but it can't solve it
politics
Wednesday, May 11, 2022
I mean, its about timescale
it could put a massive dent, but only for a short period of time
which is meaningless
for 40 billion, maybe you could raise the standard of living for a dozen or so african villages
to be almost bearable
of course that assumes 0% of the 40 billion is embezzled (its the WHO, so thats not happening)
honesty, yeah
you would acomplish more
blockade all of Africa
sink or swim on their own
and you could even call it an environmental win to get hte leftests on board
"we reduced the climate impact by X"
We either end up with Wakanda or a continent wide Ethiopia
casual genocide
you know
just peachy
well the main problem with these examples is they assume some magic actor that will do things based on a single goal or ideal
when in reality everything has its own goals and concerns
yeah when global warming hits any day now and the water level rises 1km
africa is gone
and will take the best course it can find for those
Afrolantis sounds better
water africa
Basketballantis
yeah no worries
idk how to spend money to end hunger
long term
you have to create jobs, or create massive grain handouts or something
like the Roamans used to do
reduce the population by 90%
you can solve hunger by giving us all the money
so we can start our massive pizza chain
and by we I mean spooky does all the work
and takes all the risk
but we'll draw the art
in a utopian world every household is on a sailship
or the mythical, never going to happen, post scarcity
Replying to reorruatrnte #toughbrook in a utopian world every household is on a sailship
waterworld?
if you're talking about in the real world then you're asking the wrong question
people can't even agree on what utopia would be, let alone try and get there
porygons utopia is zootopia
that wasn't even a utopia
based bob
a simple, but interesting answer
dolfs here, funs over
Thursday, May 12, 2022