I saw a study that found that global warming would have a minimal impact on global gdp because the most valuable economic activities happen indoors, with air conditioning. I thought that was pretty dumb.
So there is some argument that we are no longer in capitalism but moved onto techno feudalism where algorithms like amazon or RealPage has supplanted the market for price discovery.
@@nonenone5387Yanis Varoufakis has a book that's a good explanation of all this. Conveniently called "Technofeudalism - What Killed Capitalism ". Essentially we live in a rent economy. The markets are basically already dead or so consolidated that they may as well be. "You'll own nothing and you'll be happy" This has become our reality. It was meant as a socialist driven dream which was co-opted by corporate America into the reality we live in today. You still have to pay for everything but you don't ever actually own it. You're just renting. You're renting access, insurance, apartments, bedrooms, shops, the sun roof on your new car, TH-cam, twitter etc etc.
HVAC Engineer here, heat recovery units are awsome and I think there great. Essentially you get to reuse the energy you've already put into the heated space of a building to bring the 'New' air upto temp while exhausting the 'Old' air. It also works the other way round if youve spent energy to cool down a building but you need to bring in 'New' air the cool 'Old' air will cool down the hot air as it comes into the building, considering how simple the technology is it punches massively above its weight.
Heat pumps are also pretty neat. Particularly the large scale fancy ones that go underground. Can't they run at like 500% efficiency because they basically just input some energy to make the refrigerant phase change?
@@babygorilla4233 Yeah there very impressive I've personally only installed the 'air to air' type of Heat pump but they can achieve very high efficiency or as we call it a COP 'Coefficient of performance' of 3.5 to 4.5, basically for every 1kw of electricity it uses you can get upto 4.5 kw of heat energy. I definitely feel there going to be a big part of the future.
@@Nosirrbro No there a different, Heat recovery units work directly on the air that's being exhausted from the building and the new air coming into the building. basically the 2 opposing airstreams pass each other through a Heat exchanger and exchange heat without contamination of the fresh air, hopefully that makes it a little clearer, if you want more info look up a product made by mitsubishi A/C called a lossnay. there are diagrams that make it easier to understand.
@@DAFLIDMAN I feel like the gas industry is the only reason we don't have some government program to retrofit air conditioners? Isn't it kinda as simple as adding a valve that can reverse the flow and giving the owner a switch to change modes?
The "there are no solutions, only trade-offs" Thing really grinds my gears. It really gives person who wouldn't use an epipen they are holding on a person going into anaphylactic shock because that's one less epipen that can be used in the future, even if they themselves are the one going into shock. I was going to make a disability related analogy, but these people definitely wouldn't see the equal value of the lives of us disabled people as a given.
The trouble is this is a very incomplete version of the statement (If we want the statement to actually reflect reality), and that's the only reason they're willing to say it. If they were being honest they would say, "There are no solutions, only trade-offs, and we are nowhere near as effective at finding the best trade-offs as we could be to optimize for least suffering." I know that's a mouthful, but it's the lived truth of humanity. We are allowing extremely bad tradeoffs to be made all the time, because they get us to just give up. Whenever you hear/see something like this, just remember what's NOT being said along with it. EDIT: Oh wow, I just watched that part of the video, finally. The full wording he uses is even worse than you made it seem. Yuck.
@@keithwinget6521 there's the false dichotomy laid bare. There is no solution, true, but there are *solutions*. That is to say, there is no magic bullet, but we have a full magazine of techniques we can employ. The problem of selling them to the public one at a time allows for the trade-off narrative to creep in and take hold in the typically defeatist minds of the already overwhelmed populace.
The power of Konstantin's asspull "there are no solutions because everything has costs" comes from the fact that people that begin with that argument will use clown accounting to maximize costs and minimize benefits until any change they don't like looks like a wash or worse.
It does always seems that the crux of any argument which uses the "no free lunch" talking point as the basis for a rebuttal always boils down to "we should do absolutely nothing."
They also choose to ignore priorities, or aren't even aware they're doing that. Notice how costs are only prohibitive and should only be taken into account for things they don't like. They always want to pinch pennies when it comes to healthcare but they never worry about the cost of a massive military or police.
I've heard Thomas Sowell's "there are no solutions only trade-offs" aphorism so many times and I really believed it but this is definitely a fantastic debunking. It reminds me a bit of learning that the Indians here in America had a method of farming that was incredibly bountiful but also required very little work. It really confused the settlers who came over because they felt as if not enough work was being done for the bounty that was provided. It's true that trade-offs may exist in the smaller sense, an immediate upfront cost of money or work or time may be required, but the dividends may easily exceed the initial investment.
@@jeffersonclippership2588 Don't look at who pushed my books and academic career. I am just an objective man and totally not a token zealot for my literal paymasters. I've never even heard of AstroTurf. -Thomas "I owe my career to the billionaires I champion" Sowell
This is covered in Seeing Like a State (a book UE has mentioned a few times)! Like a lot of the schemes in the book, the trade-off is for the sake of legibility to the central authority running the scheme. The older agricultural style might have been more productive with less work, but it was harder for the bean counters (literally in this case) to estimate output. Another trade-off is the older style required specific knowledge on the part of the planters and central authorities prefer schemes where all workers can be considered interchangeable, which is easier when the system is non-complex. The older style was more productive because it used many crops growing closely together. Which requires more knowledge, but if done right they will support each other and are more resistant to pests and blight. The more legible system is what we're used to: rows and rows of a single crop (monoculture). This sucks for a lot of reasons, but it's good for a central authority because output is easily measurable and lets management ignore worker expertise.
@@jeffersonclippership2588 The existence of externalities itself proves it's not win win. Capitalism is a win for capitalists. You're not a capitalist, ie owner class, you're worker class, ie part of the capitalist machine. Sieze the means of production and you'll start winning.
I'm probably connecting dots that maybe shouldn't be connected, but I think "there's no solutions, only trade-offs" can be connected to a colonialist way of thinking. Like, "in order to enrich ourselves we must kill off/enslave/exploit non-white people", ignoring the idea that maybe establishing a mutually beneficial relationship with others may create more prosperity than trying to lord power over them.
London air; I will never forget standing in the shower during my commuter days, doing a quick snort out of my nose, and getting a mountain of black snot on the bathroom tiles. I still refer to commuters as the "Black Snot Brigade". It's so visceral, especially as I've never experienced it since quitting the Old Smoke.
I live in the countryside in a remote part of northern England, and the first time i visited London as a kid I was worried at the black snot thing, it was something I associated with the old pits in the area. I'll never forget the smell either, I find London a very smelly place.
Im in a similar position now, whenever I take a deep level line (ie- Piccadilly, Bakerloo, Northen) I notice the black particulates when I get home and wipe my nose. Was a wake-up call to how bad the air quality is on the underground and London in general
@@Soulus101in the United States, diesel cars are basically non existent, so our cities tend to be basically free of visible carbon particulate matter. I'm not saying the air quality itself is better, but it's quite a strong noticeable difference. It wouldn't surprise me though because my brother lived in Germany for a while and after a couple of years, he developed what doctors were claiming was COPD but soon after he moved back to the United States, those symptoms disappeared.
The air we breathe is the cleanest ever in human history. Because pre-industrial humans were exposed to horrific levels of indoor air pollution from burning wood and animal dung. And because fire pre-dates Homo Sapiens.
Imagine a physician telling a patient there are no solutions only trade-offs, we could proceed with your treatment and you'd improve as a result but we'd have to spend medicine.
Well if you have some late stage cancer and you're offered chemotherapy, one chemo does less harm but is more expensive than another then the doctor is doing you a service letting you know what's available and letting you choose which treatment you'd prefer.
@@Jayare175Cool. Those are fringe cases. You dont design policy based on fringe cases. Most people that need medical help arent suffering of cancer; theres a bazzillion different types of conditions and diseases who requite a bunch of different types of treatments ranging from almost no negative side effects to chemo and other treatments who require further considerations. TLDR: Whats your point? Like seriously, whats your point? Not being facetious or anything im genuinely curious.
@@33up24 That's literally on brand vs off brand medicine. Not fringe at all. Do you just want to obligate people to use on brand patented medicine with huge markups with no other option? Let people choose generic if they don't care about the difference in efficacy. The OP made the point of "spending vs not spending the medicine". I don't think any real doctor or pharmacist wants to say no to people out of malice and refuse them. That's my point.
@@Jayare175That's not how on brand vs off brand medicine works at all though, generics are pharmacologically identical to on brand medication by definition (if they fail to achieve this then they're not valid generics), the only difference is that you're paying for the inflated profit margin of the original drug developer and their marketing budget (and yes, the developer of a thing is entitled to reward, but the rewards they're receiving are grossly disproportionate to the relatively small benefit their developments yield on average)
Add in all the statistics on supply and scarcity of resources involved in those medicines, and you would have an economic perspective. Ethics, morality, and reason are not absent just because you are able to see the balance sheet. They are absent of you use the sheet to justify unethical, immoral, or unreasonable outcomes. Which is why "right wing" is a synonym for unethical, immoral, and unreasonable.
God I'm glad people will finally start saying this shit out loud. BBT is terrible and condescending. It comes across as a writing exercise straight outta the suburbs, written by people whose hardest challenge in life is a toss up between not drowning in their soul crushing ennui and that 5k, they accidentally signed up for at work that one time. I watched maybe 5 minutes of the first episode when it aired, and after the fourth or fifth laugh track on badly written thin situational humor was enough. Maybe it got better, but I'll never know, bc I got no sunkcost and they whiffed their at-bat.
This may be your best video yet. Economics is such a complex, intersectional topic, but you're really good at finding the through-lines into other disciplines, and where the current professional discourse starts to break down or become insufficient. Love this.
"45 year old Brenda had just walked through the door after a long day at work. She shouted "I'm home!" through the house. She was met with deafening silence. "odd" she thought to herself. she took off her shoes, put her bag away and made her way upstairs to scold her daughter for not replying. as she rounded the corner on the landing, she was met with a mortifying sight in the bathroom in front of her. her beloved daughter was lying there, cold. she had unalived herself just moments earlier." how to make any sentence sound juvenile 101
@@julianbinder2371nebulous is probably the wrong word, but feels like a reduction of the vocabulary forcing us to dance around the point - akin to Orwellian Newspeak
I can guarantee you that the thought of breathing dirty air makes anyone who has worked painting, fibreglassing, chemical manufacturing, etc, feel viscerally sick. I think most people have been blessed with never having had to deal with air dirty enough to cause immediate harm. It is something always on my mind when I walk past a dusty construction site, or a diesel truck exhaust.
I haven't commented on a youtube video since covid (ironically enough), but I want to comment here just to say how both well researched and necessary this video is. I am looking forward to the increase in content!
