Intergenerational equity — the idea that present generations owe debts both to the past and to the future — has become one of the most consequential concepts in international policy.
No problem! You would have a hard time convincing me that you were NOT busy! I am working through the various documents you are referring to and it is a shocking read, while it is so incredibly interesting to see how it all begins with ideas and how the ideas slowly develops into actions long after. It has led me into a parallel search for the development of cybernetic and systems theory. What hit me today is that cybernetics is about control via feedback, but this development don't get feedback from the system (i.e. the real human society) so that it overshoots and will fail catastrophically in the end.
Interesting how this deeply -felt consideration for the rights of the unborn future generations does not at all affect the widespread, incentivized practice in the present moment of effectively murdering what would otherwise have been many mothers' first-borns through various means. It's just inconsistent. I don't even want to enter into the issue of whether the founder of the "Imperative of Responsibility" and the founding mother of Planned Parenthood have anything relevant in common. Maybe they are all various manifestations of the same concept, repairing the world. There too the kabbalistic cognitive layer, named like the Chabad (Lubavitch) sect, has to be defined by someone. And I seem to observe a pattern in who gets to do the defining. Could you also look into how potentially the promotion and institutionalization and potential later enforcement of the so-called Noahide Laws might fit into the picture? There are some accounts on Substack that warn about these Laws being put (by creeping lawfare) at the basis of the renewed world order in the making. My understanding is that all the warning about Sharia law is a distraction as this would be no less, rather more intolerant of Christians. If I look at certain things that have taken place in the last ten years alone, I must say I don't find it unimaginable that certain kinds of characters could be interested in pursuing such goals.
Proposition: Just an experiment. Redistribute accumulated wealth by Breaking-up all Oligopolies and accumulated wealth of: all billionaires, starting with full audits and account freeze under TRO of the current generation of Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Duponts, Morgans, Bushes, etc...and their trusts. Demand names of majority shareholders of Blackrock Vanguard StateStreet et al and their chief executives, all other Crown members. TRO on all secret societies and largest NGOs.... as a start.
as i keep saying, simply 'taking down the billionaires' will do absolutely nothing in the long run, in fact, the few would probably fully support the idea because it's not about money, it's about control, and that control runs through the mechanism i outline above.
The billionaires and the corporations they control (the tools of their destructive force against the population), are not the source of the nightmare for me either.
The Global Financial Elite (GFE) families who control the corporations, the banks, and through them, the governments... that shadow set of less than 500 families are for me the ones who need to be outed once and for all, along with the strategies they have promoted through the methods described here.
I would like to see the thought forms of 8 billion (a number now shrinking) souls on Earth, directed at those who are ultimately responsible for our on-going global democide - courtesy of the contagious C19 injection / contamination.
Knowing exactly who originally designed / created the deadly games we are forced to play from birth, would end the divide and conquer strategy that has worked so well for millennia. We are way overdue for a 'man behind the curtain' moment.
And then I want real disclosure, and the release of the suppressed / withheld technology that could heal this planet and the people dying here.
Literally stands to reason why neoliberals are so in-favour of 'anti-trust' legislation. All it does is upsets the markets, and through insider trading, is a political means for the business-politician class to get their hands on early investments first.
So Emma Rothschild is building a punishment/reparations ledger that is essentially a new type of debt that you have to pay that you are not responsible for.
A bit like a slave system I guess, where the slaves are inherently bad and the Rothschilds are good. Now THAT is an inversion!
Once you delve into the pseudo-science 'climate economics', you understand that this 'future generations'-thing is the label that puts a price on CO2: paying for avoiding 'damage' that is projected by computer models to be visible in 2100, created by an invisible gas that is the byproduct of THE main economic necessity, energy use.
Low 'pure rate of time preference' (the ethical part of discount rate) means: pay now for all projected damage. The 'shadow price' of CO2 was rebranded 'social cost of carbon' after the Agenda 21 was launched with 'inter-generational equity' as the legal principle underpinning the Brundtland-report, written by a commission funded by the Dutch government (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, aka Prince 'Bilderberg' Bernhard) from 1984 onwards
So under the UN Agenda 21 regime we in the West (annex 1 countries), expecially now in the EU and the UK with the Dutch leading the way (Wopke Hoekstra, Frans Timmermans etc), are expected to pay a debt to history ( Piketty's inequality) to 'developing' nations (who defines what that is, and to what end are the 'developing'), AND the largest part of a 'debt to the future' created by global circulation models.
