Im very much looking forward to him coming back to talk about farming. Im a 55 year old farmer in Australia. Most of the farmers I know are older than I am. Its hard work, a lot of responsibility and income is never guarenteed due to weather and market forces. But I absolutely love the lifestyle. My kids want to build tiny houses on our farm. They want to come back not to farm commercially but to live a self sufficient lifestyle. Commercial farming isnt sexy anymore but self-sufficiency is. At least amongst my children and their peers. But they grew up in the country. One of my sons lives in suburbia but his neighborhood is growing vegies in their front gardens and all sharing produce. The tide is turning.
amazing to hear! my wife and i are back to the landers in Victoria setting up a permaculture farm and swapping and selling with other like minded people. We have recently joined the Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance in order to progress community orientated agriculture with natural farming methods
I think I have been following this podcast for a year so I can listen to THAT particular interview- all this is in the heart of the energy and material blindness, complexity of the relationships in the metabolism of society and nature, also explains why are we not motivated to change anything in the economic model. Thank you Nate for all the hard work in inviting such brilliant guests on your podcast❤
IMHO this podcast with Mr.Giampietro is up there with the ones with Daniel Schmachtenberger. This is a gem that, as a systems worker, I listen to again and again. I am grateful for the all the knowlegde and opportunities for reflection that you bring, Nate.
Been a student of Mario's work for a about 4 years now. He's a truly great mind, amazing communicator and top TOP guy. His use of language is consice and accurate - I love it. The MuSIASEM approach, accounting framework, it's use the use of the concept of a processor for accounting flows and funds, and his quantitative story telling approach shows there are frameworks for working within complexity. And if followed when making decisions on energy/food/water, could help the human race make much smarter decisions based on facts. I wish more decision makers, academics, scientists, engineers, farmers, politiions were versed in his work but unfortunately not enough people are aware of his great work. Well done Nate - You are a legend for getting him on. THANKS...Get hom on again. He's a gold mine.
WOW!!! Knocked my socks off! Shared this conversation on FaceBook. Hope some of my friends are open to hearing this message. I certainly agree that most people are not ready to transform the way we proceed into the future.
Hey Nate, I would love to hear a deep dive on the ‘extinction of farmers’ as your guest proposed’ . I also see that as a huge issue in the near future, leading to food insecurity and worsening nutrition. Thanks for your great work.
Fantastic discussion - greatly appreciated! Nate, here's an idea for a Reality Roundtable: Have Mario on alongside David Holmgren and Steve Keen, on the topic of Energy, Ecology, and Economics. I believe they have all been strongly influenced by Howard T. Odum, who wrote a groundbreaking article in 1974 on this topic.
@@thegreatsimplification Думаю через те, що до дискусії чи хоча б окремого подкасту можна було б залучити когось з експертів з Загальної семантики. Нейт, не знаю чи переклад надасть правильні слова, але: Все що ми кажемо про річ, не є нею. Все що вчений створює, це мову(текст) якою він пояснює щось. Всі теорії, гіпотези і знання, це текст(слова) які ми записуємо. Це все конструкти. Я писав уже тут, але не знаю чи Ви бачили. Альфред Коржибський не у всьому був правий, щодо загального бачення і розвитку людства. Але щодо комунікації людей та історій які ми собі розказуємо, впливу мови на когнітивні функції та культуру на сприйняття інформації. В цьому його праця флагманська. Ці теми піднімає Маріо, Даніель Шмахтенбергер, чоловік що займається півкулями мозку, Вільям Різ, Сапольський, Нора, але це все маленькі фрагменти більш ширшого розуміння. Ост це справді було б захоплююче. Реальність дуже суб'єктивна. Я б сказав, можливо це прозвучить грубо :) Але я наполягаю, що Ви маєте хоча б ознайомитись з роботами Коржибського і його послідовників. Дякую :)
Mario Giampietro, great guest, interesting conversation Nate, I for one would like to see Mario invited back in the not too distant future for that deep dive into the extinction of farmers🤔
Please come back sooner with Mario! I live on edge between city and countryside. I grow a liitle food but would love to work with farmer for couple hours a week. Sadly trust is rare these days, and the body is failing. Thanks for the talks and at least i can have discussions at home.
Sensational interview! It's a lot to digest yet makes so much sense. In my role in sales the bean counters just have a spreadsheet and look at the bottom line. No factoring service or years of experience that could make or break that massive project! The thought crossed my mind, and I don't wish to seem trite but the growth in self-sufficiency and Intentional Communities is certainly a part of the ground swell that's needed. Just imagine if all the world's leaders perhaps had psychedelic therapy and they would see through a clearer lens and bring back some of that FEELING that is lost in today's society.
What a great interview! Very sage commentary, especially regarding education and career choices, as well as governance that should prioritize local, lower level projects. I look forward to his future interview about agriculture!
Staggering. The best story / narrative I've come across so far is John Liu and Commonland. Regreening the Earth is generally super positive, but only if energy and materials constraints are factored in properly.
What Mario is saying in the "scientific reductionism" section of this discussion is totally true. Faith in science as an ameliorating counter force to the decline of our civilization and culture is misplaced. Science is a human endeavor, and as such, is subject to the same weaknesses as all other human endeavors. This includes a susceptibility to corruption. Ideologies such as religion and politics impose corrosive influences upon the integrity of the scientific method. With the postmodern decline in the influence of religion over people's lives, the single most corrupting influence remaining is politics. There is a very simple equation that one may think of regarding this: Science + Politics = Politics......(and NO science). Why is this so? For the simple reason that it is impossible to separate politics from ideology and.....money. The two most clearly defined examples of this corruption of science are in the Covid hysteria and in the climate change hysteria. In both cases, what we see are "scientific narratives" (story telling) which are not allowed to be questioned. Science is supposed to be transparent. Data is supposed to be openly available for examination, criticism and alternative interpretation. Any time one sees examination of data obscured and discouraged, criticism condemned, alternative interpretations blocked from discussion, one should take these things as huge red flags that the scientific process has veered way off the rails. So how does this happen? What are the actual mechanics of this problem? Quite simply it is that scientific research depends upon funding. It depends entirely upon this. And where does the funding come from? It comes from outside the scientific community. There are two primary sources: 1) The National Science Foundation; a governmental organization, and 2) from the private sector; wealthy individuals, corporations and political think tanks who have political and/or commercial interests they are pursuing. The latter do not fund projects that are likely to produce results that run counter to the political arguments these people want to see pushed front and center and into acceptence in the public arena. These people are not in the least interested in "objectivity". And unfortunately, scientists are very much dependent upon this funding for their livelihood. I am not implying that scientists are necessarily corrupt. What I am saying is that those scientists who happen to support one particular interpretation of a data set are more likely to receive funding than other scientists who favor a different interpretation of the same data set. People have a mistaken belief that data somehow stands on its own. Data rarely stands on its own. Usually, data must be subjected to analysis and then careful interpretation. And interpretations must always be subjected to debate. In time, debate may lead to a concensus; not always a quick process. In the case of The National Science Foundation, funding is approved or denied based upon a peer review process. But once again, this process is susceptible to bias. Grant requestors are allowed to suggest the names of those who are to review their proposals. In other cases, there can be a built-in bias favoring reviewers being chosen largely due to their success in publishing papers. The result is a circular feedback loop in which those who have successfully navigated the playing field get to determine who else gets to play on the playing field. So the end result is bias in both the direction of and the conclusions of the scientific research which are to be made available for public discussion. And the public is not oblivious to these political vulnerabilities of "scientific argument" as used in the public debate. The public perception that science is being manipulated for political ends justifiably results in alienating a large segment of the public from any belief in the credibility of the arguments. This is why "Science + Politics" is so deadly to the public forum. These things have happened, and are happening, and should come as no surprise to those of us who have been involved in observing and studying the effects of resource depletion. For the past nearly twenty years we have been predicting, and expecting, a contraction of the productive economy and the decline of all the institutions that make up our civilization: long range transportation, commerce, government, education, medicine, entertainment. Yet there remains not just a hope, but an expectation, that somehow science will be immune from the entropic forces of economic contraction and the accompanying politics of scarcity. Science as an institution, is not insulated from these affects.