As an architecture student, I have thoughts on the "trade off" between air quality and energy efficiency. The modern energy efficiency focused building method has caused much more problems than just worse air quality. The fully sealed structural layers are so complicated, construction errors are standard and even a small error can lead to severe water damage to the vulnerable structure in decade or two, which has led to much shorter life span for buildings and again worsens air quality to dangerous levels. They also require toxic or otherwise dangerous materials that put workers at risk and sometimes even the people using the building. Their construction is also very energy intensive, since they use a lot of steel and concrete. There are solutions that fix all these problems without even compromising energy efficiency. Traditional methods of building have all over the world adapted well to their climate and environment, using the sun, wind, geometry etc. to their advantage. Traditional building methods are generally much more simple, much more easy to fix, made from natural non-toxic materials (wood, stone, adobe, rammed earth, brick etc.) and therefore are also breathable. This means that the structure itself filters through the air, and changes it's temperature at the same time. These types of structural elements, when they are well planned and maintained, are much more resilient towards water damage and other climactic factors. These types of buildings can quite easily be recycled or returned to nature without issues, while industrial buildings are very hard, sometimes impossible to recycle and they cause pollution as waste. Traditional methods are in fact, more energy efficient than buildings made with industrial methods in most climates, since they utilize passive cooling and heating methods from sun, wind etc. Combining local traditional methods with modern technology such as renewable energy and modern heating, has potential to solve a lot of issues with the only drawback being that the construction industry can't have endlessly increasing profits. (Many of the natural materials are cheaper than the materials used for industrial methods, but traditional methods can't be mass-manufactured and they require skilled labour) This means that's it's not a one size fits all solution, but every region and climate has it's own solutions coming from it's own local traditions. This is not actually a bad thing at all. The reason why all our architecture and building methods are so similar all over the world is colonialism and it's beneficial for local communities, economy and culture to utilize local traditional methods.
@@Loanshark753 Oh yes absolutely. Solid wood recovers fully from from getting wet if it's allowed to dry, but MDF does not. Though that's not the main issue really, because if MDF is inside the structure, protected from rain, it does withstand changes in humidity. However, using MDF implies skeletal structure with MDF boards and insulatory infill. The insulation in these structures in the main issue. Natural insulations used traditionally in skeletal wood structures is breathable, however, it looses it's insulation as times goes on (it condenses), but modern higher performance insulation is not breathable and will start to grow mould if humidity is allowed to go through it. But if you block the humidity with a humidity blocking film, the sides of the wood next to the film, can't fully dry, so they start to grow mould, the MDF even quicker than solid wood. So plywood is much better than MDF, but really the best option for wooden house is solid mass walls made of logs or timber frame with earth material infill (for example cob, adobe or rammed earth). Now this is only for temperate or cold climates. In warm humid climates skeletal wooden structures are great, because you don't want the insulation, you want the wind to change the air.
I agree my friend this would literally be the most glorious timeline and a super awesome way to make regions and countries have genuinely unique architecture
I don't think it's colonialism, the proliferation of modern concrete buildings and glass office towers is a recent phenomenon of the last few decades in much of the developing world, driven more by rapid economic growth, real estate boom, public housing projects and technological progress. I suppose them feeling more "modern" is also a part of the appeal and could be linked to colonialism, but colonial era architecture from what I've seen is very distinct from modern mass produced homes or commerical spaces. I doubt you can build a large apartment complex using traditional materials (I've zero architecture or engineering or construction background, so I could be completely wrong).
Very interesting. Contrary to what modernism may lead you to believe, something is lost by abandoning previous technologies in favor to ones better adapted to industrialization
Totally. I actually agree with him that there is always a trade-off. But perspective affects the nature of the trade-off. If the trade-off only affects rich people, then for the rest of us it is a trade-on.
Naturally if you let the bourgeoisie and their bootlickers and only the bourgeoisie and their bootlickers, whatever argument they present wont be against their own interest. This is why conservatism, liberalism and right wing ideologs in general shouldnt be trusted at face value. Most of the time they arent talking to you, they are talking to those who would be the most affected by tackling anthropogenic global warming: The MF profiting of pollution. If we only let the umbrella sellers tell us what's the weather gonna be tomorrow, 9/10 is gonna be raining all week.
I would love to open my windows more but it's so fucking hot outside and the AC is expensive. I've started placing air purifiers all over the house. We also don't talk about mold in indoor spaces. The way our restrooms especially are built make them giant mold traps. Something ventilation will also help. Would love to see a world where homes are built well-ventilated with plenty of filters and built-in dehumidifiers to control mold.
Oh my god it feels so primitive that we have to put up with mold growing in bathrooms still, no amount of chemicals will keep it at bay since you have to shower all the time.
People drew ideas for helicopters like hundreds of years before the car was invented. That’s clearly not what people are talking about and Neil (as usual) is just being willfully obtuse.
@@Tonytonytony1234 Nah I think you just missed the idea of the quote. Neil is an industrialised obtuse quote machine but there's a pretty good underlying point of that particular one
@@jakeevans6404 I mean, I do think I get where he’s going with it. Like that we take technology that we do have for granted because we think of other technology as more impressive. But one of my favorite things about my car is the lack of a giant spiral of death directly on top of it, so I think helicopters still have some crucial differences.
@@Tonytonytony1234 as if your car is not a 1+ton metal machine that can travel at speeds of 100+ mph. great idea to have thousands of those in the sky, yep
@@darkkitchenrecords2625 i get why you think that as myco mean fungus but TB is caused by a bacteria specifically mycobacterium tuberculosis. mycobacterium are called such because when grown on media mycobacterium form colonies that look like mold. they arent though. its a bacteria.
That early bit about how most Sci-Fi is unable to imagine another future is what i discussed in length with other people. Cyberpunk 2077 as an example, is stuck in the 80's including an intact Soviet Union. If i didn't know Solarpunk exists id think our society was unable to imagine a better tommorow.
@@Littlebeth5657 Me too! I was very happy that this years Hugo award best Novelette was “The Year Without Sunshine” by Naomi Kritzer. Its a distinct little milestone for the genre.
I feel like a lot of science fiction reads a little like they just dropped a bunch of new technology today and then visited the planet a year later. Still the same shit, but with flying cars.
Cyberpunk 2077 isn't *really* trying to visualize an actual future any more than, say, Fallout. It's a theme park filled with retrofuturism based on a time period (the 80s) in the same way that Fallout is with the 50s. It just so happens that it occasionally makes good points about the potential future of the actual world.
Thank you so much for making this video. You are the only big youtuber talking about air filtration and to solve continued covid transmission. Another important thing to communicate is why the virus and other respiratory disease itself is bad because people have grown to accept this/be used to it like the cholera water. Another reason why its not questioned.
One thing you don't mention as a possible cause of the higher prevalence of diseases post-covid is covid itself. It's known it damages the immune system, in particular the connection to developing autoimmune diseases is very clear at this point, so it's quite likely that the jump in other disease incidence is directly tied to covid.
YUP! The covid medical research is showing that every infection is both dangerous and damaging to the human body and we still have no cure for long covid.
What if you looked at the data and realized that excess deaths went up in 2021, not 2020. Then you might be compelled to ask what major society wide change happened then that could have caused such abrupt shifts in health and expected death rates.
This is a common meme but not really substantiated by the science afaik. COVID, along with other respiratory viruses, can lead to severe immune system disregulation in a minority of those infected (which is not immunodeficiency, more like autoimmunity) but generally isn’t understood to cause widespread immunity impacts. Sheena Cruickshank’s article “Does COVID really damage your immune system and make you more vulnerable to infections? The evidence is lacking” reflects the scientific consensus at this point
27:00 the idea that not catching diseases weakens your immune system is unscientific. It's more likely the fact that COVID weakens your immune system, which is actually the conclusion of numerous studies
Yeah and in some studies it seems like COVID remains dormant or undetectable for a long time in someone's body and attacks certain areas for a long time (aka weakening your immune system without being detected). I hope people mask up and avoid getting COVID because the more you get it the more likely your immune system is being negatively impacted and the more likely you are to get conditions associated with long COVID and repeated COVID exposure.
the problem isn't even necessarily "there's no solutions, only tradeoffs" as a saying, it's that they don't ever think about stacking multiple tradeoffs, only looking at one tradeoff at a time. Pumping air in and out of a building for ventilation requires significantly more heating or cooling, which isn't a great tradeoff, until you add the heat transfer unit, which represents a relatively cheap item that basically eliminates the heating and cooling downside. Banning or significantly taxing cars is a very expensive solution to air and noise pollution until you start building significant alternative transit infrastructure, in which case it's almost all upside.
@@jadziaschillzone You are quite literally the product of a population surplus due to massive investment and a century and a half of intensive r&d into the science of the production of food for a population that has grown exponentially the last 2 centuries. Food is not free, monetarily or otherwise. Have you ever picked Ribes or Rubus? Wild leafy greens? If you can even get to them before the birds and squirrels and ungulates, foraging for wild foods has a massive energy input for what is essentially replacement level or worse nutrition compared to what you would get calorically in like 1/2 of 1 squash from the store. Every seed you buy has an unfathomable amount of human labor put into it over decades and decades to achieve the optimum cultivar for your home garden, so that you can actually enjoy the fruits you grow and not spend 2 hours picking seeds out of mealy little berries to throw in your pemmican mix. I challenge you to subsist on a propagated patch of wild edibles without ANY commercial or infrastructure input (potting soil, pesticides, water mains, fertilizers, etc) and see if you aren't skin and bones by the time December rolls around. The fact that we are sitting here having this conversation is a testament to the fact that we have made food so easily available and so easy to ship that society has more surplus time than at any other point in history. One bulk carrier ship can carry 300,000 metric tons of rice to places that have no way at all of getting that food themselves. Mesopotamia used cultural expertise to buy back labor hours and reinvest that time into the standardization of their society, thus reducing the COST of growing food in non-monetary terms and likely in real monetary terms as the population would have access to a ready supply of food. Yet, even after 10,000+ years of humans doing this we were still at the mercy of the weather and good harvest until about 50 years ago. A single boll weevil getting into the wrong place could destroy economies (The american south, 1920s). Whole nations collapsed into revolt due to a summer being particularly rainy or dry. The human and monetary cost of research into stopping pests is the only reason why things are so stable right now. The human and monetary cost of biological controls and IPM that will phase out pesticides for more natural methods is fueled by massive input into the plethora of scientific disciplines that intermix into agriculture. You being able to spend your time going to college or learning how to build things or make art instead of tending to a field to feed yourself is the entire reason why you lack any perspective in how difficult subsistence farming is and how many people would die if there was even a minor disruption in the global food supply system, because your access to food is ridiculously easy. None of this is to say that the system is perfect, or that it's not getting worse because it absolutely is. It's bullshit that Walmart just refuses to sell a tomato that isn't shelf-ripened with ethylene. It's scary to watch how farms are just getting aggregated and eaten by giant super farms with massive subsidy programs and extremely strong lobbying programs at the state level. Saying food has no cost is just fundamentally wrong on every level: Human cost, labor cost, and monetary cost.