To who should we pay this damage? Those who profit in the now, because the unborn do not have a bank account yet, but global banking does, and governments indebted to global banking.
Net Zero means 'dead', only after death you stop emitting CO2. The system is in architecture a demonic feat, sucking the energy of the living masses cloaked in false morality
I have often recommended ESC articles for examples of systemic regulatory capture that underlies a circus of narrative 'justifications' for dictates arising from system predicates.
For the most part we are trained to think and see in personified or mythic identifications or meanings - that like mythological archetypes - operate as conflict and struggle relative to possession and control as shifting motifs of continuity. "The King is dead - Long live the King!" or 'Whoever you vote for, the Government gets in'.
Organising structures arise from and embody the functions of a body politic - or common weal. But the quirk of the human mind is the development of models of predictive control as an extension of reach that in a sense creates an adjustment layer of surrogate self-interest.
The act of looking AT thought, (at the framing ideas that are assumed structural representations of a closed system— regardless its 'fragmenting' to many systems), cannot be achieved by using the mind or lens of such a thought-system. But can only be received fresh as an 'act of creation' which properly pertains to the extension of love, not the manipulation of outcomes external to a sense of segregative or separate control.
The function, nature and law of Mind is Extension. Thought extends or projects qualities of Existence to a tangibility and visibility of beholding or resonant recognition. The projection of thought can not and never does leave the mind of the thinker - but such a conceit can operate in concept given priority and continuity of attention and desire though the artifice of setting and maintaining a partiality - which underlies the basis for reframing vigilance to serve shifting temporal dictates in support of the self-image or thought system through which a vicarious experience of limitation framed in struggle is set by structures that can be recognised as shock or fear of disconnection, pain of loss that drives a survival dictate of conflictive and contradictory themes of will -or desire and fulfilment.
The recognition of an obsessive fixation does not come to, nor hold meaning for the will to persist in its perceived premises of gain or power against loss. On the contrary, it will be perceived as threat and defences raised to exclude and deny it from accessing awareness - or maintaining any continuity in awareness. In this sense the falsely framed 'solutions' for unrecognised inner conflict represent a will to unconsciousness or to limited death and sacrifice relative to the persistence of a face and function of possession and control.
This is not what Life Is - but is what we have 'made' of life by what we do regardless what we say or present to self and others as our 'pay to play' or 'skin in the game'.
Indigenous power Is in thought as living extension or recognition, worth and freedom. Surrogate power can be extended to ideas, events and persons by agreements that can be forgotten, broken or corrupted. Original Meaning can be overmasked by habitual assumptions that drift so far from a grounded reality as to render life unrecognisable to a learned or trained sense of possessive fixation.
The monkey trap uses a fixed gourd with a hole large enough to reach the fruit, but too small to retrieve the hand and the fruit.
Yielding false fruit, or fruits set false by their framing context, will not occur to the mind that persists in grasping at the object of their desire - which in our case is set externally as symbol of qualities that cannot be set in quantified structures. No matter how intensely the mind doubles down in sacrifice to the premise of future gains, justifying -or dictating presence sacrifice to a presentation that runs hollow, self-depleting and self-denying by definition.
Stories can be used to prompt awareness of patterns of conflicted futility.
The Prodigal Son sketches a mis-taken inheritance from a lack-driven 'solution' in which an wish to self-create became a masking source of guilt that framed a living 'Father' in death and denial as the act and experience of a self-conscious differentiation from all that lives and moves and breathes us alive - which we thus perceive in pieces that must - but cannot -be put together again.
The Problem frames what can be thought, accepted, perceived, and acted from or reacted to.
As such the Problem became to object of desire to a wish to possess and control...life framed in death, or if you prefer - a prison planet - and more directly - 'my body is a cage'.
CovidOp allowed many to see that guilting fear can run as be-lived fact in a mass mindshare under organised crime - masking as authority by means of setting definitional systemic structures for framing or repackaging perceived and projected 'risk' to sacrifice.
Who pays?
The future pays, when a true account is deferred or denied. Hence the war on both children and the womb of receptivity. Only a false sense of possession fears, denies and thus must attack questioning of its claim - hence piling up toxic debt-conflicts in a systemic structure of death by numbers. Quantified weighting runs qualitatively blind regardless the masking presentation of 'care and concern'.