Thanks Fred for sharing your insights on the political science / science policy conundrum - there are many biases, and mainstream beliefs are influenced by many sources. Herman and Chomsky's propaganda model highlights how institutions control mainstream discourse and in doing so, paint the picture of reality for the public to absorb and act within the reality created for them. The story creators and publishers of those stories have immense power to shape our worldviews. Incommensurability also arises in the philosophy of science, particularly in discussions about scientific paradigms and theories. Thomas Kuhn (philosopher of science) introduced the idea of incommensurability in his work "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions." He argued that paradigms or scientific frameworks are often incommensurable, meaning they are based on fundamentally different assumptions, methodologies, and worldviews. So we're back to the idea of measuring things depending on worldviews. Terror Management Theory (TMT) is a psychological framework that explores how humans cope with the awareness of their own mortality. According to TMT, individuals employ various psychological mechanisms, including cultural worldviews and self-esteem bolstering, to manage the anxiety associated with mortality. From this perspective, mainstream economic growth worldviews can play a significant role in society's trajectory toward overshooting planetary boundaries. Mainstream economic growth worldviews regularly announce the importance of economic expansion, consumption, and material wealth as markers of success and well-being. These worldviews are deeply ingrained in many societies and are reinforced through cultural, social, and economic institutions. They provide a sense of stability, purpose, and continuity in people's lives. According to TMT, individuals rely on cultural worldviews to mitigate the anxiety caused by the awareness of mortality. Economic growth narratives offer a sense of progress and permanence, suggesting that human endeavors can transcend individual mortality through the accumulation of wealth, technological advancements, and societal development. This narrative provides a symbolic buffer against existential fears by offering the promise of a brighter future for individuals and future generations. However, the pursuit of relentless economic growth often leads to unsustainable consumption patterns and environmental degradation. As societies strive for continual expansion and resource exploitation, they overlook or downplay the ecological consequences of their actions. This overshoots planetary boundaries by depleting natural resources, disrupting ecosystems, and exacerbating climate change. Mainstream economic growth models externalise environmental and social costs, focusing primarily on short-term gains and monetary metrics of progress. This externalisation shields people from the immediate consequences of their actions, allowing them to maintain a sense of security and well-being in the face of mounting ecological challenges. However, these costs eventually manifest in the form of environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, and social inequalities, posing long-term threats to human societies and the planet. Moreover, the entrenched nature of mainstream economic growth worldviews can hinder efforts to address sustainability challenges and transition to equitable and environmentally friendly systems. Individuals and institutions invested in the status quo tend to resist alternative paradigms and solutions that challenge their core beliefs and interests, perpetuating a cycle of ecological overshoot and societal inertia.
And to make things worse many of the claimed experts, amateur or otherwise, have been given a social media soap box (platform) from which to proclaim with a megaphone far larger than they deserve don’t believe in vaccinating against the likes of C19, or don’t believe in Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) or that Energy Minerals or minerals in general will ever run out (EROEI depleted) and in particular Oil will not peak (deplete) or if it does will just flat line, at least for 100’s of years and certainly not before Nuclear Fusion’s been perfected, or some new fantastic energy source has been discovered, or that toxic pollution of which we are currently filling the sky and oceans with like gas or microplastics. To sum up how strange that the majority of these these so called experts amateur or otherwise, social media influencers tend to be Anti-Vax, AGW denier, believer in unlimited Energy Mineral/Minerals and that Sky and Ocean pollution isn’t something to worry about, and that if it was it could be stopped and cleaned up quite easily. And so with experts like that what could possibly go wrong🤔
How can so many Great Simplification episodes all qualify as the best one ever? Thanks for this amazing interview. I first encountered Mario Giampietro as a co-author of Unraveling the Complexity of the Jevons Paradox: The Link Between Innovation, Efficiency, and Sustainability, published 4/4/2018. I understood some of it, but had to give up about halfway. Maybe I'm ready to try reading it again.
In the US there are currently about 290 million individual vehicles, traveling a total of three TRILLION miles annually on 4 million miles of paved roadway... and 375 miles of high-speed rail. Where is there ANY wisdom, foresight or common sense in any of that? And that is just one example!
If Americans wanted to travel on high speed rail, companies would be fighting each other to build them. At this time, Americans do not want them, and our country is not set up well to install them.
@@stephenboyington630Speak for yourself. I've been to Europe and things are much better there. I would love subways and high speed rail. It's not the people that don't want it, it's the oil companies.
A side effect of producing gasoline is the production of asphalt. Hence the roads, otherwise it would be a waste product. We need to build all those roads essentially.
@@everythingmatters6308 When I was in Europe, we took the Eurostar from London to Amsterdam and lived it. We are rare among Americans, who are very wed to their cars.
Very interesting episode. It teases many things, which maybe only semi-scientific, but at least make an effort to become science. It's rock to abolosh private ownership of cars. Yes, there is a violation of thermodynamics if you take circular economy too literally, but for now we recieve energy from the sun, and natural ecosystems provide a realistic "circular enough" model. Instead, ask how must human society change to be as circular as natural ecosystems? I'll give three ideas.. 1. Ecosystems keep materials in easily recyclable forms, primarily organic molecules. We either optimize to hold our materials in other easily recyclable forms, or else we revert to doing everything via organic molicules. 2. Ecosystems have checks and balances, not so much self imposed, but by externally imposed by predation, disease, and other violence. We've mostly only island dictators like the tokugawa shogunate who enforced much sustainability, but worse they were never particularly stable, aka they're no Nash equilibrium. We'll likely need a world in which different nations act by sabatoge or force to limit one another's economy, energy & resource consumption, and population. We keep this peaceful-ish by codify these into our broader rules of conflict, aka raising cows, mining coal, etc should be considered acts of war, but some dynamic responce remains necessary. 3. Ecosystems enforce effficency through evolution. We need a real economic consequences for nations who waste energy & resources on advertising, law, AIs, bitcoin, etc. At the same time, we want resources spent on scientific and technological progress, on cultural works, and on education and health care, so all these choices sound difficult.