@@jadziaschillzone Fundamental misunderstanding of the history of food and agriculture, and wrong on every level of what we think of when we talk about cost. This mentality is born from the fact that previous generations have already solved a problem that you are trying to reintroduce. You are the product of billions of hours of labor over thousands and thousands of years culminating in the most stable level of food security in human history. Have you ever foraged for wild foods? If you can get to them before the birds, squirrels, and ungulates, you're lucky to replace the calories you spent looking for the things. I sincerely challenge you to subsist on a plot of wild edibles that you propagated from seed and used no commercial or infrastucture inputs on. No potting soils, no water mains, no pesticides, no fertilizers. See if you can justify calling it free while you spend days and days and days over the growing season fighting rusts, thrips, aphids, weeds, and the weather just to hopefully have enough yield to make it through the winter and into the next year. Now scale that to a settlement of even a few thousand people and see how many of you survive to the second harvest. The entire reason we are sitting here having this conversation is because humans managed to figure out that reducing labor costs of agriculture and reinvesting the hours into other things allows a society to turn into a civilization. Furthermore, even after 10,000 years of this practice societies were still largely at the mercy of the weather. A summer being particularly rainy or particularly dry could lead to instant societal collapse and did many, many times throughout history. A single bug getting into the wrong shipping crate could devastate the economy of an entire region (American South 1920s for example). We have bulk cargo carriers that can move 300,000 metric tons of rice from one end of earth to the other and feed millions upon million of people who do not have any ability whatsoever to sustain the populations of their countries otherwise. The entire world is walking a tightrope that dangles above starvation, but we're buoyed by the unfathomable amount of energy spent on improving yields and increasing tolerances to pests. Bt corn, the green revolution in the 70s, pest resistance soybeans; all products of the works of thousands and thousands of men and women sacrificing their time to improve the world ever so slightly. Human food security is more stable by every metric right now than it was 50 years ago, especially in the large countries that are still developing. The last 30 years of research into genetics will continue to change the way we grow food. The 2 dollar pack of tomato seeds you buy at the store has had more work put into it than you could ever dream of, just so you can actually pick your fruit and enjoy it instead of spending 2 hours picking seeds out of mealy little berries to throw in your pemmican mix. It is in no way (energy, time, or money) free. Damn near every cultivar you eat has had the same work put into it. The idea that people in cities would be able to live on subsistence plots is total fantasy brought about by those who live in a place with a constant food supply. A single apartment complex in brooklyn would require acreage to even attempt to feed itself. If you don't live in the US, I'm sure you can find a city in your country that works with my analogy. Shipping food around IS the only way to feed people, unless you want to volunteer to be one of the billions that would perish if humanity reverted back to subsistence farming. Ask a sub-saharan african how fun it is trying to grow your own food all the time. Sheesh.
I was just discussing the long term capping of oil and gas wells and how the industry can only be profitable if the permanent maintenance and periodic replugging is neglected. I think some if the determination to frame pollution control as a tradeoff is because the entire system is predicated on avoiding corporate responsibility for externalities.
I am worried about stranded assets in the oil and gas industry. Maybe it would be possible to ban the use of oil and gas from new wells from being fuel and instead it should be used for the production of chemicals. I am also extremely sceptical of bioenergy and net zero.
Precisely I think it comes down to the current financial system predicated on shareholder profit maximization at all costs depending on the lack of accountability for externalities to keep seeing their numbers go up indefinitely with little effort. Case and point the absurd amount of subsidies and even regulatory loophole exemptions that the fossil fuel industry has which if eliminated or fixed would likely more or less render the industry unprofitable. Perhaps we need a catchy medical disorder esc name from it to apply a stigma pressure on these folks? Share-Holder Return Addiction Disorder?
You know, my life is finally starting to go the way I want it to. Yesterday, though--day off, slower, I decided to just step outside and go on a really long aimless walk through wherever parks and fields. And noticing all the little bits of evidence of ourselves. I couldn't get the phrase out of my head, "What have we done?"
25:19 You get soooo close to discussing "sick building syndrome" The TH-cam channel mrmattandmrchay has a great urbex video on the five ways tower, which was abandoned due to "sick building syndrome" and includes something I'd never seen before - in the basement, there is a huge ventilation mechanical room for the building - something I suppose exists in most tower blocks, but I'd never thought of it before. If I understood correctly, this was the Achilles Heel of the building due to poor design since they were not considering airborne pathogens in the building's design. For reference, the room is shown at 5:49 in the video, "ABANDONED TOWER EXPLORE - old lifts from 1979 (five ways tower)"
I hope you realize how much your videos have improved with each new upload! The general structure for this video in particular (especially the transitions between chapters) makes it really easy to get interested in and I genuinely learned a lot. Thank you :)
I find it so strange that the "historical" focus of disease prevention is in water and surfaces. That is, my daily experience is getting sick via air. Probably because all that was done so well that it hasn't bothered me, but just about every sickness that I've got that I can remember is either a cold, the flu, or COVID. So ignoring air quality has been pretty ridiculous. Anyway, I wear N95 masks in public now. Have since the beginning of this year, when I got COVID. Of course, the one time I took it off two months ago, I got COVID again. 😢
Exactly, a lot of disease and viruses that are spiking up in numbers are airborne. I also wear a mask and use nasal spray, we never know when COVID will mutate and I don't want to get sick again, especially when dealing with my own health issues, I wouldn't be able to afford it if anything happened.
I do not know much about economics but I think it's fair to say that the biggest hurdle of the discipline could be summed up as "it's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism"
a huge amount of economics is tainted by capitalism existing. crap like ''the invisible hand of the free market'' or even seeing supply and demand as a law, comes from capitalism tricking people. economics can be incredibly useful! but the value of learning it is diminished by capitalism lying so much
I'm surprised that I have not heard UE mention Mark Fisher yet. A quote I like from Murray Bookchin that is relatable is "The assumption that what currently exists must necessarily exist is the acid that corrodes all visionary thinking."
Good video, just a tiny correction in 27:02, lockdowns in the West lasted a few months at best, so their impact on general immune weakening in the population are overplayed. Right-wingers would blame mass MRNA vaccinations for the population-level immune weakening. A better hypothesis is that since reopening in 2021/2022, continuous mass reinfections with newer covid19 variants have dampened the immune response on a population level, leading to a rise in the prevalence of other diseases.
yeah. it's amazing that he made a video about air quality but when he repeated that stupid lie about immune system damage from lockdowns i was so disappointed. it's not like people were locked into 100% sterile environments during the lockdowns. at least in europe and north america everybody still had plenty of contact with pathogens during that time, in their own homes and outside when taking a walk etc. and since our governments have unilaterally declared the pandemic over and have stopped almost all testing for covid it's easy to say that everybody is mysteriously sick all the time. i remeber someone showing that some fungal infection (i forget which one) that's been on the rise follows peaks of covid wastewater levels with an about 3 month delay for example. but if you refuse to track data, it's easy for the government to ignore newly developing science on the topic and just blame lockdowns.
i find the argument that lockdown somehow damaged immune systems especially heinous since in my country it is still used (by the media and pediatricians!!!) to explain why children are sick much more now than before the pandemic started when some of these children were not even born during the relevant period. when applied to children it is also a wonderful smokescreen to avoid any discussion of air quality, since we know from a number of studies that air quality is especially bad in school and daycare settings and schools have historically been drivers of respiratory disease spread.
i find this argument especially heinous since in my country it is still used to explain why children are sick much more now than before the pandemic started when some of these children were not even born during the relevant period. when applied to children it is also a wonderful smokescreen to avoid any discussion of air quality, since we know from a number of studies that air quality is especially bad in school and daycare settings and schools have historically been drivers of respiratory disease spread.
Even the term "lockdown" seems like pretty strong hyperbole, considering it's usually meant to mean "that time we couldn't go shopping for a couple of months".
I hate the flat I live in because the air just. Doesn't move most of the time. Or when it does, it's when someone's cooking and all the air goes into my room. If someone burns something I can smell it for hours after the air has cleared from the kitchen. I have my window wide open when it's warm enough to do so, but in winter it's always a fight between keeping warm and keeping air fresh in my room.
A lot of older buildings quite heavily dependent upon windows and surrounding architecture for their internal airflow. Sadly, a lot of existing apartment buildings in cities are older buildings, many of which have had their walls and windows sealed or relocated, thus preventing natural circulation. My apartment suffers from this issue, the developers took it upon themselves to seal the windows above the doors, the windows that were specifically designed to encourage airflow across the tall ceilings you would traditionally find in a loft apartment.
Every word you say is so well chosen. Incredibly clear, free of unnecessary ambiguity or unwanted connotations. This is helped by the fact that every argument you make is perfectly logical, and you address basically every question that a reasonable person would raise upon hearing this or that fact mentioned.
@@X_TheHuntsman_X the ban cars is mostly hyperbole 😆 people can have cars if they want, but our economy shouldn't be super reliant on them. I advocate for your right to go zoom zoom on a motorbike
@@LightGlyphRasengan ♥️ Believe me, I want walkable/bikeable cities, buses, and most importantly trains too. lol They don't even have to be that fast. My recent 8 hour ride from Birmingham to New Orleans was lovely in an Amtrak roomette. 😂
the funniest thing about it is that if we build our cities with good public transit and walkability in mind, then even the people who prefer cars will benefit. Simply because there'd be less traffic on the roads and they'd get where they're going faster and safer too. it's not a zero-sum game. we wouldn't even need the massive highways - it's not the amount of road you have, it's the amount of two-tonne vehicles using that road.
The longer it takes for the intro to happen, the further left the creator is. I love your videos, but I hope one day you can have your intro at the very end.
There are solutions without trade-offs. For example: dedicated bike infrastructure. It reduces the amount of cars on the road, and since cars take up a lot of space, one bike lane can have the same amount of human throughput as 2 car lanes. So it improves the commute of both the driver and the biker. It also is carbon-negative, it is healthy and safe. There literally is no negative beside some easily debunked perceived negatives. There are other examples. Rotting trash emits methane. Methane is a greenhouse gas 20x as potent as carbon. Currently we just let it be. If we instead use it as fuel, it reduces greenhouse gasses and we have extra energy. Everyone benefits. Nay-sayers are often just ill-informed or change-averse.
But see you forgot the most important trade-off of people bike-commuting instead of driving: oil and auto companies’ profits will decrease. Because the Holy Dollar is divine and corporate profits are paramount, it’s impossible for there to be net-positive effects from more people cycling instead of driving.
There are always trade-offs. Bike infrastructure is great in cities designed for it, but you can't just drop bike lanes into a city designed around cars. And while you can process methane from waste to generate power, it's cheaper to just burn natural gas - which is mostly methane anyway. Sometimes a trade-off is a good decision though - and right now it's hard to make any such decision because the only factors that can be weighed are those measurable in dollars.
@@vylbird8014 I'm from Rotterdam. The city has been bombed in WWII, so it had to be rebuilt from scratch. During the 50s and 60s, it became very much designed around cars. But in the 70s, the citizens started to protest, demanding bike infrastructure and safety for the children. It worked; Rotterdam became bike-friendly.
Bike lanes do have a trade off: building them costs money or labour, even if it's just one guy ain't a bit of paint. Costs don't have to be big. A trade off can be very uneven. If you are starving to death, a loaf of bread doesn't cost much, but you still are trading money off.
It is mesmerising to what point these people will go to NOT help others and show something that the vast majority of us have and that is basic compassion - fix climate change, poverty, socio economic problems - but what about trade offs (I.e. what about me and my desires). They utterly fail to see that a collective exists and even from an entirely selfish viewpoint, they should want that collective to be in good health so that at some stage down the line they can get their needs met when they can’t do something for themselves. If he ever had kids, would he discuss with them the repayment of their upbringing because they were « trade offs » to his time and finances. You have to be semi sociopathic to reduce everything down to how it affects just you, and not the group as a whole.
The first set of Futurama was amazing. Love it so much more than any Simpson's since it fell apart in... dear god... 'Luck of the Fryish' is the tear jerker we deserve, along with John Laroquette's spine!
