Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Consensuseur t1_j7psus8 wrote

You mean how many of us could the oligarchy kill off before it became an inconvenience to them?

29

Wipperwill1 t1_j7q6caw wrote

Any by kill off you mean starve, de-house and let die of curable diseases?

15

TJT1970 t1_j7ra3yh wrote

Or vaccinate

−2

Wipperwill1 t1_j7rv6iv wrote

Look at all those millions of people dropping dead to vaccinations.

Oh wait! There aren't any. I know 30-40 people personally that got the vaccine that are just fine. The only people I know that died, did it before the vaccine was available.

1

TJT1970 t1_j7u12bx wrote

Oh so they aren't any side effects or fatalities associated with the vaccine? Hmmm ok.

1

rogert2 t1_j7r3jq5 wrote

Relevant: The wealthy are plotting to leave us behind

Accurate summary by a redditor:

> people who were asked by billionaires to go to a meeting and advise them on what to do to keep staff loyal in their bunkers when money becomes worthless

Supporting quotes from the source:

> I got invited to a super-deluxe private resort to deliver a keynote speech... it was by far the largest fee I had ever been offered for a talk > > I just sat there at a plain round table as my audience was brought to me: five super-wealthy guys... from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world > > Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked, “How do I maintain authority over my security force after the event?” > > This single question occupied us for the rest of the hour. They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs. But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless? What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader? > > Taking their cue from Elon Musk..., Peter Thiel..., or Sam Altman and Ray Kurzweil..., they were preparing for... insulating themselves from a very real and present danger of climate change, rising sea levels, mass migrations, global pandemics, nativist panic, and resource depletion. For them, the future of technology is really about just one thing: escape.

8

Surur t1_j7rimel wrote

> “How do I maintain authority over my security force after the event?”

The answer - AI

6

rogert2 t1_j7ssv1l wrote

You're going to have to explain that a little more.

It seems that if AI is capable of keeping human soldiers in line, it's probably also capable of simply replacing humans soldiers with armed version of the Boston Dynamics robots.

2

Surur t1_j7tfrg3 wrote

Replacement is obviously the most secure.

1

mhornberger t1_j7rvw8m wrote

I suspect sub-replacement and in some cases still-declining fertility rates are a more likely issue. Though I think it'll be a long time before that poses any threat of societal collapse. Even assuming we don't incrementally get closer to a post-scarcity economy.

https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate#what-explains-the-change-in-the-number-of-children-women-have

2

Consensuseur t1_j7t17bp wrote

I think this is right. I wish our economy was scored more on improvements in efficiency and less on limitless growth. Lower growth and consumption rates are at odds with our indexes of what we call economic health. How to untangle these things?

1

mhornberger t1_j7t1jvc wrote

I don't know what "limitless growth" means, honestly. Growth in what? You can have economic growth with a plateaued or even declining population. We were never going to have infinite people, infinite energy use, infinite land use, infinite food consumption, whatever.

I don't think people are going to embrace austerity voluntarily. Emissions are already declining in many rich countries, anyway. India, China etc remaining poor was never going to be our plan. Nor are Americans or Europeans going to want to live like a poor person in India in 1980. People like wealth. Comfort, convenience, status goods, travel, a varied diet, etc.

2

Consensuseur t1_j7t2a6b wrote

Well, hopefully our population can plateau and our consumption can be achieved with less consequence sooner rather than later.

1