Interesting insight, most of content was already known as this topic has been covered many times, but i like the optimistic and enthousiastic way of Dr Giampetro while presenting his angle. During the last 20 years i have read mostly the dark side of it with social collapse hanging around and all catastrophic side effects (mass poverty and civil war among others). It is true that the future look not that bright and very challenging : population growth, climate change, extraction of all scarce ressources to maintain our current living style. Moreover there will be a mass human migration (around one billion by 2050 because of climatic change and another 3 billion by 2100 as there will be a lack of energy to feed and provide other kind of basic services to population located inside medium and large cities).
Most people understand that the current school systems, at all levels, only real interest is to domesticate people to a degree that makes them obedient / subservient to a hierarchical working environment / society / culture / nation.
This came up in my feed, and though I have not listened to the vid, for better or worse, I am going to comment here simply because the name of this channel is The Great Simplification, and I, as synchronicity may have it, am a great simplifier. So: as random as the impulse may seem, I will offer a simplification that, if correctly groked is really the last simplification you will ever need. Not only that but it will save you a lot of time, and is actionable, in that the concepts allude to the reality of an action that is possible on your part. The automatic thought-centric associative function, sometimes referred to as "my mind" or more frequently as "I" or "me" came about as a direct result of the survival instinct. It conferred an advantage in that it's conceptual nature allow mankind to imagine things not as they are, but as they could be, or simply "otherwise". Such as would be the case in a primitive farmer imagining how he could get the water from the river up to his fields. Or a rocket scientist quantifying the effects of various turbine designs: whatever. In effect taking the reality of how things are and using concepts to project an alternative state for them. And this formulative function has served man well: to which all technological developments and civilization itself attests. However, this talent, this quite automatic thought-centric associative function, though it is the primary strength of the species is also it's main weakness. It is a strength when applied to what Jan Cox referred to as the "primary world", quite simply, the actual physical world of everything from iron to memory. The world that still persists even if no one is thinking about it. This is in contrast to what he labelled the "secondary reality", the world that disappears when no one is thinking about it, like the various religious dogmas. You might say they exist in the tomes on which they had been recorded, but that is not true, the physical writings exist no doubt, but the dogma only exists if someone reads it or is thinking about it. Mistaking secondary reality for primary reality is mankind's chief weakness and leads to endless conflict, paradoxes, and truly meaningless discussions that serve as stand-ins for hormones denied the road of physical dominance over adversaries. For those drawn to the possibility of conscious evolution there is nothing to be gained in even the partial consideration of the secondary reality for the first. In fact the reality is quite the contrary, and quite a bit more extraordinary. Nothing can be said by the automatic associative mind that is accurate about a meta position in relationship to itself, every concept it produces, even it's deeply meaningful symbols and metaphors are all incorrect and misleading, and cannot be otherwise. Including this one: If one were to be totally objective, in the moment, regarding one's own subjectivity, . . . If one were to be totally objectively APPERCEPTIVELY aware, in the MOMENT: of the automatic thought-centric associative function (what is commonly referred to as "my thoughts") your thoughts will stop. Total objectivity about the subjective process is cosmic consciousness. It doesn't get any simpler than that. Of course it's not for everyone, about one in a hundred k I'd say. If it is for you, you can take it from there. www.youtube.com/@Vision-ey6fi
Mario strikes me as a scientist who has come to realize that science has to look elsewhere for help on this whole situation. What he says is needed--seeing the crisis in its human context and working for social transformation rather than technological transformation--is pretty much what education in the humanities provides. Understanding others and how they perceive things, getting used to decision making under uncertainty, stop doing mega plan and turn to local initiatives, all this is what he says is needed and it is what being well steeped in history, philosophy, and literature provides an appreciation of.
Love this conversation. The corporate hard rule was never about life, it was to build that deemed necessary and then disband and disarm for the citizen. So, policy today has no power over the corporate mind. A simple example would be, ‘how much does it cost to build an aquifer?’ to effectively filter out micro plastics (most aquifers are filters of many years.) How much does it cost to grow a sequoia to full size? What is the total cost, from the first plan, first meeting of people, and the first mined property, to build a nuclear power plant. Thermodynamics is about totals and ‘all the kings men’, nothing skipped. (Ie, an impossible task on mars, for humans who require oxygen and food, the space suit alone, requires more total energy than a top athlete, protein rich diet, excellent health and fresh volumes of free air). For a climate crisis, as with a smoker who can not quit, the details of personal health need to be included, ie, our headaches, our yellow sky of pollution, our stress (blood cell deformities) and our collective trauma of induced service and escape. The key word used here ‘vocational skill’. Care comes before value.
I love your podcasts and listen avidly to them. An expression of interest. Schools and universities, once the altar that families send their children to worship at, have become holdout bastions for preserving the status quo. They function through a process of elimination, creating an intellectual elite that has sold out by graduation, acolytes for the corporations. Is it possible to start working also with those who have not been educated by the system? Many bright ideas exist there, not only in the minds of the certificated graduates. Won't we find better ideas about building locally among the community rather than waiting for these young minds to see themselves as elite?
With farming, I believe it's likely two parallel systems will live side by side until one collapses. The industrial one will increase in size to fill the gaps left by the small farmers quitting. Meanwhile a regenerative agriculture based system will grow in parallel with it as more and more people become aware of the metacrisis and take up small-scale farming. The industrial system will then collapse due to its high input requirements. If Rystad Research is correct about the amount of oil left at a commercially viable extraction price point - 8 to 16 years' worth - then we don't have long to build up the second system. I'm trying it and it's uneconomical; I'm trying to support it with on-farm tourism.
When have economists claimed that absolute scarcity is impossible? Have they never seen empty shelves in a supermarket? What is impossible is knowing what price to set so that inventories are not exhausted in short order. In some jurisdictions, increasing prices during an emergency, is a crime.
Listening between awe and gigging (Mario is very funny in the way he explain those very serious things), i want to hear him in an spanish interview, i will find you Mario! Just one thing, i am also a university teacher and i see that young people wants to do something but they are dis-empowered as Mario says, and then they become vegan or vegetarians and eat stuff from far away. I am vegetarian too (i eat eggs from my chicks ) and i try to eat as local products as possible. I see the irony about being vegan and eat stuff from the other side of the world, but, at least here in Turkey, most of the meat comes from Brazil, so... still being one of those "far away" vegans is better than the meat option.