Immune systems were not weakened by lockdown, they were weakened by covid itself, which attacks the immune system. We don't yet know how bad this is or how long it lasts or how to combat it -- its another paradigm slow to change. But lockdowns delayed initial infections -- so a few things upticked from that, for maybe one winter, on a small scale, but we are STILL getting sicker. Lockdowns did not weaken immune systems, but every time you get covid it may.
Thank you for correcting, I'm glad there are people who kept up with COVID research and can correct misinformation about COVID when possible. It's so important.
I love Decoding the Gurus. They can be annoyingly centrist at times, but overall they are great at exposing nonsense. Oh and this channel is pretty great too. …. Need part 2 of Sowell criticism…
People think I'm insane but every morning third thing I do is open all the windows in my house no matter the weather and they stay open until the weather dictates I close them. I have a very high heat and humidity tolerance. In the winter it's more challenging but I still do my best. I refuse to live anywhere were I cannot open a window or a door. Finding places to stay when traveling is the biggest challenge. I still have not gotten COVID. I do work from home 3 days a week and I'm not a big group activity person. I'm still very friendly and social having conversations with most people I encounter but I don't go to clubs or bars or anything. I'm still not sure how I have not gotten it, but I wager it's luck. It's also possible I've had it but didn't have symptoms. I haven't been sick at all (save a bout of salmonella in 2022) since 2019. I used to get sick every couple of months before. So...again. I don't get it. I'm excited to live in a time with so much access to scientific testing. Maybe the picture will before clearer as time goes on.
Dang I need to watch Futurama in order. The only episode I rememeber watching is the one where they go so far in the future that they cycle back around because it turns out the timeline just repeats itself once you get to the end of the universe. That stuck with me and I loved that. Plus I love time travel. But yeah, poor LA :(((( dang that plot stuff hits hard.
Watch them in chronological order up until the straight to DVD films. End on a high note with Into The Wild Green Yonder. It's all downhill from there.
Why don't we just charge oil corporations or consumers for the amount of atmospheric oxygen is consumed to produce/use their products? Gas costs oxygen your car is consuming as it goes down the road. It's not like we don't know the chemical formulas to determine how many tons of o2 and co2 are being consumed/generated, respectively.
"We" accept bad air. "We" let companies pollute. "We" don't solve climate change. Etc. This kind of language really urks me, because we wouldn't do any of that if we didn't live under this coercive system called capitalism. To act like we do anything totally negates how we are too busy surviving.
While I see the point, consumers do play a role, going for low-cost products instead of environmentally better ones, commuting further in individual traffic for better pay, going on vacation by plane etc. The point remains: Market prices of externalities are too low, but our behaviour reflects this.
This point breaks down when you see people buying bananas individually wrapped in plastic over a bunch of bananas. You can blame companies all you want, but people have also lost the plot.
@@LeoFieTv exactly people forget that products might exist for people who need them. Disabled people do benefit from certain products that look wasteful or extra to other people.
@@MrZauberelefant buying low cost products because you can't afford or don't have access to better ones. Most people don't go on vacation even once a year, and even then not everyone goes on a plane, but I wouldn't blame them because that is a fast way to travel (the point of a plane is to travel fast...).
I grew up in the Black Country during the 1950s and 60s, and when I went to Beijing a few times during the early 2010s, the atmosphere was like a breath of fresh air by comparison! There were factories on both side of my infant and junior schools - literally next door. And across the road for that matter. My grandad worked in one of them!
So there are no solutions everything is an equivalent tradeoff, but the economy is not a zero sum game and a rising tide rises all boats. Thank you for making me smarter Economics.
1:07:20 “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” -Buckminster Fuller
If you watch Not Just Bikes or other, eh, anti-car channels, the word externalities comes up a lot. It's something I didn't know about until recently (not an economist) but once I was informed that this was a thing it seems so obvious and so huge, it seems like a crime that it's not talked about more.
I am a Ph.D student in economics who has written papers on both the 1990 Clean Air Act amendment and the Kyoto Protocol! The Sulphur dioxide cap and trade system worked as well as it did because ~90% of Sulphur dioxide emissions in the US were emitted by power plants, and power plants have to be nested locally, they cannot move. The Kyoto protocol and other cap and trade systems for carbon have historically failed because of "Carbon Leakage," the proclivity for carbon-intensive industries to relocate production outside of the regulatory regime. Sulphur dioxide was largely not subject to leakage! Carbon is! We should not expect cap and trade policies to be very effective against carbon emissions as it was against Sulphur dioxide.
I understand they are probably someone knowledgeable and a friend, but the person narrating the captions in the first section is very hard to understand compared to main speaker so as someone who was listening to this video as audio in background it was very hard to hear what was being said in those sections.
Going to Beijing opened my eyes. First thing i noticed getting off the plane was that the air tasted like plastic. You could even see the smog indoors, and you couldn't see anything else from on top of a hill. Couldn't even see the sun at noon.
some of the read out portions are so hard to understand that i have to come to the laptop and pause the video to read it myself, something i can't always do...
I am SO FUCKING GLAD someone had finally called out Konstantin Kisin. Been seeing his stuff pop up on my feed for months with his triggernometry (name alone should be a red flag) channel. Guys an intellectual mid wit with a barely disguised right wing agenda
The fact people don't "see" polluted air enough is the rural area i'm from. It's near the sea, lots of farms and nature, very sparsely populated, so a very popular area for tourist, because "aaaaah clean fresh air" right? Wrong! When the wind blows from the North, polluted air comes from a big industrial area up North. Wind from the south?... same story. Wind from the East? Same story. Only clean air would come from the sea-side, but the wind hardly blows from the West ironically... And when agriculture put loads of manure on the land, you breathe in that nice fresh manure.... So that rural area has very very bad air quality, but people don't know that.
Heya just a minor gripe i have with this vid. I could barely understand, I believe that was Mélodie (french accent and all). Clarity in voice and pronounciation is kinda important to me. I don't wanna trash her with that. She did a decent job, it just required me to pay more attention to what she's talking about than when you or others did, which kinda fucks with my brain.
I took an environmental economics course once and most, if not all, of the solutions and ideas talked about were pollution credit swaps. It seemed ridiculous to me that my professor kept talking about this one policy implementation as if it is the cure to all climate and environmental issues forever.
Till this day i held onto this one sentence "Fuck the economy, people are dying!" It's the perfect expression on why "but the economy" shouldn't override more important things like safety, health, etc. Analyzing tradeoffs are fine, but there are priorities that needs to be adhered (and economy is pretty low in it).
This is a very timely video, given that COVID signals in wastewater is at a local high right before children go back to school in many places in North America. It's going to be a disastrous fall.
Yeah COVID levels are getting high in many states in the U.S. and I go to university, where no one, not even a public health professor, is taking precautions.
I saw a study that found that global warming would have a minimal impact on global gdp because the most valuable economic activities happen indoors, with air conditioning. I thought that was pretty dumb.
Lmao, you gotta love mainstream, neoliberal economists
Least out of touch economist
clearly those activities happen in a vacuum with no dependency on input from the outside!
that mans IQ must be room temperature. In Celsius.
You must find that study again. For sake of our amusement.
@@ivan55599 I've been looking for it, but there have many studies on the economics of climate change, so it's difficult to find one in particular :(
I’m a little annoyed. In a video featuring Futurama so prominently, you asked me, a doctor, to voice some academics…WHY NOT ZOIDBERG
There's no possible way you'd be able to pull off the Woop Woop Woop Woop Woop.
@@naciremasti I’ll have you know it’s my most commonly used phrase, especially when talking to patients
"The laws of science be a harsh mistress"
Your Woop woop woop woop woop is bad and you should feel bad!
"We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings." -Ursula K. Le Guin
Thanks for all the Fish U.E.
Mark ...Fisher ...i love it - capitalist realsim is an issue
We live in Big Bang Theory. It's powers seems inescapable. So did the property rights of capitalists.
The Divine Right of Kings didn't place a hard expiration date on the habitability of the planet though
So there is some argument that we are no longer in capitalism but moved onto techno feudalism where algorithms like amazon or RealPage has supplanted the market for price discovery.
@@nonenone5387Yanis Varoufakis has a book that's a good explanation of all this. Conveniently called "Technofeudalism -
What Killed Capitalism ". Essentially we live in a rent economy. The markets are basically already dead or so consolidated that they may as well be.
"You'll own nothing and you'll be happy"
This has become our reality. It was meant as a socialist driven dream which was co-opted by corporate America into the reality we live in today. You still have to pay for everything but you don't ever actually own it. You're just renting. You're renting access, insurance, apartments, bedrooms, shops, the sun roof on your new car, TH-cam, twitter etc etc.
finally a reasonable take on the big bang theory
that hit home with me. And don't even get me started on Two And Half Men.
it isn't even about the actual big bang for some reason
I think "pop culture detective" had some good videos about it
HVAC Engineer here, heat recovery units are awsome and I think there great.
Essentially you get to reuse the energy you've already put into the heated space of a building to bring the 'New' air upto temp while exhausting the 'Old' air.
It also works the other way round if youve spent energy to cool down a building but you need to bring in 'New' air the cool 'Old' air will cool down the hot air as it comes into the building, considering how simple the technology is it punches massively above its weight.
Is it just a heat pump basically?
Heat pumps are also pretty neat. Particularly the large scale fancy ones that go underground. Can't they run at like 500% efficiency because they basically just input some energy to make the refrigerant phase change?
@@babygorilla4233 Yeah there very impressive I've personally only installed the 'air to air' type of Heat pump but they can achieve very high efficiency or as we call it a COP 'Coefficient of performance' of 3.5 to 4.5, basically for every 1kw of electricity it uses you can get upto 4.5 kw of heat energy. I definitely feel there going to be a big part of the future.
@@Nosirrbro No there a different, Heat recovery units work directly on the air that's being exhausted from the building and the new air coming into the building. basically the 2 opposing airstreams pass each other through a Heat exchanger and exchange heat without contamination of the fresh air, hopefully that makes it a little clearer, if you want more info look up a product made by mitsubishi A/C called a lossnay. there are diagrams that make it easier to understand.
@@DAFLIDMAN I feel like the gas industry is the only reason we don't have some government program to retrofit air conditioners? Isn't it kinda as simple as adding a valve that can reverse the flow and giving the owner a switch to change modes?
The "there are no solutions, only trade-offs" Thing really grinds my gears. It really gives person who wouldn't use an epipen they are holding on a person going into anaphylactic shock because that's one less epipen that can be used in the future, even if they themselves are the one going into shock. I was going to make a disability related analogy, but these people definitely wouldn't see the equal value of the lives of us disabled people as a given.
The trouble is this is a very incomplete version of the statement (If we want the statement to actually reflect reality), and that's the only reason they're willing to say it. If they were being honest they would say, "There are no solutions, only trade-offs, and we are nowhere near as effective at finding the best trade-offs as we could be to optimize for least suffering." I know that's a mouthful, but it's the lived truth of humanity. We are allowing extremely bad tradeoffs to be made all the time, because they get us to just give up. Whenever you hear/see something like this, just remember what's NOT being said along with it.
EDIT: Oh wow, I just watched that part of the video, finally. The full wording he uses is even worse than you made it seem. Yuck.
@@keithwinget6521 there's the false dichotomy laid bare. There is no solution, true, but there are *solutions*. That is to say, there is no magic bullet, but we have a full magazine of techniques we can employ. The problem of selling them to the public one at a time allows for the trade-off narrative to creep in and take hold in the typically defeatist minds of the already overwhelmed populace.
