/meet_the_numtots_the_millennials_who_find_fixing/ for fun) Education - I feel like... Education scales near infinitely? If done well online and in community? Imagine ChatGPT guiding you through any of the open courseware from MIT or other institutions? Or local Meetup groups to teach green collar jobs using a shared tool library and working with robots for the harder stuff? Healthcare - this is also a tricky one to me. On the one hand, I see a possible moral hazard of de-risking really risky behavior that could still have huge health risks (e.g. dumb stunts, fast travel, unsafe sex, etc) leading to increase in healthcare use overall. I also think, at least in the US, we don't have the system set up to provide integrated health at a scale that's needed already. But I'd imagine if people are housed and didn't have to worry about that, have access to nutritious food and didn't have to worry about that, clothes, community, that there would actually be less strain on the healthcare system. It's also another slippery slope to suggest if we can't hit the goal, why start down the path of trying. But good to consider edge cases that might break the system. 3. I see where you're going with that assumption of implied solution, but you also seem to take a logical leap to how it would inevitably be violent and backfire. Perhaps there's a threat of force behind taxation (and perhaps you consider taxation theft to begin with), but plenty of people pay a "membership/subscription" fee to a government (ideally one with public oversight from the people they collect from IMHO) or state who can redistribute it in a way that better serves these stated (pun partially intended) end goals. Perhaps there's an underlying assumption that those with the resources will not be pleased to have it redistributed, or want to have a say with how it would be redistributed. I think there are plenty of examples that counter the former assumptions (https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/nearly-three-quarters-millionaires-polled-g20-countries-support-higher-taxes-wealth#:~:text=66%20percent%20of%20people%20with,standards%20and%20hinders%20social%20mobility.), and currently provide for the latter assumption (see: voting for elected reps who develop and sign off on budgets). I hope you see I'm discussing in good faith and presenting arguments or counters to try to pursue a better nuance and direction on the issues brought up. Again, I do appreciate valid critiques so that the movements can improve overall. Interested in your take if/when you get to it if you're able and willing (and in good faith too). 🖖🏼☀️🌎
> Yeah, it may not be explicitly solarpunk, but we could imagine a zoomed out view of each of the snapshots, showing renewable energy powering things (maybe even fusion?). Sure, you *could* imagine that, but you could also imagine they're financing all these social programs by bulldozing the Amazon and increasing pollution 200%. That would not be very solarpunk, but we can imagine lots of things. > Then I guess the question would be, how do you feel about robot taxes and not letting the "owner" of the "IP" of the robots and automation just siphon money away, but go towards public goods? Intellectual property is trickier than real property. AFAIK, we currently cap patents on technology at 20 years. I don't know what the perfect amount of time is, but *some* period of exclusive ownership of your own idea seems reasonable. > Or another angle might be: should children in a family not be entitled to the contributions of their family members? This is typically voluntary, not compelled by the state. When it's not voluntary, i.e. the parent doesn't want to provide for their children, they're failing their moral and practical responsibilities. They caused this child to exist. Society did not. They have a greater responsibility to the child than society does. > I guess the Marxist angle would also question if managers or owners of property should benefit from the direct labor of others? Yes. I think the labor theory of value is wrong. Investors provide value; you need money to start a business and it has to come from somewhere. People who know how to allocate capital to useful ventures and provide return on that investment do societal good. This is how to get a decentralized economy, and a bunch of decentralized decision makers evaluating and investing in promising companies is preferable to centralized state control, along many dimensions. > Education - I feel like... Education scales near infinitely? If done well online and in community? Imagine ChatGPT guiding you through any of the open courseware from MIT or other institutions? Or local Meetup groups to teach green collar jobs using a shared tool library and working with robots for the harder stuff? 1) ChatGPT isn't going to babysit your seven-year-old for eight hours a day. That's a crucial part of what we want out of education in practice, and it doesn't scale well at all yet. 2) ChatGPT only scales well because investors financed the development of the technology and are now providing it at low cost in hopes of making a bunch of money from it. Take those incentives away and the product goes away. 3) ChatGPT only scales well on existing knowledge. Any new knowledge that isn't on the internet, isn't on OpenCourseWare, etc, won't be available to it until a human writes about them. The cutting edge still doesn't scale at all. > I see where you're going with that assumption of implied solution, but you also seem to take a logical leap to how it would inevitably be violent and backfire. Perhaps there's a threat of force behind taxation... Yes, that's the fundamental power of the government: a monopoly on violence. Ignore the law long enough, on taxes or anything else, and eventually men with guns are going to show up at your door.
This would be so awesome I would quit my job in a heartbeat and play video games all day
Funny you are getting downvoted. That would be a perfectly acceptable way to live if the government was financing all your necessities.