Waste management starts, and ends in production. Don't make it in the first place, does everything need to be wrapped in plastic? No! Do we need to import lots of plastic crap that we don't need from China? No. Would it be better to Power Down FIRST rather than scale up in renewables? Yes. Do we need to use so many words to solve the problems we face...... Or should we just make a list of need & unnecessary & crack on. Sorry I may be being reductionist in my approach but when you factor in Time.. tick tick tick Great discussion Thanks Nate 🤗
Nate is there a way I can reach out to you to bounce ideas off of you? I been thinking about these topics and have been talking to lots of different people especially students about the future of energy. I have the feeling like our future is going to be anachronistic. I just finished a book about how the near east was reshaped geopolitically by the Mongol conquests and towards the end it was talking about Ibn Khaldun’s observations of the 13th century and how the big issues was the conflict between nomads and agriculturalists but the groups that benefited the most ultimately were hybrids. Is it possible that the groups that do relatively better manage consumption and labor into things that require little to no carbon energy (stuff like DND or playing sports in the park vs streaming content and watching sports) while then prioritizing fossil carbons to support more critical industries like agriculture and unfortunately defense?
I have often looked at the 1930s as an example of a comfortable level of Civilization which still preserved infrastructure from a pre-electric time period, which made life even better.
In Hawai’i, we are vulnerable sitting out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. But, we will be sitting over the ‘hot spot” for 1-2 million years. We can drill down, steam rises,spin a turbine and get stable cost electricity forever!! Why aren’t we doing this? Richard Ha
I think it's questionable whether academics of any kind, as Nate introduces the podcast, are able to speak truth to power. Throughout Nate's unarguably wonderful survey of all manner of deep dives into the catastrophe of modern civilization, there are quite noticeable gaps, wide enough to lose an entire civilization in. Simply, we focus on the celebrated tales and avoid the emotionally sensitive ones. Why have Nate and the others yet to ask, "What's with our favorite thing to do with money?" It's to use money to make money rather than work. Shouldn't some upstart intellectual movement addressing the world crisis venture into the morasse of self-serving self-deceptions hiding in that question? Happy to do so with anyone who calls. I've found it's impolite to go any further is criticizing my fellow swimmers in the flood.
Nate, have you ever contacted the FIRE (Financially Independent Retired Early) and Minimalist communities? My GenZ kids are very passionate about living well below their means.
Again a luxury of those with "means". With the reduction in the value of labor the last few decades a huge percentage of people do not have high enough means to live below. It used to be 30% of US were working poor, now it is closer to 60%. That is a lot of people who cannot even retire on time, early is a fantasy.
18:40 Adult reinforcement from home is the other side of this coin problem. Eg. If a child has a environmental project and delievers on all the expected features of the chain of effects for plastic pollution but the problem were all directed at climate change without leaving open the discussion for what that means to a child. We boxed them in with a view that isn't likely to allow other views outside of the assessment requirement and the school environment. They just frown and they cant help but think its about thier performance not being accepted rather than expand the topic with other people's knowledge. Online information is not other people. 31:00 WHAOH! 😍 32:20 I think this is also like what J.Vervaeke says about the vulnerability of the old world. 47:20 your right Nate. Spanish do say it better hhh. 1:01:00 to me politics is like watching paint dry. Although i would be more inclined to watch the ratings if the homeless drug addicts woke up and took a sobering perspective from a seat in the house of representatives 😏. 1:16:00 anonymous priesthood ...isn't that how these kinds of things begin? 1:19:00 let's not lightly past by the subject of animals. They are dying in large numbers because of human activity. That's not even grazing the surface of its trafficking or sound comphrehension of its alternative holistic welfare plan for accidents and recovery abilities in their home frequency environment. In the spirit of an interconnected economy, it is and will always be the representations in our own human behaviours and traits!
If anyone would listen they will tell you why they will not change their behavior. It's no mystery, it's not very complicated. Individuals, companies, whole Countries say in clear words that they will not make the changes demanded of them because it would absolutely reduce their ability to "make a living". No money or even less money means suffering and even dying. It is happening right now all around the world, even in the US. NOTHING will change until we change how money works....or until collapse. The first one means we can manage the simplification, the second means brutal, ugly, violent death.
I've been experimenting growing food by isolating the actual work regulated by hand vs machines. The design, set up of the design, planting, weeding, harvesting, preserving, preparing, and eating. In short. Aside from using machines to set up the design, which saves a lot of time, and as an aside as fuel energy becomes scarce all this will change so start now, without doing data analysis I believe 8 hours a week working by hand in the design will feed multiple people. I don't know how many but the professor triggered this thought.
A university teacher bought a solar domestic water heater from a business I was involved in, I being the salesman. Within my sales process I was highlighting many points most uncomfortable. The teacher was surprised and agreed with most. After proving ourselves with the installation at his house he brought me into the university, he wanted that same presentation to whoever. When I saw the boiler my immediate response was this is the problem.
For those looking for slides, I suspect Dr G's presentation here has a lot of it... th-cam.com/video/AT5_WnlVSgo/w-d-xo.html "Two Elephants in the Room of Sustainability Science"
No future generations, my DNA line has decided to be extinct. Im so damaged from the non consumptive prey predator dynamic and so cortisol flooded for years i can barely move.
Im very much looking forward to him coming back to talk about farming. Im a 55 year old farmer in Australia. Most of the farmers I know are older than I am. Its hard work, a lot of responsibility and income is never guarenteed due to weather and market forces. But I absolutely love the lifestyle. My kids want to build tiny houses on our farm. They want to come back not to farm commercially but to live a self sufficient lifestyle. Commercial farming isnt sexy anymore but self-sufficiency is. At least amongst my children and their peers. But they grew up in the country. One of my sons lives in suburbia but his neighborhood is growing vegies in their front gardens and all sharing produce. The tide is turning.
amazing to hear!
my wife and i are back to the landers in Victoria setting up a permaculture farm and swapping and selling with other like minded people. We have recently joined the Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance in order to progress community orientated agriculture with natural farming methods
@@chookbuffy awesome! I'm going to look up Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance.
I think I have been following this podcast for a year so I can listen to THAT particular interview- all this is in the heart of the energy and material blindness, complexity of the relationships in the metabolism of society and nature, also explains why are we not motivated to change anything in the economic model. Thank you Nate for all the hard work in inviting such brilliant guests on your podcast❤
Wow Nate, this guys depth and breadth of knowledge is staggering. Well done and thank you. Cheers
IMHO this podcast with Mr.Giampietro is up there with the ones with Daniel Schmachtenberger. This is a gem that, as a systems worker, I listen to again and again. I am grateful for the all the knowlegde and opportunities for reflection that you bring, Nate.
