Are zoomers any better than boomers?

[thaibeachlovers]

29 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

They were predicting that in the 1970's, 50 years later and no signs of it happening.

In actual fact food production is increasing year on year with no indication of any change.

Intensive farming methods are getting better, factory farming is still in it's infancy.

My prediction is there will always be plenty of food available to people with the ability to earn money.

Did you ever watch the movie Brazil? Their food was really yummy, wasn't it?

[BritManToo]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Did you ever watch the movie Brazil? Their food was really yummy, wasn't it?

It's a socialist impression of the future, it isn't real.

Most predictions for the future have been wildly wrong, and usually the predictions are made through ignorance or with an agenda.

 

I certainly have a wider choice of foods than my parents ever imagined.

From all over the world and with no seasonal restrictions and probably cheaper as well (as a proportion of my income).

Edited November 8, 2021 by BritManToo

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, BritManToo said:

It's a socialist impression of the future, it isn't real.

Most predictions for the future have been wildly wrong, and usually the predictions are made through ignorance or with an agenda.

Not always. Star Trek got some right. Jules Verne didn't do too badly either.

[The Hammer2021]

It's a facile question. Generationally there is no better or worse. Even the notion of boomer and zoomer is an Americentric idea that excludes the experience of the majority of the world.

[BritManToo]

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not always. Star Trek got some right. Jules Verne didn't do too badly either.

Tomorrows world was wrong on almost everything.

What happened to the Ice age they predicted, or my personal flying car, or an outpost on Mars/Moon?

They completely missed out personal computers and smart phones.

Edited November 8, 2021 by BritManToo

[thaibeachlovers]

37 minutes ago, Bert got kinky said:

The worst of it is that they have no shame. Do ya think Leo is going to stop flying on private jets because he was called out for being a hypocrite?

How much carbon did they produce for the recent talk fest in Glasgow?

Bah humbug, if I believed the outcome of overpollution was reversible I'd be angry. Just so long as they don't use up all the petrol as long as I want to drive my 3.5 litre 4x4 SUV.

[The Hammer2021]

On 11/7/2021 at 6:06 AM, Chad3000 said:

Better than what?

 

I think she's a duplicitious monster, fraudster, hypocrite and absolute establishment tool.

 

Cancel culture? No  it's cancer culture.

I dont think she's a duplicitious monster, fraudster,hypocrite etc. She's just stupid, obsessed, single minded, unbalanced and unbelievably arrogant and entitled. She needs help.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 11/7/2021 at 12:22 PM, atpeace said:

All generations have created this wonderful world we live.  No major wars (excluding internal conflicts) in 75 years, extreme poverty at all time lows and continuing to plummet, live expectancy now at nearly 75, and many have the freedom to explore distant shores in ways that would have been a dream for all but a few.  Sure the rich keep getting richer and our planet needs to some tender loving care but confident these issues will be resolved or mitigated by all of us.

 

My concern is the online religion of "Group Think".  Most the over 40 crowd and some of the young have enough world experience to see the danger of this but do not have any ideas how to calm this storm of hate that seems to arise from good intentions. In the end, I assume it will be societal shift that creates enough space for those engaging in spewing hatred in the name of "good" to see their errors.

I'd like to agree with you but IMO it's going to be more like Germany before 1937 than .................... oh dear, I can't think of a better option to compare with.

 

IMO we are at the same stage as Rome was in the days of bread and circuses, but our fall will take far less time.

 

There is a famous quote

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Sadly, I see no good men among our leaders. While they may not be evil themselves, they are not stopping the rise of greed. More and more wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer people can't end well, IMO.

Edited November 8, 2021 by thaibeachlovers

[nobodysfriend]

4 hours ago, malathione said:

Youth are idealistic. Give them a decade or two and they'll grow out of it. 

You mean they will become corrupted by the usual consumerism ?

Become obedient and remote controlled valuable citizens ?

I only hope that most of them realize that it is not a world anymore to put kids into .

Because having kids that need to be cared for is changing the priorities many had before .

Not a good thing to do anymore ...

[BritManToo]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

There is a famous quote

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

I prefer, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

Which is nearly the exact opposite to your quote.

Edited November 8, 2021 by BritManToo

[nobodysfriend]

2 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

Is there a speed limit on that road ?

Should have one .

Many who are drunk of their own ego drive too fast on that road .

[VocalNeal]

16 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

I prefer, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

Which is nearly the exact opposite to your quote.