The focus on tradeoffs DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT POSITIVE SUM LOGIC!!!!!!!
Both are Not mutually exclusive benefits out way downsides, people will use any excuse for badwork 😂😂
Tradeoffs shouldn't override priorities, period.
The power of Konstantin's asspull "there are no solutions because everything has costs" comes from the fact that people that begin with that argument will use clown accounting to maximize costs and minimize benefits until any change they don't like looks like a wash or worse.
Assuming profit maximization and nobody wants to bribe the owner for improvements, yay!! /S
It does always seems that the crux of any argument which uses the "no free lunch" talking point as the basis for a rebuttal always boils down to "we should do absolutely nothing."
They also choose to ignore priorities, or aren't even aware they're doing that. Notice how costs are only prohibitive and should only be taken into account for things they don't like. They always want to pinch pennies when it comes to healthcare but they never worry about the cost of a massive military or police.
it's the inverted sunk cost fallacy
I will never not love the TH-cam trope of going "Wait, the video's over already?" _moves cursor_ "Oh ho ho I'm in for a good one" 😜
Best trope ever
@@haruhisuzumiya6650 TvTropes would be proud🤧🤧
I've heard Thomas Sowell's "there are no solutions only trade-offs" aphorism so many times and I really believed it but this is definitely a fantastic debunking.
It reminds me a bit of learning that the Indians here in America had a method of farming that was incredibly bountiful but also required very little work. It really confused the settlers who came over because they felt as if not enough work was being done for the bounty that was provided. It's true that trade-offs may exist in the smaller sense, an immediate upfront cost of money or work or time may be required, but the dividends may easily exceed the initial investment.
There are no solutions, only trade-offs but also capitalism is win-win for everybody.
@@jeffersonclippership2588 Don't look at who pushed my books and academic career. I am just an objective man and totally not a token zealot for my literal paymasters. I've never even heard of AstroTurf.
-Thomas "I owe my career to the billionaires I champion" Sowell
This is covered in Seeing Like a State (a book UE has mentioned a few times)! Like a lot of the schemes in the book, the trade-off is for the sake of legibility to the central authority running the scheme. The older agricultural style might have been more productive with less work, but it was harder for the bean counters (literally in this case) to estimate output. Another trade-off is the older style required specific knowledge on the part of the planters and central authorities prefer schemes where all workers can be considered interchangeable, which is easier when the system is non-complex.
The older style was more productive because it used many crops growing closely together. Which requires more knowledge, but if done right they will support each other and are more resistant to pests and blight. The more legible system is what we're used to: rows and rows of a single crop (monoculture). This sucks for a lot of reasons, but it's good for a central authority because output is easily measurable and lets management ignore worker expertise.
@@jeffersonclippership2588 The existence of externalities itself proves it's not win win.
Capitalism is a win for capitalists. You're not a capitalist, ie owner class, you're worker class, ie part of the capitalist machine.
Sieze the means of production and you'll start winning.
I'm probably connecting dots that maybe shouldn't be connected, but I think "there's no solutions, only trade-offs" can be connected to a colonialist way of thinking. Like, "in order to enrich ourselves we must kill off/enslave/exploit non-white people", ignoring the idea that maybe establishing a mutually beneficial relationship with others may create more prosperity than trying to lord power over them.
London air; I will never forget standing in the shower during my commuter days, doing a quick snort out of my nose, and getting a mountain of black snot on the bathroom tiles. I still refer to commuters as the "Black Snot Brigade". It's so visceral, especially as I've never experienced it since quitting the Old Smoke.
I live in the countryside in a remote part of northern England, and the first time i visited London as a kid I was worried at the black snot thing, it was something I associated with the old pits in the area. I'll never forget the smell either, I find London a very smelly place.
@@tomirving8722 yeah it's gross. It really takes some of the joy out of visiting the place. But I think it's true for all built up towns/cities.
Im in a similar position now, whenever I take a deep level line (ie- Piccadilly, Bakerloo, Northen) I notice the black particulates when I get home and wipe my nose.
Was a wake-up call to how bad the air quality is on the underground and London in general
@@Soulus101in the United States, diesel cars are basically non existent, so our cities tend to be basically free of visible carbon particulate matter. I'm not saying the air quality itself is better, but it's quite a strong noticeable difference.
It wouldn't surprise me though because my brother lived in Germany for a while and after a couple of years, he developed what doctors were claiming was COPD but soon after he moved back to the United States, those symptoms disappeared.
The air we breathe is the cleanest ever in human history. Because pre-industrial humans were exposed to horrific levels of indoor air pollution from burning wood and animal dung. And because fire pre-dates Homo Sapiens.
Imagine a physician telling a patient there are no solutions only trade-offs, we could proceed with your treatment and you'd improve as a result but we'd have to spend medicine.
Well if you have some late stage cancer and you're offered chemotherapy, one chemo does less harm but is more expensive than another then the doctor is doing you a service letting you know what's available and letting you choose which treatment you'd prefer.
@@Jayare175Cool. Those are fringe cases. You dont design policy based on fringe cases. Most people that need medical help arent suffering of cancer; theres a bazzillion different types of conditions and diseases who requite a bunch of different types of treatments ranging from almost no negative side effects to chemo and other treatments who require further considerations.
TLDR: Whats your point? Like seriously, whats your point? Not being facetious or anything im genuinely curious.
@@33up24 That's literally on brand vs off brand medicine. Not fringe at all. Do you just want to obligate people to use on brand patented medicine with huge markups with no other option? Let people choose generic if they don't care about the difference in efficacy.
The OP made the point of "spending vs not spending the medicine". I don't think any real doctor or pharmacist wants to say no to people out of malice and refuse them. That's my point.
@@Jayare175That's not how on brand vs off brand medicine works at all though, generics are pharmacologically identical to on brand medication by definition (if they fail to achieve this then they're not valid generics), the only difference is that you're paying for the inflated profit margin of the original drug developer and their marketing budget (and yes, the developer of a thing is entitled to reward, but the rewards they're receiving are grossly disproportionate to the relatively small benefit their developments yield on average)
Add in all the statistics on supply and scarcity of resources involved in those medicines, and you would have an economic perspective.
Ethics, morality, and reason are not absent just because you are able to see the balance sheet. They are absent of you use the sheet to justify unethical, immoral, or unreasonable outcomes. Which is why "right wing" is a synonym for unethical, immoral, and unreasonable.
“Big Bang Theory was a crime against humanity”….i agree
Too much misogyny and racism towards Asian
i havent watched it. why?
@@drendelous Just kinda shit, innit.
@@drendelousbazinga
God I'm glad people will finally start saying this shit out loud. BBT is terrible and condescending. It comes across as a writing exercise straight outta the suburbs, written by people whose hardest challenge in life is a toss up between not drowning in their soul crushing ennui and that 5k, they accidentally signed up for at work that one time.
I watched maybe 5 minutes of the first episode when it aired, and after the fourth or fifth laugh track on badly written thin situational humor was enough. Maybe it got better, but I'll never know, bc I got no sunkcost and they whiffed their at-bat.
This may be your best video yet. Economics is such a complex, intersectional topic, but you're really good at finding the through-lines into other disciplines, and where the current professional discourse starts to break down or become insufficient. Love this.
Just glad someone used a suitable euphemism, “off himself”, rather than the nebulous ‘unalive’.
It’s purposefully nebulous so as to avoid algorithmic punishment.
I understand why people dislike it and I do too to some point but it seems the opposite of nebulous, unalive = kill pretty much exactly imo
"45 year old Brenda had just walked through the door after a long day at work. She shouted "I'm home!" through the house. She was met with deafening silence.
"odd" she thought to herself.
she took off her shoes, put her bag away and made her way upstairs to scold her daughter for not replying. as she rounded the corner on the landing, she was met with a mortifying sight in the bathroom in front of her.
her beloved daughter was lying there, cold. she had unalived herself just moments earlier."
how to make any sentence sound juvenile 101
@@julianbinder2371nebulous is probably the wrong word, but feels like a reduction of the vocabulary forcing us to dance around the point - akin to Orwellian Newspeak
What about, redead 😂
as someone suffering/recovering from a bout of pneumonia, it really hits in the lungs what you are talking about...
God that was a scary thing to have. I felt perfectly fine, then I'd stand up and move and be *instantly* out of breath and completely exhausted.
I can guarantee you that the thought of breathing dirty air makes anyone who has worked painting, fibreglassing, chemical manufacturing, etc, feel viscerally sick. I think most people have been blessed with never having had to deal with air dirty enough to cause immediate harm. It is something always on my mind when I walk past a dusty construction site, or a diesel truck exhaust.
I work input at fedex, and deal with a lot of dust making me sneeze. I wonder how much of that is microplastics.
I haven't commented on a youtube video since covid (ironically enough), but I want to comment here just to say how both well researched and necessary this video is. I am looking forward to the increase in content!
Please tell me he is bringing attention to poor indoor air quality responsible for the continued spread of covid.
Greatest quote of all time: “you see on the one hand this is based on nothing, on the other hand it is a curve, which is the shape of science”
As an architecture student, I have thoughts on the "trade off" between air quality and energy efficiency. The modern energy efficiency focused building method has caused much more problems than just worse air quality. The fully sealed structural layers are so complicated, construction errors are standard and even a small error can lead to severe water damage to the vulnerable structure in decade or two, which has led to much shorter life span for buildings and again worsens air quality to dangerous levels. They also require toxic or otherwise dangerous materials that put workers at risk and sometimes even the people using the building. Their construction is also very energy intensive, since they use a lot of steel and concrete.
There are solutions that fix all these problems without even compromising energy efficiency. Traditional methods of building have all over the world adapted well to their climate and environment, using the sun, wind, geometry etc. to their advantage. Traditional building methods are generally much more simple, much more easy to fix, made from natural non-toxic materials (wood, stone, adobe, rammed earth, brick etc.) and therefore are also breathable. This means that the structure itself filters through the air, and changes it's temperature at the same time. These types of structural elements, when they are well planned and maintained, are much more resilient towards water damage and other climactic factors. These types of buildings can quite easily be recycled or returned to nature without issues, while industrial buildings are very hard, sometimes impossible to recycle and they cause pollution as waste. Traditional methods are in fact, more energy efficient than buildings made with industrial methods in most climates, since they utilize passive cooling and heating methods from sun, wind etc.
Combining local traditional methods with modern technology such as renewable energy and modern heating, has potential to solve a lot of issues with the only drawback being that the construction industry can't have endlessly increasing profits. (Many of the natural materials are cheaper than the materials used for industrial methods, but traditional methods can't be mass-manufactured and they require skilled labour) This means that's it's not a one size fits all solution, but every region and climate has it's own solutions coming from it's own local traditions. This is not actually a bad thing at all. The reason why all our architecture and building methods are so similar all over the world is colonialism and it's beneficial for local communities, economy and culture to utilize local traditional methods.
Interesting I wonder if a MDF free wooden house would be better than one that uses MDF incase of water leaks.