Been a student of Mario's work for a about 4 years now. He's a truly great mind, amazing communicator and top TOP guy. His use of language is consice and accurate - I love it. The MuSIASEM approach, accounting framework, it's use the use of the concept of a processor for accounting flows and funds, and his quantitative story telling approach shows there are frameworks for working within complexity. And if followed when making decisions on energy/food/water, could help the human race make much smarter decisions based on facts. I wish more decision makers, academics, scientists, engineers, farmers, politiions were versed in his work but unfortunately not enough people are aware of his great work. Well done Nate - You are a legend for getting him on. THANKS...Get hom on again. He's a gold mine.
WOW!!! Knocked my socks off! Shared this conversation on FaceBook. Hope some of my friends are open to hearing this message. I certainly agree that most people are not ready to transform the way we proceed into the future.
This was the best interview so far IMO. Please have him again.
I agree, this was one of my avsolute favorites.
Wonderful discussion. Can't wait for his return visit!
This is Nate’s best podcast yet A wonderful wise man Mario Giampietro 🕊🌏❤️
Hey Nate, I would love to hear a deep dive on the ‘extinction of farmers’ as your guest proposed’ . I also see that as a huge issue in the near future, leading to food insecurity and worsening nutrition.
Thanks for your great work.
Fantastic discussion - greatly appreciated! Nate, here's an idea for a Reality Roundtable: Have Mario on alongside David Holmgren and Steve Keen, on the topic of Energy, Ecology, and Economics. I believe they have all been strongly influenced by Howard T. Odum, who wrote a groundbreaking article in 1974 on this topic.
Not a bad idea 🙏
@@thegreatsimplification
Думаю через те, що до дискусії чи хоча б окремого подкасту можна було б залучити когось з експертів з Загальної семантики.
Нейт, не знаю чи переклад надасть правильні слова, але: Все що ми кажемо про річ, не є нею. Все що вчений створює, це мову(текст) якою він пояснює щось. Всі теорії, гіпотези і знання, це текст(слова) які ми записуємо. Це все конструкти.
Я писав уже тут, але не знаю чи Ви бачили. Альфред Коржибський не у всьому був правий, щодо загального бачення і розвитку людства. Але щодо комунікації людей та історій які ми собі розказуємо, впливу мови на когнітивні функції та культуру на сприйняття інформації. В цьому його праця флагманська. Ці теми піднімає Маріо, Даніель Шмахтенбергер, чоловік що займається півкулями мозку, Вільям Різ, Сапольський, Нора, але це все маленькі фрагменти більш ширшого розуміння.
Ост це справді було б захоплююче. Реальність дуже суб'єктивна. Я б сказав, можливо це прозвучить грубо :) Але я наполягаю, що Ви маєте хоча б ознайомитись з роботами Коржибського і його послідовників.
Дякую :)
Mario Giampietro, great guest, interesting conversation Nate, I for one would like to see Mario invited back in the not too distant future for that deep dive into the extinction of farmers🤔
Thank you so much for introducing him to us im going to start reading “The Metabolic Patterns of Society” now
It's on my list, now.
Please come back sooner with Mario! I live on edge between city and countryside. I grow a liitle food but would love to work with farmer for couple hours a week. Sadly trust is rare these days, and the body is failing. Thanks for the talks and at least i can have discussions at home.
Fantastic Nate! Thanks for this and thank you Professor Mario!
I can’t believe you got my main Academic G Mario on this podcast. Can’t wait to give a listen later!
That was amazing Nate so good
Sensational interview! It's a lot to digest yet makes so much sense. In my role in sales the bean counters just have a spreadsheet and look at the bottom line. No factoring service or years of experience that could make or break that massive project! The thought crossed my mind, and I don't wish to seem trite but the growth in self-sufficiency and Intentional Communities is certainly a part of the ground swell that's needed. Just imagine if all the world's leaders perhaps had psychedelic therapy and they would see through a clearer lens and bring back some of that FEELING that is lost in today's society.
What a great interview! Very sage commentary, especially regarding education and career choices, as well as governance that should prioritize local, lower level projects. I look forward to his future interview about agriculture!
Thank you so much Nate. You've connected so many dots for me with this series.
Staggering. The best story / narrative I've come across so far is John Liu and Commonland. Regreening the Earth is generally super positive, but only if energy and materials constraints are factored in properly.
What Mario is saying in the "scientific reductionism" section of this discussion is totally true. Faith in science as an ameliorating counter force to the decline of our civilization and culture is misplaced. Science is a human endeavor, and as such, is subject to the same weaknesses as all other human endeavors. This includes a susceptibility to corruption. Ideologies such as religion and politics impose corrosive influences upon the integrity of the scientific method. With the postmodern decline in the influence of religion over people's lives, the single most corrupting influence remaining is politics. There is a very simple equation that one may think of regarding this: Science + Politics = Politics......(and NO science). Why is this so? For the simple reason that it is impossible to separate politics from ideology and.....money.
The two most clearly defined examples of this corruption of science are in the Covid hysteria and in the climate change hysteria. In both cases, what we see are "scientific narratives" (story telling) which are not allowed to be questioned. Science is supposed to be transparent. Data is supposed to be openly available for examination, criticism and alternative interpretation. Any time one sees examination of data obscured and discouraged, criticism condemned, alternative interpretations blocked from discussion, one should take these things as huge red flags that the scientific process has veered way off the rails.
So how does this happen? What are the actual mechanics of this problem? Quite simply it is that scientific research depends upon funding. It depends entirely upon this. And where does the funding come from? It comes from outside the scientific community. There are two primary sources: 1) The National Science Foundation; a governmental organization, and 2) from the private sector; wealthy individuals, corporations and political think tanks who have political and/or commercial interests they are pursuing. The latter do not fund projects that are likely to produce results that run counter to the political arguments these people want to see pushed front and center and into acceptence in the public arena. These people are not in the least interested in "objectivity". And unfortunately, scientists are very much dependent upon this funding for their livelihood. I am not implying that scientists are necessarily corrupt. What I am saying is that those scientists who happen to support one particular interpretation of a data set are more likely to receive funding than other scientists who favor a different interpretation of the same data set. People have a mistaken belief that data somehow stands on its own. Data rarely stands on its own. Usually, data must be subjected to analysis and then careful interpretation. And interpretations must always be subjected to debate. In time, debate may lead to a concensus; not always a quick process.
In the case of The National Science Foundation, funding is approved or denied based upon a peer review process. But once again, this process is susceptible to bias. Grant requestors are allowed to suggest the names of those who are to review their proposals. In other cases, there can be a built-in bias favoring reviewers being chosen largely due to their success in publishing papers. The result is a circular feedback loop in which those who have successfully navigated the playing field get to determine who else gets to play on the playing field.
So the end result is bias in both the direction of and the conclusions of the scientific research which are to be made available for public discussion. And the public is not oblivious to these political vulnerabilities of "scientific argument" as used in the public debate. The public perception that science is being manipulated for political ends justifiably results in alienating a large segment of the public from any belief in the credibility of the arguments. This is why "Science + Politics" is so deadly to the public forum.