Mutating 'solutions' mask and protect the Problem.
What Is the Problem?
"It's Life Jim -but not as we know it".
I invite considering that thinking to know runs an active ignorance.
To be still and know opens to an unfolding of fulfiment - when ye thinketh not.
Living thought cannot be conceptually framed, but concepts can be released from a circular self-reinforcing loop of futility, in willingness to 'be as a servant in my Father's house'.
Another great essay along with the one on Stranded Assets - both should be required reading for the planet.
Central Bank Digital Currency as a mechanism for control and undermining national and individual sovereignty, often hidden behind climate "justice" - all in the name of defending democracy.
Explains why the established "powers that be" are so allied against Donald Trump.
Incredibly well-researched article, which in turn attests to what high-quality discourse production can deliver. I remember leaving a comment on previous article where you discussed the undemocratic responses to climate change. I won't restate the arguments I made there, but what I'd like to know is this:
How can we ameliorate the conditions caused by endemic problems, culminating in the, 'tragedy of the commons', that are perpetuated by undemocratic private organisations which extract/process resources available for anyone in the commons to exploit in a democratic system where actors can be held accountable, and the body politic can form consensus?
To clarify, I don't mean to straw-man you by suggesting you are opposed to the addressing the problem itself. Rather, if democracy is in fact too short-termist, and incapable of resolving these problems of hyper objects, even I find it hard to avoid operating within Jonas' rationale than to follow a deontic rule of "two wrongs don't make a right".
I understand completely here that this kind of unaccountability leads to unrestrained power, and thus, unrestrained corruptibility. It also presumes these technocrats are infallible—this, of course, isn't true, either.
My own systems theory is modeled in attempt to reconcile this democratic backsliding while still delivering effective resolutions to the problems found through sufficientarian 'reason acceptabilities' (finding issues from science, personal experience, social trends, historiography, etc.). Perhaps you have your own vision to resolve this, but I'd deeply appreciate knowing your thoughts regardless.
Edmund Burke had the right idea: acknowledging that properly educated, accomplished individuals with skin in the game (property), and demonstrated interest in the wellness of their fellow citizens and their country should play a central role in governing over and guiding others...what was described as a natural aristocracy.
Instead, in the U.S., there are virtually no qualitative standards candidates must meet to run for office, so we end up being ruled by clueless narcissists who wouldn't recognize a basic economics textbook if it landed on their heads. The majority of voters are no better aware of what's at stake in electing to be governed by fellow morons. Some codified qualifications to run for public office might help, along with an exam on basic civics that one must pass in order to be eligible to vote. Absent that, it was a nice republic. Too bad it was overtaken by a mobocracy.
The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.
But isn't the Burkean notion of noblesse oblige just another way tyranny prevails through elitist institutions? The critique of technocracy that esc discusses here seems not so detached from the paternalistic conservative philosophy Burke advocates for a responsible hierarchy. The intergovernmental organisation (IGO) experts are in their positions because of the doctorates and other qualifications they received and form a kind of aristocracy in their own right, while the development of global governance draws into the liberal pedagogy of the cosmopolitan citizen.
Proximity to an issue will always be problematic for those at the periphery of society. National governments have been no more capable at resolving this the larger they have become than IGOs are, so it makes sense to me why people are even more disenfranchised when policy is passed through even larger bodies.
I think the best way to ameliorate this is through cultivating a public intelligentsia which raises the standards of competence, which should trickle its way to us having better-elected politicians wholesale. I also think devolution can be avoided through local and regional autonomy that offers legislative flexibility under the same Covenant. Local representative democracy is a must, and we can reduce the deviance from proportionality of the Statewide democratic polity by using mixed-member proportional voting system.
"It's what our system produces: garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you are gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders." — George Carlin
I walked out of economics once I learned that the concept of Externalities is fundamental to the operation. Foist the harm onto those and that which has no representation and boom. Instant profit.
Deeply shocking to get to know about all this. Thanks again for a brilliant article.
oh reminds me, apologies for not getting back to you, was busy
No problem! You would have a hard time convincing me that you were NOT busy! I am working through the various documents you are referring to and it is a shocking read, while it is so incredibly interesting to see how it all begins with ideas and how the ideas slowly develops into actions long after. It has led me into a parallel search for the development of cybernetic and systems theory. What hit me today is that cybernetics is about control via feedback, but this development don't get feedback from the system (i.e. the real human society) so that it overshoots and will fail catastrophically in the end.