@@Loanshark753 Oh yes absolutely. Solid wood recovers fully from from getting wet if it's allowed to dry, but MDF does not. Though that's not the main issue really, because if MDF is inside the structure, protected from rain, it does withstand changes in humidity. However, using MDF implies skeletal structure with MDF boards and insulatory infill. The insulation in these structures in the main issue. Natural insulations used traditionally in skeletal wood structures is breathable, however, it looses it's insulation as times goes on (it condenses), but modern higher performance insulation is not breathable and will start to grow mould if humidity is allowed to go through it. But if you block the humidity with a humidity blocking film, the sides of the wood next to the film, can't fully dry, so they start to grow mould, the MDF even quicker than solid wood.
So plywood is much better than MDF, but really the best option for wooden house is solid mass walls made of logs or timber frame with earth material infill (for example cob, adobe or rammed earth). Now this is only for temperate or cold climates. In warm humid climates skeletal wooden structures are great, because you don't want the insulation, you want the wind to change the air.
I agree my friend this would literally be the most glorious timeline and a super awesome way to make regions and countries have genuinely unique architecture
I don't think it's colonialism, the proliferation of modern concrete buildings and glass office towers is a recent phenomenon of the last few decades in much of the developing world, driven more by rapid economic growth, real estate boom, public housing projects and technological progress. I suppose them feeling more "modern" is also a part of the appeal and could be linked to colonialism, but colonial era architecture from what I've seen is very distinct from modern mass produced homes or commerical spaces. I doubt you can build a large apartment complex using traditional materials (I've zero architecture or engineering or construction background, so I could be completely wrong).
Very interesting. Contrary to what modernism may lead you to believe, something is lost by abandoning previous technologies in favor to ones better adapted to industrialization
55:15 "At the cost of others"
I think Kisin gave the game away here. These others aren't poor people as he is pretending to care about, it's the rich.
Totally. I actually agree with him that there is always a trade-off. But perspective affects the nature of the trade-off. If the trade-off only affects rich people, then for the rest of us it is a trade-on.
Naturally if you let the bourgeoisie and their bootlickers and only the bourgeoisie and their bootlickers, whatever argument they present wont be against their own interest. This is why conservatism, liberalism and right wing ideologs in general shouldnt be trusted at face value. Most of the time they arent talking to you, they are talking to those who would be the most affected by tackling anthropogenic global warming: The MF profiting of pollution.
If we only let the umbrella sellers tell us what's the weather gonna be tomorrow, 9/10 is gonna be raining all week.
I would love to open my windows more but it's so fucking hot outside and the AC is expensive. I've started placing air purifiers all over the house. We also don't talk about mold in indoor spaces. The way our restrooms especially are built make them giant mold traps. Something ventilation will also help. Would love to see a world where homes are built well-ventilated with plenty of filters and built-in dehumidifiers to control mold.
Oh my god it feels so primitive that we have to put up with mold growing in bathrooms still, no amount of chemicals will keep it at bay since you have to shower all the time.
Are built-in dehumidifiers even possible? Where would they dump the water?
I can't believe this. I clicked on the video to watch an essay about air and air pollution and I got HBomberguyed.
This guy might actually be hmbomberguy with a slightly different accent.
Not nearly as interesting as an hbomb video. This guy sucks ass and is just here to make neoliberals feel more progressive than they actually are.
@@Praisethesunson Ebomberguy (the E stands for economics)
All bald British boys look the same to me 🤷🏻♂️
Britbomberguy
Gist: Driving a combustion car equals sh***ing the water you plan to drink.
Also not wearing a mask indoors is like drinking diarrhea.
2:50 As Neil deGrasse Tyson has said, we have flying cars. They’re called “helicopters.”
People drew ideas for helicopters like hundreds of years before the car was invented. That’s clearly not what people are talking about and Neil (as usual) is just being willfully obtuse.
@@Tonytonytony1234 Nah I think you just missed the idea of the quote. Neil is an industrialised obtuse quote machine but there's a pretty good underlying point of that particular one
@@jakeevans6404 I mean, I do think I get where he’s going with it. Like that we take technology that we do have for granted because we think of other technology as more impressive. But one of my favorite things about my car is the lack of a giant spiral of death directly on top of it, so I think helicopters still have some crucial differences.
@@Tonytonytony1234Can't see the flying car for the rotor.
@@Tonytonytony1234 as if your car is not a 1+ton metal machine that can travel at speeds of 100+ mph. great idea to have thousands of those in the sky, yep
At 21:40 you refer to tuberculosis as a virus, it's a bacterium.
You are free to remember the relevant Futurama clip at your leisure
it could be fungal as well
@@darkkitchenrecords2625 i get why you think that as myco mean fungus but TB is caused by a bacteria specifically mycobacterium tuberculosis. mycobacterium are called such because when grown on media mycobacterium form colonies that look like mold. they arent though. its a bacteria.
@@darkkitchenrecords2625
TB is definitely bacterial, although it is an unusual one that is tricky to grow in a lab.
That early bit about how most Sci-Fi is unable to imagine another future is what i discussed in length with other people. Cyberpunk 2077 as an example, is stuck in the 80's including an intact Soviet Union. If i didn't know Solarpunk exists id think our society was unable to imagine a better tommorow.
Love solar punk!
@@Littlebeth5657 Me too! I was very happy that this years Hugo award best Novelette was “The Year Without Sunshine” by Naomi Kritzer. Its a distinct little milestone for the genre.
I feel like a lot of science fiction reads a little like they just dropped a bunch of new technology today and then visited the planet a year later.
Still the same shit, but with flying cars.
Cyberpunk 2077 isn't *really* trying to visualize an actual future any more than, say, Fallout. It's a theme park filled with retrofuturism based on a time period (the 80s) in the same way that Fallout is with the 50s. It just so happens that it occasionally makes good points about the potential future of the actual world.
A better tomorrow is bad for profits
Unlearning Economics is the SpecOps: The Line of Economics
Reminds me of Stewart Lee... "I'm the that of this"
We're in hell and it all keeps happening until we accept and let go?
Thank you so much for making this video. You are the only big youtuber talking about air filtration and to solve continued covid transmission. Another important thing to communicate is why the virus and other respiratory disease itself is bad because people have grown to accept this/be used to it like the cholera water. Another reason why its not questioned.
but then he blamed excess sickness on """lockdowns""" so...tradeoffs lol
One thing you don't mention as a possible cause of the higher prevalence of diseases post-covid is covid itself. It's known it damages the immune system, in particular the connection to developing autoimmune diseases is very clear at this point, so it's quite likely that the jump in other disease incidence is directly tied to covid.
YUP! The covid medical research is showing that every infection is both dangerous and damaging to the human body and we still have no cure for long covid.
Yes, and covid is still spreading.
What if you looked at the data and realized that excess deaths went up in 2021, not 2020.
Then you might be compelled to ask what major society wide change happened then that could have caused such abrupt shifts in health and expected death rates.
This is a common meme but not really substantiated by the science afaik. COVID, along with other respiratory viruses, can lead to severe immune system disregulation in a minority of those infected (which is not immunodeficiency, more like autoimmunity) but generally isn’t understood to cause widespread immunity impacts. Sheena Cruickshank’s article “Does COVID really damage your immune system and make you more vulnerable to infections? The evidence is lacking” reflects the scientific consensus at this point
@@MattAngionocould a pandemic that reduces the effectiveness of our immune system be a cause🤔
27:00 the idea that not catching diseases weakens your immune system is unscientific. It's more likely the fact that COVID weakens your immune system, which is actually the conclusion of numerous studies
Yeah and in some studies it seems like COVID remains dormant or undetectable for a long time in someone's body and attacks certain areas for a long time (aka weakening your immune system without being detected). I hope people mask up and avoid getting COVID because the more you get it the more likely your immune system is being negatively impacted and the more likely you are to get conditions associated with long COVID and repeated COVID exposure.
Youre a savage for being seen in public without a respirator.
that's what you look like from the future. cover your holes dude.
the problem isn't even necessarily "there's no solutions, only tradeoffs" as a saying, it's that they don't ever think about stacking multiple tradeoffs, only looking at one tradeoff at a time. Pumping air in and out of a building for ventilation requires significantly more heating or cooling, which isn't a great tradeoff, until you add the heat transfer unit, which represents a relatively cheap item that basically eliminates the heating and cooling downside. Banning or significantly taxing cars is a very expensive solution to air and noise pollution until you start building significant alternative transit infrastructure, in which case it's almost all upside.
It's absolutely insane how we just accept that cars and industry are allowed to pollute our bodies, thank you for making this video
The best way to disprove the saying "There's no free lunch" is to simply think about how much food we waste every day.
“Capitalism will even charge you for a free lunch”
The problem with free food is the transportation of the food to those who need it. Building that logistics network requires things that aren't free.
@@CarrotConsumer all food is free brother. Why do you assume that shipping food around the city even is the only way to feed people?
@@jadziaschillzone You are quite literally the product of a population surplus due to massive investment and a century and a half of intensive r&d into the science of the production of food for a population that has grown exponentially the last 2 centuries. Food is not free, monetarily or otherwise. Have you ever picked Ribes or Rubus? Wild leafy greens? If you can even get to them before the birds and squirrels and ungulates, foraging for wild foods has a massive energy input for what is essentially replacement level or worse nutrition compared to what you would get calorically in like 1/2 of 1 squash from the store. Every seed you buy has an unfathomable amount of human labor put into it over decades and decades to achieve the optimum cultivar for your home garden, so that you can actually enjoy the fruits you grow and not spend 2 hours picking seeds out of mealy little berries to throw in your pemmican mix. I challenge you to subsist on a propagated patch of wild edibles without ANY commercial or infrastructure input (potting soil, pesticides, water mains, fertilizers, etc) and see if you aren't skin and bones by the time December rolls around. The fact that we are sitting here having this conversation is a testament to the fact that we have made food so easily available and so easy to ship that society has more surplus time than at any other point in history. One bulk carrier ship can carry 300,000 metric tons of rice to places that have no way at all of getting that food themselves. Mesopotamia used cultural expertise to buy back labor hours and reinvest that time into the standardization of their society, thus reducing the COST of growing food in non-monetary terms and likely in real monetary terms as the population would have access to a ready supply of food. Yet, even after 10,000+ years of humans doing this we were still at the mercy of the weather and good harvest until about 50 years ago. A single boll weevil getting into the wrong place could destroy economies (The american south, 1920s). Whole nations collapsed into revolt due to a summer being particularly rainy or dry. The human and monetary cost of research into stopping pests is the only reason why things are so stable right now. The human and monetary cost of biological controls and IPM that will phase out pesticides for more natural methods is fueled by massive input into the plethora of scientific disciplines that intermix into agriculture. You being able to spend your time going to college or learning how to build things or make art instead of tending to a field to feed yourself is the entire reason why you lack any perspective in how difficult subsistence farming is and how many people would die if there was even a minor disruption in the global food supply system, because your access to food is ridiculously easy. None of this is to say that the system is perfect, or that it's not getting worse because it absolutely is. It's bullshit that Walmart just refuses to sell a tomato that isn't shelf-ripened with ethylene. It's scary to watch how farms are just getting aggregated and eaten by giant super farms with massive subsidy programs and extremely strong lobbying programs at the state level. Saying food has no cost is just fundamentally wrong on every level: Human cost, labor cost, and monetary cost.