These things have happened, and are happening, and should come as no surprise to those of us who have been involved in observing and studying the effects of resource depletion. For the past nearly twenty years we have been predicting, and expecting, a contraction of the productive economy and the decline of all the institutions that make up our civilization: long range transportation, commerce, government, education, medicine, entertainment. Yet there remains not just a hope, but an expectation, that somehow science will be immune from the entropic forces of economic contraction and the accompanying politics of scarcity. Science as an institution, is not insulated from these affects.
Thanks Fred for sharing your insights on the political science / science policy conundrum - there are many biases, and mainstream beliefs are influenced by many sources. Herman and Chomsky's propaganda model highlights how institutions control mainstream discourse and in doing so, paint the picture of reality for the public to absorb and act within the reality created for them. The story creators and publishers of those stories have immense power to shape our worldviews. Incommensurability also arises in the philosophy of science, particularly in discussions about scientific paradigms and theories.
Thomas Kuhn (philosopher of science) introduced the idea of incommensurability in his work "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions." He argued that paradigms or scientific frameworks are often incommensurable, meaning they are based on fundamentally different assumptions, methodologies, and worldviews. So we're back to the idea of measuring things depending on worldviews. Terror Management Theory (TMT) is a psychological framework that explores how humans cope with the awareness of their own mortality. According to TMT, individuals employ various psychological mechanisms, including cultural worldviews and self-esteem bolstering, to manage the anxiety associated with mortality. From this perspective, mainstream economic growth worldviews can play a significant role in society's trajectory toward overshooting planetary boundaries.
Mainstream economic growth worldviews regularly announce the importance of economic expansion, consumption, and material wealth as markers of success and well-being. These worldviews are deeply ingrained in many societies and are reinforced through cultural, social, and economic institutions. They provide a sense of stability, purpose, and continuity in people's lives.
According to TMT, individuals rely on cultural worldviews to mitigate the anxiety caused by the awareness of mortality. Economic growth narratives offer a sense of progress and permanence, suggesting that human endeavors can transcend individual mortality through the accumulation of wealth, technological advancements, and societal development. This narrative provides a symbolic buffer against existential fears by offering the promise of a brighter future for individuals and future generations.
However, the pursuit of relentless economic growth often leads to unsustainable consumption patterns and environmental degradation. As societies strive for continual expansion and resource exploitation, they overlook or downplay the ecological consequences of their actions. This overshoots planetary boundaries by depleting natural resources, disrupting ecosystems, and exacerbating climate change.
Mainstream economic growth models externalise environmental and social costs, focusing primarily on short-term gains and monetary metrics of progress. This externalisation shields people from the immediate consequences of their actions, allowing them to maintain a sense of security and well-being in the face of mounting ecological challenges. However, these costs eventually manifest in the form of environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, and social inequalities, posing long-term threats to human societies and the planet.
Moreover, the entrenched nature of mainstream economic growth worldviews can hinder efforts to address sustainability challenges and transition to equitable and environmentally friendly systems. Individuals and institutions invested in the status quo tend to resist alternative paradigms and solutions that challenge their core beliefs and interests, perpetuating a cycle of ecological overshoot and societal inertia.
If this isn't the most self indulgent comment thread on this platform by golly.
And to make things worse many of the claimed experts, amateur or otherwise, have been given a social media soap box (platform) from which to proclaim with a megaphone far larger than they deserve don’t believe in vaccinating against the likes of C19, or don’t believe in Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) or that Energy Minerals or minerals in general will ever run out (EROEI depleted) and in particular Oil will not peak (deplete) or if it does will just flat line, at least for 100’s of years and certainly not before Nuclear Fusion’s been perfected, or some new fantastic energy source has been discovered, or that toxic pollution of which we are currently filling the sky and oceans with like gas or microplastics.
To sum up how strange that the majority of these these so called experts amateur or otherwise, social media influencers tend to be Anti-Vax, AGW denier, believer in unlimited Energy Mineral/Minerals and that Sky and Ocean pollution isn’t something to worry about, and that if it was it could be stopped and cleaned up quite easily. And so with experts like that what could possibly go wrong🤔
have you read Ernest Becker?
You are very much mistaken. Hard sciences are based on observed data. Facts are not settled on "by debate."
How can so many Great Simplification episodes all qualify as the best one ever? Thanks for this amazing interview. I first encountered Mario Giampietro as a co-author of Unraveling the Complexity of the Jevons Paradox: The Link Between Innovation, Efficiency, and Sustainability, published 4/4/2018. I understood some of it, but had to give up about halfway. Maybe I'm ready to try reading it again.
Excellent, merci (thank you)
Another member of a small group of people who understand our meta crisis, The Master and His emissary, features in his dialogue. Amazing
In the US there are currently about 290 million individual vehicles, traveling a total of three TRILLION miles annually on 4 million miles of paved roadway... and 375 miles of high-speed rail. Where is there ANY wisdom, foresight or common sense in any of that? And that is just one example!
If Americans wanted to travel on high speed rail, companies would be fighting each other to build them. At this time, Americans do not want them, and our country is not set up well to install them.
@@stephenboyington630Speak for yourself. I've been to Europe and things are much better there. I would love subways and high speed rail. It's not the people that don't want it, it's the oil companies.
A side effect of producing gasoline is the production of asphalt. Hence the roads, otherwise it would be a waste product. We need to build all those roads essentially.
@@everythingmatters6308 When I was in Europe, we took the Eurostar from London to Amsterdam and lived it. We are rare among Americans, who are very wed to their cars.
General Motors bought up and dismantled public transportation in the USA. th-cam.com/video/p-I8GDklsN4/w-d-xo.htmlsi=sIbmhOKSLNwDZEfj
Nice interview. Completely agree with Mario. We need a new vision of the world and of the purpose of human beings as part of nature and ecosystem.
Very interesting episode. It teases many things, which maybe only semi-scientific, but at least make an effort to become science. It's rock to abolosh private ownership of cars.
Yes, there is a violation of thermodynamics if you take circular economy too literally, but for now we recieve energy from the sun, and natural ecosystems provide a realistic "circular enough" model. Instead, ask how must human society change to be as circular as natural ecosystems? I'll give three ideas..
1. Ecosystems keep materials in easily recyclable forms, primarily organic molecules. We either optimize to hold our materials in other easily recyclable forms, or else we revert to doing everything via organic molicules.
2. Ecosystems have checks and balances, not so much self imposed, but by externally imposed by predation, disease, and other violence. We've mostly only island dictators like the tokugawa shogunate who enforced much sustainability, but worse they were never particularly stable, aka they're no Nash equilibrium. We'll likely need a world in which different nations act by sabatoge or force to limit one another's economy, energy & resource consumption, and population. We keep this peaceful-ish by codify these into our broader rules of conflict, aka raising cows, mining coal, etc should be considered acts of war, but some dynamic responce remains necessary.