I think the good men doing nothing saying predates paved roads?

[KarenBravo]

Just remember that 99% of all the species that have ever-been are now extinct. Extinction is the norm, not the exception.

 

Things are not going to change. This is because no one is willing to say what the real problem is. The problems of pollution, climate warming, depopulation of the oceans and the unbridled rape of the planet.

 

That problem is called over-population. In 1958 there were 2.7 billion people on the planet. Now there is over seven billion. This problem cannot be fixed as having children (lots of them if you want) is seen as an inalienable right.

The poor countries with the highest birth-rates will claim (correctly) that it was the first world countries that got us into this mess in the first place.

Want to heal the planet? Don't have children. Of course this will affect the economy which is now the be all, end all concern for most people.

Personally, I can't see Mankind lasting another thousand years.

[BritManToo]

10 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

That problem is called over-population. In 1958 there were 2.7 billion people on the planet. Now there is over seven billion. This problem cannot be fixed as having children (lots of them if you want) is seen as an inalienable right.

It's not possible to deal with overpopulation as the people that are overpopulating can't be discussed.

White folk are down from 45% of the world population to 14% since 1940 ..... we ain't the problem.

If you did nothing we'd probably be gone as a race in the next 50 years. 

 

As for mankind being gone in 1000 years.

If they aren't my descendents, why would I care?

Edited November 8, 2021 by BritManToo

[Bert got kinky]

11 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

Just remember that 99% of all the species that have ever-been are now extinct. Extinction is the norm, not the exception.

 

Things are not going to change. This is because no one is willing to say what the real problem is. The problems of pollution, climate warming, depopulation of the oceans and the unbridled rape of the planet.

 

That problem is called over-population. In 1958 there were 2.7 billion people on the planet. Now there is over seven billion. This problem cannot be fixed as having children (lots of them if you want) is seen as an inalienable right.

The poor countries with the highest birth-rates will claim (correctly) that it was the first world countries that got us into this mess in the first place.

Want to heal the planet? Don't have children. Of course this will affect the economy which is now the be all, end all concern for most people.

Personally, I can't see Mankind lasting another thousand years.

 

Personally, I can't see Mankind lasting another thousand years.

Really, are you open for a wager, winner takes all, just name your ante.

Easy money.....

 

[KarenBravo]

22 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

It's not possible to deal with overpopulation as the people that are overpopulating can't be discussed.

White folk are down from 45% of the world population to 14% since 1940 ..... we ain't the problem.

If you did nothing we'd probably be gone as a race in the next 50 years. 

 

As for mankind being gone in 1000 years.

If they aren't my descendents, why would I care?

Oh, but we are. Do Western companies not sell most of the goods and services in the developing countries. Is it not their seas that are being emptied? Where do you think all that chopped down hard-wood ends up?

[KarenBravo]

22 minutes ago, Bert got kinky said:

 

Personally, I can't see Mankind lasting another thousand years.

Really, are you open for a wager, winner takes all, just name your ante.

Easy money.....

 

No, not if you are Buddhist, or Hindu.

[zzaa09]

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not always. Star Trek got some right. Jules Verne didn't do too badly either.

H. G. Wells comes to mind....

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I prefer, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

Which is nearly the exact opposite to your quote.

Perhaps but the destination is the same for either.

[thaibeachlovers]

15 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

H. G. Wells comes to mind....

Ah, thanks for that. I meant H G Wells and not Verne.

[thaibeachlovers]

21 hours ago, KarenBravo said:

Oh, but we are. Do Western companies not sell most of the goods and services in the developing countries. Is it not their seas that are being emptied? Where do you think all that chopped down hard-wood ends up?

Exploitation of "their" countries is not the same as them overpopulating beyond the capacity of their own country to support them.

However, I'm against exploitation of anyone, but I fear I'm a voice crying into the wind on that. Greed reigns supreme and most of us lose, despite getting something for a few pennies less.

[thaibeachlovers]

21 hours ago, BritManToo said:

It's not possible to deal with overpopulation as the people that are overpopulating can't be discussed.

White folk are down from 45% of the world population to 14% since 1940 ..... we ain't the problem.

If you did nothing we'd probably be gone as a race in the next 50 years. 

 

As for mankind being gone in 1000 years.

If they aren't my descendents, why would I care?