OMG, I can’t keep up with your work, absolutely outstanding!
Interesting how this deeply -felt consideration for the rights of the unborn future generations does not at all affect the widespread, incentivized practice in the present moment of effectively murdering what would otherwise have been many mothers' first-borns through various means. It's just inconsistent. I don't even want to enter into the issue of whether the founder of the "Imperative of Responsibility" and the founding mother of Planned Parenthood have anything relevant in common. Maybe they are all various manifestations of the same concept, repairing the world. There too the kabbalistic cognitive layer, named like the Chabad (Lubavitch) sect, has to be defined by someone. And I seem to observe a pattern in who gets to do the defining. Could you also look into how potentially the promotion and institutionalization and potential later enforcement of the so-called Noahide Laws might fit into the picture? There are some accounts on Substack that warn about these Laws being put (by creeping lawfare) at the basis of the renewed world order in the making. My understanding is that all the warning about Sharia law is a distraction as this would be no less, rather more intolerant of Christians. If I look at certain things that have taken place in the last ten years alone, I must say I don't find it unimaginable that certain kinds of characters could be interested in pursuing such goals.
Re: Intergenerational equity
Proposition: Just an experiment. Redistribute accumulated wealth by Breaking-up all Oligopolies and accumulated wealth of: all billionaires, starting with full audits and account freeze under TRO of the current generation of Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Duponts, Morgans, Bushes, etc...and their trusts. Demand names of majority shareholders of Blackrock Vanguard StateStreet et al and their chief executives, all other Crown members. TRO on all secret societies and largest NGOs.... as a start.
as i keep saying, simply 'taking down the billionaires' will do absolutely nothing in the long run, in fact, the few would probably fully support the idea because it's not about money, it's about control, and that control runs through the mechanism i outline above.
The billionaires and the corporations they control (the tools of their destructive force against the population), are not the source of the nightmare for me either.
The Global Financial Elite (GFE) families who control the corporations, the banks, and through them, the governments... that shadow set of less than 500 families are for me the ones who need to be outed once and for all, along with the strategies they have promoted through the methods described here.
I would like to see the thought forms of 8 billion (a number now shrinking) souls on Earth, directed at those who are ultimately responsible for our on-going global democide - courtesy of the contagious C19 injection / contamination.
Knowing exactly who originally designed / created the deadly games we are forced to play from birth, would end the divide and conquer strategy that has worked so well for millennia. We are way overdue for a 'man behind the curtain' moment.
And then I want real disclosure, and the release of the suppressed / withheld technology that could heal this planet and the people dying here.
Literally stands to reason why neoliberals are so in-favour of 'anti-trust' legislation. All it does is upsets the markets, and through insider trading, is a political means for the business-politician class to get their hands on early investments first.
So Emma Rothschild is building a punishment/reparations ledger that is essentially a new type of debt that you have to pay that you are not responsible for.
A bit like a slave system I guess, where the slaves are inherently bad and the Rothschilds are good. Now THAT is an inversion!
By the time these self-proclaimed experts have finished stripping humanity's assets, what remains will not be worth owning and controlling.
Once you delve into the pseudo-science 'climate economics', you understand that this 'future generations'-thing is the label that puts a price on CO2: paying for avoiding 'damage' that is projected by computer models to be visible in 2100, created by an invisible gas that is the byproduct of THE main economic necessity, energy use.
Low 'pure rate of time preference' (the ethical part of discount rate) means: pay now for all projected damage. The 'shadow price' of CO2 was rebranded 'social cost of carbon' after the Agenda 21 was launched with 'inter-generational equity' as the legal principle underpinning the Brundtland-report, written by a commission funded by the Dutch government (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, aka Prince 'Bilderberg' Bernhard) from 1984 onwards
So under the UN Agenda 21 regime we in the West (annex 1 countries), expecially now in the EU and the UK with the Dutch leading the way (Wopke Hoekstra, Frans Timmermans etc), are expected to pay a debt to history ( Piketty's inequality) to 'developing' nations (who defines what that is, and to what end are the 'developing'), AND the largest part of a 'debt to the future' created by global circulation models.