3. Ecosystems enforce effficency through evolution. We need a real economic consequences for nations who waste energy & resources on advertising, law, AIs, bitcoin, etc. At the same time, we want resources spent on scientific and technological progress, on cultural works, and on education and health care, so all these choices sound difficult.
Interesting insight, most of content was already known as this topic has been covered many times, but i like the optimistic and enthousiastic way of Dr Giampetro while presenting his angle. During the last 20 years i have read mostly the dark side of it with social collapse hanging around and all catastrophic side effects (mass poverty and civil war among others). It is true that the future look not that bright and very challenging : population growth, climate change, extraction of all scarce ressources to maintain our current living style. Moreover there will be a mass human migration (around one billion by 2050 because of climatic change and another 3 billion by 2100 as there will be a lack of energy to feed and provide other kind of basic services to population located inside medium and large cities).
Again a top interview !!!
Most people understand that the current school systems, at all levels, only real interest is to domesticate people to a degree that makes them obedient / subservient to a hierarchical working environment / society / culture / nation.
This came up in my feed, and though I have not listened to the vid, for better or worse, I am going to comment here simply because the name of this channel is The Great Simplification, and I, as synchronicity may have it, am a great simplifier. So: as random as the impulse may seem, I will offer a simplification that, if correctly groked is really the last simplification you will ever need. Not only that but it will save you a lot of time, and is actionable, in that the concepts allude to the reality of an action that is possible on your part.
The automatic thought-centric associative function, sometimes referred to as "my mind" or more frequently as "I" or "me" came about as a direct result of the survival instinct. It conferred an advantage in that it's conceptual nature allow mankind to imagine things not as they are, but as they could be, or simply "otherwise". Such as would be the case in a primitive farmer imagining how he could get the water from the river up to his fields. Or a rocket scientist quantifying the effects of various turbine designs: whatever. In effect taking the reality of how things are and using concepts to project an alternative state for them.
And this formulative function has served man well: to which all technological developments and civilization itself attests.
However, this talent, this quite automatic thought-centric associative function, though it is the primary strength of the species is also it's main weakness. It is a strength when applied to what Jan Cox referred to as the "primary world", quite simply, the actual physical world of everything from iron to memory. The world that still persists even if no one is thinking about it. This is in contrast to what he labelled the "secondary reality", the world that disappears when no one is thinking about it, like the various religious dogmas. You might say they exist in the tomes on which they had been recorded, but that is not true, the physical writings exist no doubt, but the dogma only exists if someone reads it or is thinking about it. Mistaking secondary reality for primary reality is mankind's chief weakness and leads to endless conflict, paradoxes, and truly meaningless discussions that serve as stand-ins for hormones denied the road of physical dominance over adversaries.
For those drawn to the possibility of conscious evolution there is nothing to be gained in even the partial consideration of the secondary reality for the first. In fact the reality is quite the contrary, and quite a bit more extraordinary.
Nothing can be said by the automatic associative mind that is accurate about a meta position in relationship to itself, every concept it produces, even it's deeply meaningful symbols and metaphors are all incorrect and misleading, and cannot be otherwise.
Including this one: If one were to be totally objective, in the moment, regarding one's own subjectivity, . . . If one were to be totally objectively APPERCEPTIVELY aware, in the MOMENT: of the automatic thought-centric associative function (what is commonly referred to as "my thoughts") your thoughts will stop. Total objectivity about the subjective process is cosmic consciousness.
It doesn't get any simpler than that. Of course it's not for everyone, about one in a hundred k I'd say. If it is for you, you can take it from there.
www.youtube.com/@Vision-ey6fi
We only have to understand the world in ways conducive to survival. All other noetic constructs can be dispensed with. But that's no fun.
I didn't understand a single thing you said. 😂😮😊❤
Totally and wholeheartedly agree with your interviewee. We are perceptionlly blind. Why do folks insist that their own perception cancels outothera.
Sharing will save the world.
Mario strikes me as a scientist who has come to realize that science has to look elsewhere for help on this whole situation. What he says is needed--seeing the crisis in its human context and working for social transformation rather than technological transformation--is pretty much what education in the humanities provides. Understanding others and how they perceive things, getting used to decision making under uncertainty, stop doing mega plan and turn to local initiatives, all this is what he says is needed and it is what being well steeped in history, philosophy, and literature provides an appreciation of.
Love this conversation.
The corporate hard rule was never about life, it was to build that deemed necessary and then disband and disarm for the citizen.
So, policy today has no power over the corporate mind.
A simple example would be, ‘how much does it cost to build an aquifer?’ to effectively filter out micro plastics (most aquifers are filters of many years.)
How much does it cost to grow a sequoia to full size?
What is the total cost, from the first plan, first meeting of people, and the first mined property, to build a nuclear power plant.
Thermodynamics is about totals and ‘all the kings men’, nothing skipped.
(Ie, an impossible task on mars, for humans who require oxygen and food, the space suit alone, requires more total energy than a top athlete, protein rich diet, excellent health and fresh volumes of free air).
For a climate crisis, as with a smoker who can not quit, the details of personal health need to be included, ie, our headaches, our yellow sky of pollution, our stress (blood cell deformities) and our collective trauma of induced service and escape.
The key word used here ‘vocational skill’.
Care comes before value.
I love your podcasts and listen avidly to them. An expression of interest. Schools and universities, once the altar that families send their children to worship at, have become holdout bastions for preserving the status quo. They function through a process of elimination, creating an intellectual elite that has sold out by graduation, acolytes for the corporations. Is it possible to start working also with those who have not been educated by the system? Many bright ideas exist there, not only in the minds of the certificated graduates. Won't we find better ideas about building locally among the community rather than waiting for these young minds to see themselves as elite?
My kind of engineer. Thanks Mario / Nate.
With all this talk about universities, their role, their future… Nate, have you ever done an individual or round table podcast with your students?
With farming, I believe it's likely two parallel systems will live side by side until one collapses. The industrial one will increase in size to fill the gaps left by the small farmers quitting. Meanwhile a regenerative agriculture based system will grow in parallel with it as more and more people become aware of the metacrisis and take up small-scale farming. The industrial system will then collapse due to its high input requirements. If Rystad Research is correct about the amount of oil left at a commercially viable extraction price point - 8 to 16 years' worth - then we don't have long to build up the second system. I'm trying it and it's uneconomical; I'm trying to support it with on-farm tourism.
When have economists claimed that absolute scarcity is impossible? Have they never seen empty shelves in a supermarket?
What is impossible is knowing what price to set so that inventories are not exhausted in short order. In some jurisdictions, increasing prices during an emergency, is a crime.