They certainly ain't my descendants as I don't have children, something I'm happier about every time I see the international news.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, KarenBravo said:

Just remember that 99% of all the species that have ever-been are now extinct. Extinction is the norm, not the exception.

 

Things are not going to change. This is because no one is willing to say what the real problem is. The problems of pollution, climate warming, depopulation of the oceans and the unbridled rape of the planet.

 

That problem is called over-population. In 1958 there were 2.7 billion people on the planet. Now there is over seven billion. This problem cannot be fixed as having children (lots of them if you want) is seen as an inalienable right.

The poor countries with the highest birth-rates will claim (correctly) that it was the first world countries that got us into this mess in the first place.

Want to heal the planet? Don't have children. Of course this will affect the economy which is now the be all, end all concern for most people.

Personally, I can't see Mankind lasting another thousand years.

I can't see us lasting another 500 years if we keep polluting the planet and eating garbage. Seems we never learned that it's not a good idea to defecate in our own nest.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, nobodysfriend said:

You mean they will become corrupted by the usual consumerism ?

Become obedient and remote controlled valuable citizens ?

I only hope that most of them realize that it is not a world anymore to put kids into .

Because having kids that need to be cared for is changing the priorities many had before .

Not a good thing to do anymore ...

Good post.

Kids are easily controlled, as they willingly carry about with them the instrument of their obedience. Whatever it tells them is to be obeyed without question.

Seems to me that we now have a new variant of human, the sheeple.

Baaaaah.

 

[BritManToo]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Good post.

Kids are easily controlled, as they willingly carry about with them the instrument of their obedience. Whatever it tells them is to be obeyed without question.

Seems to me that we now have a new variant of human, the sheeple.

Baaaaah.

 

A lot of people seem to surrender their lives to their kids.

I never did, and mine seem to have turned out OK.

I didn't spend money on private schools, private healthcare or expensive universities.

I didn't devote a lot of my time, they seem happy to circulate around me, watch TV, play on the XBOX, play in the road with their friends.

 

Essentially the same upbringing I had in the 1960s and 1970s.

[elgenon]

Don't be self-hating Baby Boomers rock! It was a golden era. WE cared about peace, love and the environment and health. Now most young people put getting rich quickly and living large at the top of the list. IMHO

 

Unfortunately Greta and her ilk are a small %, Look at the Jenners and Kardashians to see what most youngins want. Greta travels by sailboat, Ms Jenner travels by private airplane.

 

Rockstars didn't commercialize themselves back in the day. Now many have that as a goal.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, elgenon said:

Don't be self-hating Baby Boomers rock! It was a golden era. WE cared about peace, love and the environment and health.

LOL. I guess you must have missed it for chemical reasons. Nothing golden about Vietnam war. At least the music was great back then, unlike the <deleted> now.

[Jingthing]

Indeed.

Flashback time.

It sounded like this but didn't look like this.

 

 

[swissie]

On 11/8/2021 at 1:04 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Given the temperature in Antarctica is well below 0 C, how is a rise of 1.5 C going to melt it all. The highest temperature at McMurdo when I was there was -4 C, so if the temperature rose 1.5 C that would still leave it below zero and that was just one day. Most days were well below that.

 

I have a magazine ( if I remember correctly from Time corp. ) about climate change from 20 years ago. It described methane storms, and basically if that happens the fat lady is singing for the human race. However that required a rise 6 C if I remember correctly. Certainly way more than 2 C.

Sorry for late reply (I was busy polishing my halo). For a non native english speaker, not easy to explain, but I will try my best.

Antarctica: The antarctic current is getting warmer. Ice/Snow, due to it's own weight has a tendency to "flatten", pushing toward the shores. There, the "tongues" of this mass is subject to "underspins" of warmer water. Eventually tose "tongues" break off the mainland ice body and turn into huge icebergs They are relatively flat but can cover an area of 10 square Kilometers. Once in the water: They melt.

Thawing of the perma-frost: The amout of methane released into the air has been monitored for a long time. Year by year, more methane is released into the air.

To make a long story short: All our efforts to stop earth warming are inadequate and come too late. Sea levels are rising already. The inhabitands of those flat islands in the pacific will gladly confirm. They are telling this to the world at the currently taking place "Glasgow Climate Conference".  

 

[zzaa09]

18 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. I guess you must have missed it for chemical reasons. Nothing golden about Vietnam war. At least the music was great back then, unlike the <deleted> now.

Indeed. Spoken like a true boomer -