To who should we pay this damage? Those who profit in the now, because the unborn do not have a bank account yet, but global banking does, and governments indebted to global banking.
Net Zero means 'dead', only after death you stop emitting CO2. The system is in architecture a demonic feat, sucking the energy of the living masses cloaked in false morality
I have often recommended ESC articles for examples of systemic regulatory capture that underlies a circus of narrative 'justifications' for dictates arising from system predicates.
For the most part we are trained to think and see in personified or mythic identifications or meanings - that like mythological archetypes - operate as conflict and struggle relative to possession and control as shifting motifs of continuity. "The King is dead - Long live the King!" or 'Whoever you vote for, the Government gets in'.
Organising structures arise from and embody the functions of a body politic - or common weal. But the quirk of the human mind is the development of models of predictive control as an extension of reach that in a sense creates an adjustment layer of surrogate self-interest.
The act of looking AT thought, (at the framing ideas that are assumed structural representations of a closed system— regardless its 'fragmenting' to many systems), cannot be achieved by using the mind or lens of such a thought-system. But can only be received fresh as an 'act of creation' which properly pertains to the extension of love, not the manipulation of outcomes external to a sense of segregative or separate control.
The function, nature and law of Mind is Extension. Thought extends or projects qualities of Existence to a tangibility and visibility of beholding or resonant recognition. The projection of thought can not and never does leave the mind of the thinker - but such a conceit can operate in concept given priority and continuity of attention and desire though the artifice of setting and maintaining a partiality - which underlies the basis for reframing vigilance to serve shifting temporal dictates in support of the self-image or thought system through which a vicarious experience of limitation framed in struggle is set by structures that can be recognised as shock or fear of disconnection, pain of loss that drives a survival dictate of conflictive and contradictory themes of will -or desire and fulfilment.
The recognition of an obsessive fixation does not come to, nor hold meaning for the will to persist in its perceived premises of gain or power against loss. On the contrary, it will be perceived as threat and defences raised to exclude and deny it from accessing awareness - or maintaining any continuity in awareness. In this sense the falsely framed 'solutions' for unrecognised inner conflict represent a will to unconsciousness or to limited death and sacrifice relative to the persistence of a face and function of possession and control.
This is not what Life Is - but is what we have 'made' of life by what we do regardless what we say or present to self and others as our 'pay to play' or 'skin in the game'.
Indigenous power Is in thought as living extension or recognition, worth and freedom. Surrogate power can be extended to ideas, events and persons by agreements that can be forgotten, broken or corrupted. Original Meaning can be overmasked by habitual assumptions that drift so far from a grounded reality as to render life unrecognisable to a learned or trained sense of possessive fixation.
The monkey trap uses a fixed gourd with a hole large enough to reach the fruit, but too small to retrieve the hand and the fruit.
Yielding false fruit, or fruits set false by their framing context, will not occur to the mind that persists in grasping at the object of their desire - which in our case is set externally as symbol of qualities that cannot be set in quantified structures. No matter how intensely the mind doubles down in sacrifice to the premise of future gains, justifying -or dictating presence sacrifice to a presentation that runs hollow, self-depleting and self-denying by definition.
Stories can be used to prompt awareness of patterns of conflicted futility.
The Prodigal Son sketches a mis-taken inheritance from a lack-driven 'solution' in which an wish to self-create became a masking source of guilt that framed a living 'Father' in death and denial as the act and experience of a self-conscious differentiation from all that lives and moves and breathes us alive - which we thus perceive in pieces that must - but cannot -be put together again.
The Problem frames what can be thought, accepted, perceived, and acted from or reacted to.
As such the Problem became to object of desire to a wish to possess and control...life framed in death, or if you prefer - a prison planet - and more directly - 'my body is a cage'.
CovidOp allowed many to see that guilting fear can run as be-lived fact in a mass mindshare under organised crime - masking as authority by means of setting definitional systemic structures for framing or repackaging perceived and projected 'risk' to sacrifice.
Who pays?
The future pays, when a true account is deferred or denied. Hence the war on both children and the womb of receptivity. Only a false sense of possession fears, denies and thus must attack questioning of its claim - hence piling up toxic debt-conflicts in a systemic structure of death by numbers. Quantified weighting runs qualitatively blind regardless the masking presentation of 'care and concern'.