@@jadziaschillzone Fundamental misunderstanding of the history of food and agriculture, and wrong on every level of what we think of when we talk about cost. This mentality is born from the fact that previous generations have already solved a problem that you are trying to reintroduce. You are the product of billions of hours of labor over thousands and thousands of years culminating in the most stable level of food security in human history. Have you ever foraged for wild foods? If you can get to them before the birds, squirrels, and ungulates, you're lucky to replace the calories you spent looking for the things. I sincerely challenge you to subsist on a plot of wild edibles that you propagated from seed and used no commercial or infrastucture inputs on. No potting soils, no water mains, no pesticides, no fertilizers. See if you can justify calling it free while you spend days and days and days over the growing season fighting rusts, thrips, aphids, weeds, and the weather just to hopefully have enough yield to make it through the winter and into the next year. Now scale that to a settlement of even a few thousand people and see how many of you survive to the second harvest. The entire reason we are sitting here having this conversation is because humans managed to figure out that reducing labor costs of agriculture and reinvesting the hours into other things allows a society to turn into a civilization. Furthermore, even after 10,000 years of this practice societies were still largely at the mercy of the weather. A summer being particularly rainy or particularly dry could lead to instant societal collapse and did many, many times throughout history. A single bug getting into the wrong shipping crate could devastate the economy of an entire region (American South 1920s for example). We have bulk cargo carriers that can move 300,000 metric tons of rice from one end of earth to the other and feed millions upon million of people who do not have any ability whatsoever to sustain the populations of their countries otherwise. The entire world is walking a tightrope that dangles above starvation, but we're buoyed by the unfathomable amount of energy spent on improving yields and increasing tolerances to pests. Bt corn, the green revolution in the 70s, pest resistance soybeans; all products of the works of thousands and thousands of men and women sacrificing their time to improve the world ever so slightly. Human food security is more stable by every metric right now than it was 50 years ago, especially in the large countries that are still developing. The last 30 years of research into genetics will continue to change the way we grow food. The 2 dollar pack of tomato seeds you buy at the store has had more work put into it than you could ever dream of, just so you can actually pick your fruit and enjoy it instead of spending 2 hours picking seeds out of mealy little berries to throw in your pemmican mix. It is in no way (energy, time, or money) free. Damn near every cultivar you eat has had the same work put into it. The idea that people in cities would be able to live on subsistence plots is total fantasy brought about by those who live in a place with a constant food supply. A single apartment complex in brooklyn would require acreage to even attempt to feed itself. If you don't live in the US, I'm sure you can find a city in your country that works with my analogy. Shipping food around IS the only way to feed people, unless you want to volunteer to be one of the billions that would perish if humanity reverted back to subsistence farming. Ask a sub-saharan african how fun it is trying to grow your own food all the time. Sheesh.
I was just discussing the long term capping of oil and gas wells and how the industry can only be profitable if the permanent maintenance and periodic replugging is neglected. I think some if the determination to frame pollution control as a tradeoff is because the entire system is predicated on avoiding corporate responsibility for externalities.
I am worried about stranded assets in the oil and gas industry. Maybe it would be possible to ban the use of oil and gas from new wells from being fuel and instead it should be used for the production of chemicals. I am also extremely sceptical of bioenergy and net zero.
We'll probably use the oil until it's gone. And then we'll start hydrogenating coal.
Precisely I think it comes down to the current financial system predicated on shareholder profit maximization at all costs depending on the lack of accountability for externalities to keep seeing their numbers go up indefinitely with little effort. Case and point the absurd amount of subsidies and even regulatory loophole exemptions that the fossil fuel industry has which if eliminated or fixed would likely more or less render the industry unprofitable.
Perhaps we need a catchy medical disorder esc name from it to apply a stigma pressure on these folks? Share-Holder Return Addiction Disorder?
I feel like I should know more about this.
DarkviperAu is credited in the description. I'm intrigued.
he uh, he read out some of the quotes, like the one for covid
I was kinda surprised to hear his voice lmao. 20:00, 24:48
He was blackmailed into doing this to get into witness protection...
@@John-ct5opand around 54:00
one day when the video budget gets big enough he's gonna have chris chan or boogie to do voiceovers
You know, my life is finally starting to go the way I want it to.
Yesterday, though--day off, slower, I decided to just step outside and go on a really long aimless walk through wherever parks and fields. And noticing all the little bits of evidence of ourselves. I couldn't get the phrase out of my head, "What have we done?"
Great opening man. "He just won't stop with the social commentary" 😂
Kisin is a cartoon villain.
He's Russian and British, he's the ultimate American movie villain.
25:19 You get soooo close to discussing "sick building syndrome"
The TH-cam channel mrmattandmrchay has a great urbex video on the five ways tower, which was abandoned due to "sick building syndrome" and includes something I'd never seen before - in the basement, there is a huge ventilation mechanical room for the building - something I suppose exists in most tower blocks, but I'd never thought of it before.
If I understood correctly, this was the Achilles Heel of the building due to poor design since they were not considering airborne pathogens in the building's design.
For reference, the room is shown at 5:49 in the video, "ABANDONED TOWER EXPLORE - old lifts from 1979 (five ways tower)"
I hope you realize how much your videos have improved with each new upload! The general structure for this video in particular (especially the transitions between chapters) makes it really easy to get interested in and I genuinely learned a lot. Thank you :)
I find it so strange that the "historical" focus of disease prevention is in water and surfaces. That is, my daily experience is getting sick via air.
Probably because all that was done so well that it hasn't bothered me, but just about every sickness that I've got that I can remember is either a cold, the flu, or COVID.
So ignoring air quality has been pretty ridiculous.
Anyway, I wear N95 masks in public now. Have since the beginning of this year, when I got COVID. Of course, the one time I took it off two months ago, I got COVID again. 😢
Exactly, a lot of disease and viruses that are spiking up in numbers are airborne. I also wear a mask and use nasal spray, we never know when COVID will mutate and I don't want to get sick again, especially when dealing with my own health issues, I wouldn't be able to afford it if anything happened.
I do not know much about economics but I think it's fair to say that the biggest hurdle of the discipline could be summed up as "it's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism"
a huge amount of economics is tainted by capitalism existing. crap like ''the invisible hand of the free market'' or even seeing supply and demand as a law, comes from capitalism tricking people. economics can be incredibly useful! but the value of learning it is diminished by capitalism lying so much
I'm surprised that I have not heard UE mention Mark Fisher yet. A quote I like from Murray Bookchin that is relatable is "The assumption that what currently exists must necessarily exist is the acid that corrodes all visionary thinking."
Good video, just a tiny correction in 27:02, lockdowns in the West lasted a few months at best, so their impact on general immune weakening in the population are overplayed. Right-wingers would blame mass MRNA vaccinations for the population-level immune weakening. A better hypothesis is that since reopening in 2021/2022, continuous mass reinfections with newer covid19 variants have dampened the immune response on a population level, leading to a rise in the prevalence of other diseases.
yeah. it's amazing that he made a video about air quality but when he repeated that stupid lie about immune system damage from lockdowns i was so disappointed. it's not like people were locked into 100% sterile environments during the lockdowns. at least in europe and north america everybody still had plenty of contact with pathogens during that time, in their own homes and outside when taking a walk etc. and since our governments have unilaterally declared the pandemic over and have stopped almost all testing for covid it's easy to say that everybody is mysteriously sick all the time. i remeber someone showing that some fungal infection (i forget which one) that's been on the rise follows peaks of covid wastewater levels with an about 3 month delay for example. but if you refuse to track data, it's easy for the government to ignore newly developing science on the topic and just blame lockdowns.
i find the argument that lockdown somehow damaged immune systems especially heinous since in my country it is still used (by the media and pediatricians!!!) to explain why children are sick much more now than before the pandemic started when some of these children were not even born during the relevant period. when applied to children it is also a wonderful smokescreen to avoid any discussion of air quality, since we know from a number of studies that air quality is especially bad in school and daycare settings and schools have historically been drivers of respiratory disease spread.
The lockdowns collpased the economy and caused a tranfer of money from the workers to the rich.
i find this argument especially heinous since in my country it is still used to explain why children are sick much more now than before the pandemic started when some of these children were not even born during the relevant period. when applied to children it is also a wonderful smokescreen to avoid any discussion of air quality, since we know from a number of studies that air quality is especially bad in school and daycare settings and schools have historically been drivers of respiratory disease spread.
Even the term "lockdown" seems like pretty strong hyperbole, considering it's usually meant to mean "that time we couldn't go shopping for a couple of months".
You are really finding your groove with the talking head videos. Seriously, much improved over the past few years. Keep up the great work.
I hate the flat I live in because the air just. Doesn't move most of the time. Or when it does, it's when someone's cooking and all the air goes into my room. If someone burns something I can smell it for hours after the air has cleared from the kitchen. I have my window wide open when it's warm enough to do so, but in winter it's always a fight between keeping warm and keeping air fresh in my room.
Could you just leave your window open and close the vent.
Get heavy blankets?
@@SamRMoyer I have pets, it's not only about my health unfortunately. The only heater is under the window as well.
A lot of older buildings quite heavily dependent upon windows and surrounding architecture for their internal airflow. Sadly, a lot of existing apartment buildings in cities are older buildings, many of which have had their walls and windows sealed or relocated, thus preventing natural circulation. My apartment suffers from this issue, the developers took it upon themselves to seal the windows above the doors, the windows that were specifically designed to encourage airflow across the tall ceilings you would traditionally find in a loft apartment.
there are these things called fans, you might want to look into buying one, they're made to circulate air.
Every word you say is so well chosen. Incredibly clear, free of unnecessary ambiguity or unwanted connotations. This is helped by the fact that every argument you make is perfectly logical, and you address basically every question that a reasonable person would raise upon hearing this or that fact mentioned.
Is this the Simpson’s review?
All things are a Simpsons review, @redrom9270. Except this.
Please ban cars 😑 (after we have better public transportation of course)
But I like to drive... Sometimes... 😢 Mostly I like to motorcycle, but I wouldn't mind a few less cars on the road for that.
@@X_TheHuntsman_X the ban cars is mostly hyperbole 😆 people can have cars if they want, but our economy shouldn't be super reliant on them. I advocate for your right to go zoom zoom on a motorbike
@@LightGlyphRasengan ♥️
Believe me, I want walkable/bikeable cities, buses, and most importantly trains too. lol They don't even have to be that fast. My recent 8 hour ride from Birmingham to New Orleans was lovely in an Amtrak roomette. 😂
@@X_TheHuntsman_X aw how nice! 😄
the funniest thing about it is that if we build our cities with good public transit and walkability in mind, then even the people who prefer cars will benefit. Simply because there'd be less traffic on the roads and they'd get where they're going faster and safer too.
it's not a zero-sum game. we wouldn't even need the massive highways - it's not the amount of road you have, it's the amount of two-tonne vehicles using that road.
This video is very accessible. I would say is one of your best so far! Congrats!
The longer it takes for the intro to happen, the further left the creator is. I love your videos, but I hope one day you can have your intro at the very end.
Same but it’s shifting from last year 😅😅😂❤🎉🎉🎉
19:45 The DarkViperAU cameo 😂
❤
I do love a 40 minutes long setup to dunk on a absolutely gigantic wastecadet.
There are solutions without trade-offs. For example: dedicated bike infrastructure. It reduces the amount of cars on the road, and since cars take up a lot of space, one bike lane can have the same amount of human throughput as 2 car lanes. So it improves the commute of both the driver and the biker. It also is carbon-negative, it is healthy and safe. There literally is no negative beside some easily debunked perceived negatives.
