So then what’s up? Advocating for a carnivore diet is ecological madness, particularly a beef based diet when there are more ecologically friendly ways to achieve a carbohydrate deficient diet.

I’m guessing you haven’t read the discussion until now. That’s an extreme but more realistically we should be decreasing meat consumption and advocating for a plant based or meat reduced diet for the vast majority of humanity amid what is essentially the ecological apocalypse. There are a few narrow scenarios where standard meat production is environmentally neutral but that’s simply not how most meat production is done.

Have you seen the discussion going on? Even our current level of meat consumption should decrease that is short of shifting to more efficient sources. Once again insect based protein sources can be comparable to plant based protein. I would suggest lab grown meat but I don’t think it’s natured enough yet.

Beef as a primary source of calories for 8 billion people is absolute madness and ecological suicide. More efficient sources of animal proteins like insects or lab meat is more reasonable if one muse obtain protein from animals.

To respond to other discussions but I have like an irl life so chill baby, I’m here for you.

I also have a banana in my garage but it’s only for OP’s mom.

I’m coming back with receipts after the weekend. Right now i can’t manage the 30 whole minutes to debunk the madness on this sub but I’ll get there. Even then I doubt anyone will change their mind. For what it’s worth I did a few weeks of active research on the subject for a ten page paper I wrote a while ago and gave casually read on the subject from what I consider to be reputable authors such as Michael Pollan. Generally speaking though this sub is pure madness in the face of a full biosphere collapse that is happening.

And the majority of cows are fed that way?

Is that a banana in your garage or are you just happy to see me?

Particularly before this January. I’m starting to believe them a little that Donald bought their “were gonna nuke them” bid or maybe it’s just another Epstein leverage over Donald thing.

This applies to people who are trillionaires through other means as well? Although most don’t publicly share their total wealth and underplay the value quite heavily.

Yeah in the scenario of smaller and larger nations but let’s say all nations had a population around 10M or fewer then the power differential would likely be far less and of course the military power differential would be far less. Also today I learned today Ireland has a population of 5.5M, kinda shockingly small. Makes sense now there’s far more Irish outside of Ireland. Could have sworn it was more than that.

Most likely not from my limited experience of the place although this is becoming more of a surface issue and there are pundits (however disturbing) actually speaking about it. It’s becoming a serious fracture point for the right currently. Eventually the left will have to do their own housekeeping.

You would think but the major news media sure does their hard work to make suggesting not doing things like this is a hate crime. Also the fear politicians have around going against particular lobbyist groups is palpable. What the people want and what’s in the best interest of the country seems nowhere to be regarded currently by those in office, unfortunately on both sides of the aisle. I’m often reminded of the Tal Shiar and federation in this scenario.

Including the mining, yes. If you just bought and sold then it’s more like shifting around the ownership title of that sodoku solution.

So far as I’ve traveled. It seems easier for the population to be at least aware of what’s going on and engaged, particularly in the 10M and fewer population sizes. That engagement in turn seems to generally have good outcomes. Of course there are some outliers, but generally that seems to be around the limit where the population seems to maintain a strong awareness of the country in most places. Also yeah what you’re saying is definitely true as well.

Yeah it’s very unfortunate because we could pretty much effortlessly create a system that disallows gerrymandering and ensures the mathematical equivalence of all votes. The original concept was that smaller states didn’t want to become fully subservient to larger states if they entered the union.

Both? Yeah both. There’s so much emotional energy around this topic. So many actually deep philosophical questions involving what is a mind, copyright, the very essence of art. Aka there is so much fuel here to generate art which makes people think, feel, and question. Any medium is a valid medium to make art in so long as one isn’t committing illegal violence to do so.

Take banksy who creates works that really trigger people to think and feel but typically in an unlawful medium.

It’s funny I was downvoted to hell for the argument that smaller countries tend to have better behavior and that humanity would be better off if the population size of a nation was capped which is essentially what you’re suggesting in a roundabout way.

If I were to bet some states would go it alone or form smaller unions until they realize this drastically weakens them internally and on the global stage and ultimately a union would be formed not unlike the European union for the same reason the EU formed. When you go from part of a global power to a backwater 2nd or 3rd world country it’s pretty noticeable and the people there will want the former glory. Also losing strategic locations like Alaska or Hawaii would be big. At least Hawaii is too valuable as a military asset, if the US loses it someone else will take their shot at colonizing it. Essentially they’ll never be able to be their own country.