Mutating 'solutions' mask and protect the Problem.
What Is the Problem?
"It's Life Jim -but not as we know it".
I invite considering that thinking to know runs an active ignorance.
To be still and know opens to an unfolding of fulfiment - when ye thinketh not.
Living thought cannot be conceptually framed, but concepts can be released from a circular self-reinforcing loop of futility, in willingness to 'be as a servant in my Father's house'.
How to be born a debt slave and live your whole life that way...
;-(
Another great essay along with the one on Stranded Assets - both should be required reading for the planet.
Central Bank Digital Currency as a mechanism for control and undermining national and individual sovereignty, often hidden behind climate "justice" - all in the name of defending democracy.
Explains why the established "powers that be" are so allied against Donald Trump.
Incredibly well-researched article, which in turn attests to what high-quality discourse production can deliver. I remember leaving a comment on previous article where you discussed the undemocratic responses to climate change. I won't restate the arguments I made there, but what I'd like to know is this:
How can we ameliorate the conditions caused by endemic problems, culminating in the, 'tragedy of the commons', that are perpetuated by undemocratic private organisations which extract/process resources available for anyone in the commons to exploit in a democratic system where actors can be held accountable, and the body politic can form consensus?
To clarify, I don't mean to straw-man you by suggesting you are opposed to the addressing the problem itself. Rather, if democracy is in fact too short-termist, and incapable of resolving these problems of hyper objects, even I find it hard to avoid operating within Jonas' rationale than to follow a deontic rule of "two wrongs don't make a right".
I understand completely here that this kind of unaccountability leads to unrestrained power, and thus, unrestrained corruptibility. It also presumes these technocrats are infallible—this, of course, isn't true, either.
My own systems theory is modeled in attempt to reconcile this democratic backsliding while still delivering effective resolutions to the problems found through sufficientarian 'reason acceptabilities' (finding issues from science, personal experience, social trends, historiography, etc.). Perhaps you have your own vision to resolve this, but I'd deeply appreciate knowing your thoughts regardless.
Thanks in-advance.
Edmund Burke had the right idea: acknowledging that properly educated, accomplished individuals with skin in the game (property), and demonstrated interest in the wellness of their fellow citizens and their country should play a central role in governing over and guiding others...what was described as a natural aristocracy.
https://x.com/i/grok/share/ec3fbf50d7e94436a1dda928d70e04bc
Instead, in the U.S., there are virtually no qualitative standards candidates must meet to run for office, so we end up being ruled by clueless narcissists who wouldn't recognize a basic economics textbook if it landed on their heads. The majority of voters are no better aware of what's at stake in electing to be governed by fellow morons. Some codified qualifications to run for public office might help, along with an exam on basic civics that one must pass in order to be eligible to vote. Absent that, it was a nice republic. Too bad it was overtaken by a mobocracy.
The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.
~ Churchill (maybe)
But isn't the Burkean notion of noblesse oblige just another way tyranny prevails through elitist institutions? The critique of technocracy that esc discusses here seems not so detached from the paternalistic conservative philosophy Burke advocates for a responsible hierarchy. The intergovernmental organisation (IGO) experts are in their positions because of the doctorates and other qualifications they received and form a kind of aristocracy in their own right, while the development of global governance draws into the liberal pedagogy of the cosmopolitan citizen.
Proximity to an issue will always be problematic for those at the periphery of society. National governments have been no more capable at resolving this the larger they have become than IGOs are, so it makes sense to me why people are even more disenfranchised when policy is passed through even larger bodies.
I think the best way to ameliorate this is through cultivating a public intelligentsia which raises the standards of competence, which should trickle its way to us having better-elected politicians wholesale. I also think devolution can be avoided through local and regional autonomy that offers legislative flexibility under the same Covenant. Local representative democracy is a must, and we can reduce the deviance from proportionality of the Statewide democratic polity by using mixed-member proportional voting system.
"It's what our system produces: garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you are gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders." — George Carlin
Res ipsa loquitur: the Idiocracy.
Over here in the wilds of America, most people have already rejected this kind of bullshit.
Was this written by a chatbot?
I walked out of economics once I learned that the concept of Externalities is fundamental to the operation. Foist the harm onto those and that which has no representation and boom. Instant profit.
Externalities.”