Listening between awe and gigging (Mario is very funny in the way he explain those very serious things), i want to hear him in an spanish interview, i will find you Mario! Just one thing, i am also a university teacher and i see that young people wants to do something but they are dis-empowered as Mario says, and then they become vegan or vegetarians and eat stuff from far away. I am vegetarian too (i eat eggs from my chicks ) and i try to eat as local products as possible. I see the irony about being vegan and eat stuff from the other side of the world, but, at least here in Turkey, most of the meat comes from Brazil, so... still being one of those "far away" vegans is better than the meat option.
Waste management starts, and ends in production. Don't make it in the first place, does everything need to be wrapped in plastic? No! Do we need to import lots of plastic crap that we don't need from China? No. Would it be better to Power Down FIRST rather than scale up in renewables? Yes.
Do we need to use so many words to solve the problems we face...... Or should we just make a list of need & unnecessary & crack on. Sorry I may be being reductionist in my approach but when you factor in Time..
tick tick tick
Great discussion Thanks Nate 🤗
Hey Nate, you sure it isn’t your dad?😁
Nate is there a way I can reach out to you to bounce ideas off of you? I been thinking about these topics and have been talking to lots of different people especially students about the future of energy. I have the feeling like our future is going to be anachronistic. I just finished a book about how the near east was reshaped geopolitically by the Mongol conquests and towards the end it was talking about Ibn Khaldun’s observations of the 13th century and how the big issues was the conflict between nomads and agriculturalists but the groups that benefited the most ultimately were hybrids. Is it possible that the groups that do relatively better manage consumption and labor into things that require little to no carbon energy (stuff like DND or playing sports in the park vs streaming content and watching sports) while then prioritizing fossil carbons to support more critical industries like agriculture and unfortunately defense?
I think medical will be the priority for allocation of any remaining fossil fuel use. Care flights and medical equipment.
I have often looked at the 1930s as an example of a comfortable level of Civilization which still preserved infrastructure from a pre-electric time period, which made life even better.
I have absolutely nothing to lose, i really don't care if everything is extinct or starves.
In Hawai’i, we are vulnerable sitting out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. But, we will be sitting over the ‘hot spot” for 1-2 million years. We can drill down, steam rises,spin a turbine and get stable cost electricity forever!! Why aren’t we doing this? Richard Ha
Nate, I care for 1,000 + free-range animals here in Hawaii come visit. Thanks for the good fight
I think it's questionable whether academics of any kind, as Nate introduces the podcast, are able to speak truth to power. Throughout Nate's unarguably wonderful survey of all manner of deep dives into the catastrophe of modern civilization, there are quite noticeable gaps, wide enough to lose an entire civilization in. Simply, we focus on the celebrated tales and avoid the emotionally sensitive ones. Why have Nate and the others yet to ask, "What's with our favorite thing to do with money?" It's to use money to make money rather than work. Shouldn't some upstart intellectual movement addressing the world crisis venture into the morasse of self-serving self-deceptions hiding in that question?
Happy to do so with anyone who calls. I've found it's impolite to go any further is criticizing my fellow swimmers in the flood.
Nate, have you ever contacted the FIRE (Financially Independent Retired Early) and Minimalist communities?
My GenZ kids are very passionate about living well below their means.
Again a luxury of those with "means".
With the reduction in the value of labor the last few decades a huge percentage of people do not have high enough means to live below.
It used to be 30% of US were working poor, now it is closer to 60%. That is a lot of people who cannot even retire on time, early is a fantasy.
18:40 Adult reinforcement from home is the other side of this coin problem. Eg. If a child has a environmental project and delievers on all the expected features of the chain of effects for plastic pollution but the problem were all directed at climate change without leaving open the discussion for what that means to a child. We boxed them in with a view that isn't likely to allow other views outside of the assessment requirement and the school environment. They just frown and they cant help but think its about thier performance not being accepted rather than expand the topic with other people's knowledge. Online information is not other people.
31:00 WHAOH! 😍 32:20 I think this is also like what J.Vervaeke says about the vulnerability of the old world. 47:20 your right Nate. Spanish do say it better hhh. 1:01:00 to me politics is like watching paint dry. Although i would be more inclined to watch the ratings if the homeless drug addicts woke up and took a sobering perspective from a seat in the house of representatives 😏. 1:16:00 anonymous priesthood ...isn't that how these kinds of things begin? 1:19:00 let's not lightly past by the subject of animals. They are dying in large numbers because of human activity. That's not even grazing the surface of its trafficking or sound comphrehension of its alternative holistic welfare plan for accidents and recovery abilities in their home frequency environment. In the spirit of an interconnected economy, it is and will always be the representations in our own human behaviours and traits!
Professors sit in offices and no idea real world . Pretend degrees as university professors pass each other with a wink and smile 😃
Shades of Wendell Berry.
💜
If anyone would listen they will tell you why they will not change their behavior. It's no mystery, it's not very complicated.
Individuals, companies, whole Countries say in clear words that they will not make the changes demanded of them because it would absolutely reduce their ability to "make a living". No money or even less money means suffering and even dying. It is happening right now all around the world, even in the US.
NOTHING will change until we change how money works....or until collapse. The first one means we can manage the simplification, the second means brutal, ugly, violent death.
I have absolutely zero agency, not one person i can trust. Every family member is on the payroll of rituals and burying my ability to get away.
Carl Reiner with a Catalan accent. 😁
Check out the song carbon by tori amos.
Prioritize unintended consequences! lol
Society doesn't even want a multiple choice question.
I've been experimenting growing food by isolating the actual work regulated by hand vs machines. The design, set up of the design, planting, weeding, harvesting, preserving, preparing, and eating. In short. Aside from using machines to set up the design, which saves a lot of time, and as an aside as fuel energy becomes scarce all this will change so start now, without doing data analysis I believe 8 hours a week working by hand in the design will feed multiple people. I don't know how many but the professor triggered this thought.
I love thinking about how the French free tenant peasant lived. *gasp*
Did he say magic motors? lol
A university teacher bought a solar domestic water heater from a business I was involved in, I being the salesman. Within my sales process I was highlighting many points most uncomfortable. The teacher was surprised and agreed with most. After proving ourselves with the installation at his house he brought me into the university, he wanted that same presentation to whoever. When I saw the boiler my immediate response was this is the problem.
For those looking for slides, I suspect Dr G's presentation here has a lot of it... th-cam.com/video/AT5_WnlVSgo/w-d-xo.html "Two Elephants in the Room of Sustainability Science"
Couldn't we start the issue with societies willing to build out mass transportation.?
No future generations, my DNA line has decided to be extinct. Im so damaged from the non consumptive prey predator dynamic and so cortisol flooded for years i can barely move.
🤍🕊
Does this man have a carbon pulse? Perhaps his daughters have a carbon pulse.
This guy is a Joker and he knows it
He says he respects animals, I guess he is vegan, that's the only way to respect them.
Here is why the US does not have efficient public transportation th-cam.com/video/p-I8GDklsN4/w-d-xo.htmlsi=sIbmhOKSLNwDZEfj