There are other examples. Rotting trash emits methane. Methane is a greenhouse gas 20x as potent as carbon. Currently we just let it be. If we instead use it as fuel, it reduces greenhouse gasses and we have extra energy. Everyone benefits.
Nay-sayers are often just ill-informed or change-averse.
But see you forgot the most important trade-off of people bike-commuting instead of driving: oil and auto companies’ profits will decrease. Because the Holy Dollar is divine and corporate profits are paramount, it’s impossible for there to be net-positive effects from more people cycling instead of driving.
There are always trade-offs. Bike infrastructure is great in cities designed for it, but you can't just drop bike lanes into a city designed around cars. And while you can process methane from waste to generate power, it's cheaper to just burn natural gas - which is mostly methane anyway. Sometimes a trade-off is a good decision though - and right now it's hard to make any such decision because the only factors that can be weighed are those measurable in dollars.
@@vylbird8014 I'm from Rotterdam. The city has been bombed in WWII, so it had to be rebuilt from scratch. During the 50s and 60s, it became very much designed around cars. But in the 70s, the citizens started to protest, demanding bike infrastructure and safety for the children. It worked; Rotterdam became bike-friendly.
Bike lanes do have a trade off: building them costs money or labour, even if it's just one guy ain't a bit of paint. Costs don't have to be big. A trade off can be very uneven.
If you are starving to death, a loaf of bread doesn't cost much, but you still are trading money off.
@@موسى_7 Agreed, but it's much cheaper than an extra car lane.
It is mesmerising to what point these people will go to NOT help others and show something that the vast majority of us have and that is basic compassion - fix climate change, poverty, socio economic problems - but what about trade offs (I.e. what about me and my desires). They utterly fail to see that a collective exists and even from an entirely selfish viewpoint, they should want that collective to be in good health so that at some stage down the line they can get their needs met when they can’t do something for themselves. If he ever had kids, would he discuss with them the repayment of their upbringing because they were « trade offs » to his time and finances. You have to be semi sociopathic to reduce everything down to how it affects just you, and not the group as a whole.
@27:30 *nervously looks around my 1930's house that has 0 forced ventilation except for my window units, which simply recirculate the air*
If youre concerned look up a fancy C-R box to add some filtration.
Happy to see @DarkViperAU doing voice over. ❤
The first set of Futurama was amazing. Love it so much more than any Simpson's since it fell apart in... dear god... 'Luck of the Fryish' is the tear jerker we deserve, along with John Laroquette's spine!
Um, you're forgetting Jurassic Bark.
Immune systems were not weakened by lockdown, they were weakened by covid itself, which attacks the immune system. We don't yet know how bad this is or how long it lasts or how to combat it -- its another paradigm slow to change. But lockdowns delayed initial infections -- so a few things upticked from that, for maybe one winter, on a small scale, but we are STILL getting sicker. Lockdowns did not weaken immune systems, but every time you get covid it may.
thank you. it was wild to hear someone who supposedly believes in the science say this. but unsurprising from an economist lol.
Thank you for correcting, I'm glad there are people who kept up with COVID research and can correct misinformation about COVID when possible. It's so important.
I love Decoding the Gurus. They can be annoyingly centrist at times, but overall they are great at exposing nonsense.
Oh and this channel is pretty great too.
…. Need part 2 of Sowell criticism…
People think I'm insane but every morning third thing I do is open all the windows in my house no matter the weather and they stay open until the weather dictates I close them. I have a very high heat and humidity tolerance. In the winter it's more challenging but I still do my best. I refuse to live anywhere were I cannot open a window or a door. Finding places to stay when traveling is the biggest challenge.
I still have not gotten COVID. I do work from home 3 days a week and I'm not a big group activity person. I'm still very friendly and social having conversations with most people I encounter but I don't go to clubs or bars or anything. I'm still not sure how I have not gotten it, but I wager it's luck. It's also possible I've had it but didn't have symptoms. I haven't been sick at all (save a bout of salmonella in 2022) since 2019. I used to get sick every couple of months before. So...again. I don't get it.
I'm excited to live in a time with so much access to scientific testing. Maybe the picture will before clearer as time goes on.
33:55 as a born and raised NJian waiting in that exact goddamn toll line has probably consumed over a month of my conscious lifetime
“We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost-effective” - Kurt Vonnegut
Great stuff!
Wasn't there supposed to be a part 2 to your Thomas Sowell video?
I was wondering the samething
Give it time lol
It's the next one I think
Futurama has more math PhDs in the writers room than any other syndicated cartoon show 😂
i'm really glad you made this so here's some engagement in the form of a comment. i appreciate you
Hearing about John Snow makes my epidemiologist heart happy 😊
Good video, I always enjoy these when they come out
Dang I need to watch Futurama in order. The only episode I rememeber watching is the one where they go so far in the future that they cycle back around because it turns out the timeline just repeats itself once you get to the end of the universe. That stuck with me and I loved that. Plus I love time travel. But yeah, poor LA :(((( dang that plot stuff hits hard.
Watch them in chronological order up until the straight to DVD films. End on a high note with Into The Wild Green Yonder. It's all downhill from there.
@@naciremasti haha if I get around to it I will keep that in mind thank you :D
Brilliant video. Thank you very much.
Why don't we just charge oil corporations or consumers for the amount of atmospheric oxygen is consumed to produce/use their products? Gas costs oxygen your car is consuming as it goes down the road. It's not like we don't know the chemical formulas to determine how many tons of o2 and co2 are being consumed/generated, respectively.
This is SUCH a good video man.
"We" accept bad air. "We" let companies pollute. "We" don't solve climate change. Etc.
This kind of language really urks me, because we wouldn't do any of that if we didn't live under this coercive system called capitalism. To act like we do anything totally negates how we are too busy surviving.
While I see the point, consumers do play a role, going for low-cost products instead of environmentally better ones, commuting further in individual traffic for better pay, going on vacation by plane etc.
The point remains: Market prices of externalities are too low, but our behaviour reflects this.
This point breaks down when you see people buying bananas individually wrapped in plastic over a bunch of bananas. You can blame companies all you want, but people have also lost the plot.
@@ShwetaManohar already peeled fresh fruit is for people with disabilities who can't peel it themselves.
@@LeoFieTv exactly people forget that products might exist for people who need them. Disabled people do benefit from certain products that look wasteful or extra to other people.
@@MrZauberelefant buying low cost products because you can't afford or don't have access to better ones. Most people don't go on vacation even once a year, and even then not everyone goes on a plane, but I wouldn't blame them because that is a fast way to travel (the point of a plane is to travel fast...).
I grew up in the Black Country during the 1950s and 60s, and when I went to Beijing a few times during the early 2010s, the atmosphere was like a breath of fresh air by comparison!
There were factories on both side of my infant and junior schools - literally next door. And across the road for that matter. My grandad worked in one of them!
So there are no solutions everything is an equivalent tradeoff, but the economy is not a zero sum game and a rising tide rises all boats. Thank you for making me smarter Economics.
the Everything's A Tradeoff Guys never seem interested in what it costs society, the environment etc to create huge concentrations of wealth
1:07:20 “You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”
-Buckminster Fuller
NOT JUST BIKES MENTIONED 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
rvyntshubfwvu4fhu.blogspot.com/2024/08/the-impact-of-air-quality-on.html
28:38 "blue sky only at the top" - damn what a hit of nostalgia!
If you watch Not Just Bikes or other, eh, anti-car channels, the word externalities comes up a lot. It's something I didn't know about until recently (not an economist) but once I was informed that this was a thing it seems so obvious and so huge, it seems like a crime that it's not talked about more.
That clip of alex o’connor drinking water and smiling was perfect 😂
tell your narators to SPEAK UP i can barely understand
I´m not on youtube to read
The female was really difficult to understand and I’m a native English speaker.
I am a Ph.D student in economics who has written papers on both the 1990 Clean Air Act amendment and the Kyoto Protocol! The Sulphur dioxide cap and trade system worked as well as it did because ~90% of Sulphur dioxide emissions in the US were emitted by power plants, and power plants have to be nested locally, they cannot move. The Kyoto protocol and other cap and trade systems for carbon have historically failed because of "Carbon Leakage," the proclivity for carbon-intensive industries to relocate production outside of the regulatory regime. Sulphur dioxide was largely not subject to leakage! Carbon is! We should not expect cap and trade policies to be very effective against carbon emissions as it was against Sulphur dioxide.
I'm 1:25 into this video and I'm already so happy.
I‘m guessing this took a long time to write. Absolute banger this one, amazing video
Yay, new video. You made my day! Or, more like my next 3 days, I don't have infinite free time.
Every video, a banger. Well done - I'm learning so much from your content!
I understand they are probably someone knowledgeable and a friend, but the person narrating the captions in the first section is very hard to understand compared to main speaker so as someone who was listening to this video as audio in background it was very hard to hear what was being said in those sections.
I also could not understand
Going to Beijing opened my eyes. First thing i noticed getting off the plane was that the air tasted like plastic. You could even see the smog indoors, and you couldn't see anything else from on top of a hill. Couldn't even see the sun at noon.
some of the read out portions are so hard to understand that i have to come to the laptop and pause the video to read it myself, something i can't always do...
I struggle with focus these days but I thoroughly enjoyed this whole piece.
Thank you for your hard work
I am SO FUCKING GLAD someone had finally called out Konstantin Kisin. Been seeing his stuff pop up on my feed for months with his triggernometry (name alone should be a red flag) channel. Guys an intellectual mid wit with a barely disguised right wing agenda
He's absolutely insufferable
The fact people don't "see" polluted air enough is the rural area i'm from. It's near the sea, lots of farms and nature, very sparsely populated, so a very popular area for tourist, because "aaaaah clean fresh air" right? Wrong! When the wind blows from the North, polluted air comes from a big industrial area up North. Wind from the south?... same story. Wind from the East? Same story. Only clean air would come from the sea-side, but the wind hardly blows from the West ironically... And when agriculture put loads of manure on the land, you breathe in that nice fresh manure.... So that rural area has very very bad air quality, but people don't know that.
Heya just a minor gripe i have with this vid. I could barely understand, I believe that was Mélodie (french accent and all). Clarity in voice and pronounciation is kinda important to me. I don't wanna trash her with that. She did a decent job, it just required me to pay more attention to what she's talking about than when you or others did, which kinda fucks with my brain.
Your life must be hard
What a great video! More like this please! Telling a good story makes the Unlearning all the better!
I took an environmental economics course once and most, if not all, of the solutions and ideas talked about were pollution credit swaps. It seemed ridiculous to me that my professor kept talking about this one policy implementation as if it is the cure to all climate and environmental issues forever.
Till this day i held onto this one sentence "Fuck the economy, people are dying!"
It's the perfect expression on why "but the economy" shouldn't override more important things like safety, health, etc.
Analyzing tradeoffs are fine, but there are priorities that needs to be adhered (and economy is pretty low in it).
This is a very timely video, given that COVID signals in wastewater is at a local high right before children go back to school in many places in North America. It's going to be a disastrous fall.
🙄🙄🙄
Brother it’s 2024… no one cares about Covid. We are still paying for 2020.
Yeah COVID levels are getting high in many states in the U.S. and I go to university, where no one, not even a public health professor, is taking precautions.
Great video! Much love from Norway :)
Oh hell yeah
Love your channel, man.