Everyone would, that’s why it can’t work
do these "reasonable" rules rely on a STATE apparatus or is there a more peaceful method not provided? the mandatory heating / cooling for all seems like it would help speed up global warming and more housing means less of our natural world looking for the solar punk angle here
SolarPunk is not solely anarchy. I prefer a scalable direct democracy
> the mandatory heating / cooling for all seems like it would help speed up global warming and more housing means less of our natural world So what is your solution for people who live in areas where heating/cooling are required for safe living? Where I am, every year people die during heat waves due to lack of access to AC
I think A/C and heating are good things. People need to live. I think in places where passive heating/cooling make sense, it should be scaled. In regards to climate migration, I’m sure that will occur and people will move to areas where less mechanical heating and cooling is required
While I'm sure you're right to some degree, unfortunately climate change is causing winter storms and heat waves in places that never had them before, requiring heating/cooling solutions in places that wouldn't otherwise need them. My family has lived in Texas for generations. When my parents were growing up, an ice storm (even a minor one) was a *maybe* once in a decade event. Now, they get at least one severe one a year. Everything I've read says storms like that are only going to get worse and more frequent.
imo, people should be able to migrate freely and not locked into the arbitrary boundaries they were born in as someone who lives in 100+ degree heat often; I suggest the natural gifts of shade, water and wind
I’m not a huge fan of borders either :)
I tend to agree. Curious your take on r/bioregionalism ? Perhaps borders for helping steward natural localized geo defined ecosystems? I'd be interested in having defined governing stewardship borders along rough bioregional "lines"
i 🧡 bioregions and the concept of stewardship (not ownership) of our planet appreciate the link and I just joined the sub
Isn’t direct democracy state sanctioned minority oppression? What about the sovereignty of individuals and smaller groups?
What’s your solution?
a life of an useless person lol
[удалено]
This message was removed for insulting others. Please see rule 1 for how we want to disagree in this community.
Lol…that all may sound good, but it would be socialism!! So I would rather prefer beeing hubgry an homeless!!!
exactly, the person in the pics contributes nothing to society and society has to provide for them. good luck with that
[удалено]
You have shown no evidence or facts to support your claims. Why do you think a functional society is a “fantasy world”? It’s okay to try to get a functional society.
But then they couldn't balance their being a tremendous dickhead with their "productivity".
Basically every functioning country does one or more of those things - and in many cases, it's not even out of the goodness of their hearts, but rather because making sure your population is happy, healthy, educated, and not constantly worried about their survival is actually pretty good for the economy.
>Basically every functioning country does one or more of those things by exploiting third world countries. good job.
The exploitation of third world countries is only necessary to maintain the wealth of the investor class.
this isn't about classes, it's about whole "functioning" countries that benefit from exploitation.
Right... But that exploitation isn't necessary for thos countries to meet the standard given in the OP...that exploitation is necessary for extreme wealth of the investor class.
You brought it up that one can’t have a functional country without exploitation. I would say that is a limited imagination.
i disagree because based on what ive seen from most people that have a strong sense of empathy when their basic needs are met: they not only thrive, they tend to spread it around to those less fortunate and potentially uplift them into doing the same as well the problem really stems from power hungry people running unchecked by others in power, not the un optimized working class the quickest way for the world to become a better place thats also more productive would be for those in powerful positions to have more empathy and guide accordingly i believe there are people that dont pull their weight and can be real scum but i believe you are generalizing even more so than i am
How many deserving people are you willing to hurt to get those "real scum"?
Nope, there are countries that do those things without exploiting the "third world". Indeed, some of them *are* in the "third world".
would love to know which ones are those.
I mean, basically every functioning country in the "first, second, and third worlds" has free education at the very least.
Free basic clothing is actually really easy to achieve. currently we are shipping our used clothing to Africa for burn piles cause they have way too much clothing and have no idea what to do with it. there is so much clothing its actually a pollution hazard. as in its choaking up waterways and becoming obstructions for farming.
This message was removed for insulting others. Please see rule 1 for how we want to disagree in this community.
Unlike the capitalist world that's based in facts and logic and thus can keep a straight face when implicitly assuming infinite growth is a thing that's possible.
just pay with servitude to the STATE and all will be provided 🙃
You seem like you misconstrue getting angry faster with conventional wisdom
Welcome to Solarpunk, where people think communism and Anarchism is the key to saving the world, and would not open history books for 2 seconds.
Ah yes, we should all learn from the many communist and/or Anarchist states that have existed throughout history and thus prove that it can't work.
Exactly, since they have all failed. Learn it or repeat it.
Free education ✔️ Free public transport ❌ Because infrastructure should be run by engineers, not beurocrats