this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2025
156 points (97.6% liked)

AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND

1371 readers
239 users here now

This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

♦ ♦ ♦

RULES

❶ Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.

❷ Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.

❸ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.

❹ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.

❺ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.

❻ Don't be a dick.

Please also abide by the instance rules.

♦ ♦ ♦

Can't get enough? Visit my blog.

♦ ♦ ♦

Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.

$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.

 

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HasturInYellow@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

People seem to react very poorly any time it is mentioned that exponential growth is bad, no matter what is doing the growing. The economy, the population, debt, cash reserves, disease, or anything else.

Exponential growth doesn't happen often in nature, but when it does, it is indicative of a severe imbalance and will shortly rectify itself. Often quite violently.

Suggesting that we should try to reign in the exponential growth that we have going on in many sectors of our society before nature does it for us is met with rage and accusations of desiring genocide or mass death.

To these people I would say, we will see mass death and chaos if we do nothing, but if we do something to actually prevent that, we will very likely see the same thing on a smaller scale because undoing that growth IS THE SOLUTION.

[–] StoneyPicton@lemmy.ca -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It cannot be countered at all, no matter what you do with capitalism. It can be slightly mitigated in order to provide time to adapt, which should include substantial reductions in population.

[–] bizzle@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Who exactly would you see genocided to realize your new world order?

[–] collapse_already@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago

I'd start with the billionaires. Then the climate change deniers.

[–] rah@feddit.uk 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Reducing the population doesn't imply killing.

[–] bizzle@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Lmfao ok, who would you choose to strip of their reproductive rights and personal autonomy?

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I’m not OP either, but if you just provide everyone with effective birth control and access to abortion if they want them, the birth rate will go down a lot.

[–] rah@feddit.uk 2 points 1 week ago
[–] StoneyPicton@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago

No genocide. We're already seeing population reduction around the world that is being offset by immigration. With a coordinated effort we could accomplish a lot through attrition. Stop being so melodramatic.