|
|
|
|
|
|
by CptFribble
2726 days ago
|
|
|
With respect, I disagree on both points: 1) "it's physics"
- Texas alone receives more solar energy than our daily planet-wide power consumption, like hundreds of times more. Given a plant-based building material, basic needs for all humans, including "large" homes, could be reduced to just an energy supply problem. There's enough resources for all people be live well, if we would work together to use them effectively. 2) "focus on yourself first"
- I believe this is what got us into this mess of global inequality (not just USA, consider difference between average American and average African) and global warming. We need not to focus on ourselves, but work together to elect leaders that will align economic incentives with the good of all humans, not just the owners of capital. The problem is, the entire system we have is pretty much the opposite of this right now. I get that what I'm saying amounts to little more than saying "let's have a wand and pray," but I believe there is a path out of the next 100 years that leaves us all better off than where we are now. I just haven't figured out exactly what that path is yet. |
|
|
But I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about how an individual improves their own situation.
Double the median salary in the UK, and any individual would still be way better off just ignoring the advice of "what an average person should do" and doing well for themselves.
Trivially provable - the median income is ~3x the minimum, incomes of 10x the minimum are eminently achievable, and obviously billionaires exist (of course, any individual has a low likelihood of making that happen even with extreme effort).
Again, you're always better off trying to improve your own situation _even if_ you have charitable goals. Especially if you have charitable goals... it's generally easier to make an impact if you're not poor.
Society does not work in this sort of averaged collective way because individuals exist. It's pretty much that simple. Things aren't equally distributed. If you produce a model for society that is based on equal distribution of resources - you've created a wonderful work of art, but it's abstract, not real.