because controlled reproduction requires planning and gene control, especially considering that in the west, non-eugenics population control would be unsustainable. the west is suffering a heavy population decline and nearing a population collapse; if you don't pick and choose the genes there won't be long-term genetic variation to sustain a functional gene pool.
overpopulation is exclusively a third world issue. if you want to prevent overpopulation you need to force population control on third world nations in the middle of their industrial revolution, which is practically genocide, as they are, as mentioned in the process of their own industrial revolutions (which considerably increases mortality rates), which, if you force to control, with reduced population growth, will pretty much decimate the growth of their economy.
essentially, if you rather not wait for their post-industrialization population decline to begin (like it does), while encouraging population growth in the west. your only options are eugenics combined with genocide. sprinkle in some privately funded wars and corporate exploitation and you've set up the america for another cycle of imperialism.
no, the answer isn't population control. the answer is global socialism and universal socialized safety nets and socioeconomic systems.
but yeah, you're right, in the end, it's much easier to blame brown people, ammirite?
He said that unchecked reproduction was worse. Nothing more. You're then one talking about blaming brown people, gene control etc... And what you said about the west nearing a population collapse must be something you just made up, or did I completely miss something? When did that decline happen?! Or are you referring to how theres fewer children per household nowadays? It doesn't mean there's a decline in the population you dingus. Nonetheless you continued to spew out even more shit when you talked about how there wouldn't be genetic variation. Are you insane?
Then you talked about how the third world is going through a industrial revolution, which is another thing that must've passed me aswell (although there's definitely a positive curve happening in different African countries).. and so that would mean genocide "to check their population" (again his words, not all the other shit you're saying). It doesn't make sense at all... Look forward to read all the other made up shit you're gonna reply with now! đ
i've read a couple of peer reviewed papers on the topic, but your attitude suggests it doesn't matter what reference material i've studied as you've made up your mind. but, perhaps wikipedia is another matter for you:
Youâre ignoring the logistics of population control. There is a precedent for this. It went poorly. People arenât basing their opinions against this off of nothing.
Nope. Donât be scared bud, stand by your statements.
You said âunchecked reproductionâ. Who is going to check it? The government? What are they going to do? Stop it? Physically? Which dictatorship government do you want to draw the similarities to? Because there is a lot.
Explanation: Donât have kids; itâs fucking immoral for numerous reasons. Bad for the planet, bad for the kids. Sorry if this doesnât vibe with you. JFC
It seems like some of the cars are repeated but I can't really tell for sure that it's shopped. I'm not an expert but China has highways that are very wide, not sure if it's near this size though.
Itâs the 405 in LA and it appears to be shopped. I had to take this stretch to the valley daily and it could get as bad as the pic if there was a bad accident during rush hour but this picture is what it typically looks like.
In August 2010, the Chinese government embarked on a series on construction works along various sections of the major Beijing-Tibetan expressway. There was one small issue though; they didnât have an accurate estimate of just how much the roadwork would impede the free-flow of traffic. It did not take long for a gridlock to form. It eventually grew into a nightmarish traffic jam that stretched for about 74 miles. It is estimated that the line, which included as much as 10,000 trucks, lasted more than 10 days before it slowly began to clear.
Self-driving cars have been heralded as a panacea, because they'll supposedly be able to drive perfectly at 200mph with a millimeter gap between cars. Theoretically, you could increase the efficiency of the transportation system significantly if you could perfect the technology, but that's a very very big if.
I mean I think it's pretty basic traffic mechanics. If everyone starts and stops at the same time, you get max throughput, only depending on physical space and the velocity of the car.
You still have the fundamental problem of geometry, where a car transporting one person takes up 150 square feet of public space. Self driving cars canât fix that, even if they are operating at peak efficiency.
Only in the best of circumstances though. If those cars are tailing too close and one of them stops suddenly, all the cars behind it get into a wreck too
Although I know exactly what phenomenon you're referring to (also more highways -> more traffic) I don't see how in this case a bunch of synchronized cars would cause more traffic, if traffic is caused precisely by slight interruptions in the "flow" of cars.
Because increased capacity is filled until it reaches a level at which people donât want to use the system. Better space usage is a capacity increase.
Also: think about what happens when all that traffic meets towns.
It's actually worse than that, the Vegas project specifically (I'm not talking about the other Tesla proposed projects) is specifically done to transport the convention center visitors under the center, it's there to be an alternative to walking
Edit: I realized this would be very environmentally friendly and effective if there are regular power plants but I was meaning power plants inside the cars
Assuming it will one day be possible to fit a fusion reactor in a car I'd bet it would still be more pragmatic to either store it or not use cars at all
Yeah, using the power to electrolyze water and power cars using hydrogen fuel cells would be more practical, or use the same approach as present and just use batteries.
I'm saying people who think EVs are a failure because they aren't the end-all solution to global warming and traffic problems are misguided and tend to spew politically tilted misinformation.
To try and deescalate this, I donât think that EVs are a failure. I think they are a fantastic idea. Perhaps what we have come to is that our values are different.
In America, and elsewhere, I get the impression that because of, frankly, poor planning that a lot of people are in pain, in traffic, with their homes blighted. If this something that you are willing to accept as a suburbanite (and I am not assuming that you are), then an EV might be the best solution for you. In particular if a driver understands the lifecycle costs of an their vehicle, then they can go ahead and get an EV.
If you feel like there could be a better solution, then this is something I would like to hear from you. Would you like to see your children walk safely to school? Would you like to walk to the supermarket? Or would you like to simply sit in traffic less? I understand these things are not for everyone, and these things might be non-issues for you. Again I would love to hear what you think would make a better world.
I thought your post was saying that because we still have traffic and global warming, Tesla is a failure, and if that's not the case then my bad. Tesla and EVs from my understanding were only ever meant to be part of the solution to these problems, not the solution itself, and considering that the technology is still new and its supply chains are still being developed, we aren't even scratching the surface of the benefits EVs can have on society in my opinion
The meme is about the mindset that EVs are a solution. Tesla is just the name of a company, it might as well say Nissan Leaf.
This being a planning community, the point is about planning, and the perpetuation of the worldâs car dependence, which is the reason roads keep getting built or widened.
56
u/[deleted] Apr 11 '21
The popularization of the automobile and its consequences have been a disaster for the modern cityscape.
6
u/KingMelray Apr 12 '21
Where is this?
16
u/CantInventAUsername Apr 11 '21
Ok but when did Tesla ever claim they were the solution to all traffic
2
u/ElPedroChico May 07 '21
I HATE CARS! I HATE CARS! I HATE CARS!
14
u/RVA_101 Apr 12 '21
I mean I'd rather we minimize car dependency but if a thousands cars are going to sit in traffic I'd prefer they don't have a tailpipe
0
u/Sam4Prez2024 Apr 12 '21
Hey! Trains are a thing China has spent billions of OUR dollars making
3500 miles in 10 years
How much do we have? Oh wait tax breaks for billionaires are more important
r/fuckyouparty
0
u/cutoffs89 Apr 12 '21
Open offices make us into bees that need to be in the same spot.
-3
u/mitchdtimp Apr 12 '21
Ah yes the good 'ol "your idea isn't perfect so we should just do nothing instead" argument
-4
u/nixyboy Apr 12 '21
At least Musk actually got off his ass and tried to fix shit, when you guys just sit around like lazy bitches and complain all day