You’d have a lot fewer engineers, scientists, doctors, and lawyers. Pretty much anyone with half-decent money management and enough income to not live paycheck to paycheck in the western world makes the global 1% in their lifetime. That’s only about a mil in total assets.
Median american (so probably not the four careers I listed) will earn ~2mil in their lifetime.
If I go into my garden now, and pull up all the weeds, the garden will look good for a bit, and the nutrients they were stealing from other plants will be spread out amongst the remaining plants.
However, there are likely some smaller weeds just under the surface, so within a few weeks, there’ll be some weeds again, and they’ll begin taking nutrition away from all the other plants. A year from now, there’ll be just as many weeds as before, and they’ll have strangled and starved many of the other plants in the garden.
It’s generally accepted that there’s two ways to deal with such weeds.
Regular maintenance. You need to cull all the weeds, every week, to keep on top of them. Eventually this will weaken the roots, rhizomes and seeds and then there’ll be fewer weeds. Over time there’ll be fewer weeds to remove each week, but you must never stop maintaining, or else they’ll take over as before.
Preventative measures. Look at the circumstances that cause weeds to form, and make structural changes to stop this. This may include things such as ground-cover plants, which protect the soil from weed growth, but store and then distribute their nutrients back into the soil. It can also include things like organising, supporting and strengthening your other plants, using things such as companion planting (where two plants take and release opposing nutrients, both working together and feeding each other to become stronger). When the garden is unified and stronger and working harmoniously, there are fewer opportunities for weeds to thrive.
It’s best to take both approaches simultaneously.
Oh, sorry, I accidentally posted this gardening tip in a comment about billionaires!
Any given population is approximately 30% highly authoritarian. Their behaviors can be summarized as:
high degree of submission to established, legitimate authorities in their society
high levels of aggression in the name of said authorities
a high level of conventionalism
Often, a high authoritarian individual can be identified with the following question: To what degree should society be dictated by authority? Low and medium authoritarian people will both answer “not at all”, while highly authoritarian people will say something like “an average amount”. This illustrates the need to be normal in their lives. The need to see oneself as average.
So, one of the most effective ways to prevent this is for highly authoritarian people to see others acting in defiance of authority, as well as interacting with other, non-authoritarian people. Basically showing that continuous submission to authority is not the only way to live a normal life.
The remaining top 1 percent would take their place and things would continue as usual. Maybe some of their heirs would spread some money around but I doubt it. We need structural change.
There’s a movie where a virus kills only billionaires, there’s a quick chaos as they try to hide their wealth but it turns very stupid quickly, society collapses as people stops trusting the rich and burn everything for some reason. Such a wasted premise
If we set up guillotines around the world and killed the global 1%, what would happen after that?
You’d have a lot fewer engineers, scientists, doctors, and lawyers. Pretty much anyone with half-decent money management and enough income to not live paycheck to paycheck in the western world makes the global 1% in their lifetime. That’s only about a mil in total assets.
Median american (so probably not the four careers I listed) will earn ~2mil in their lifetime.
If I go into my garden now, and pull up all the weeds, the garden will look good for a bit, and the nutrients they were stealing from other plants will be spread out amongst the remaining plants.
However, there are likely some smaller weeds just under the surface, so within a few weeks, there’ll be some weeds again, and they’ll begin taking nutrition away from all the other plants. A year from now, there’ll be just as many weeds as before, and they’ll have strangled and starved many of the other plants in the garden.
It’s generally accepted that there’s two ways to deal with such weeds.
Regular maintenance. You need to cull all the weeds, every week, to keep on top of them. Eventually this will weaken the roots, rhizomes and seeds and then there’ll be fewer weeds. Over time there’ll be fewer weeds to remove each week, but you must never stop maintaining, or else they’ll take over as before.
Preventative measures. Look at the circumstances that cause weeds to form, and make structural changes to stop this. This may include things such as ground-cover plants, which protect the soil from weed growth, but store and then distribute their nutrients back into the soil. It can also include things like organising, supporting and strengthening your other plants, using things such as companion planting (where two plants take and release opposing nutrients, both working together and feeding each other to become stronger). When the garden is unified and stronger and working harmoniously, there are fewer opportunities for weeds to thrive.
It’s best to take both approaches simultaneously.
Oh, sorry, I accidentally posted this gardening tip in a comment about billionaires!
we could also create a pesticide that kills all the weeds and gives everyone celiac disease and cancer
In the metaphor, this is pollution and microplastics.
The oxalis in my garden bed is getting out of control even though pull it.
Depending on the specifics type, you can normally eat it, which might help get rid of it quicker?
p.s. Do not eat billionaires.
This could be coopted by others to deal with species of plants that gets labelled as weed too.
Mint, dandelion, thistle, etc.
So, uh, I’d be careful with that.
Any given population is approximately 30% highly authoritarian. Their behaviors can be summarized as:
So, one of the most effective ways to prevent this is for highly authoritarian people to see others acting in defiance of authority, as well as interacting with other, non-authoritarian people. Basically showing that continuous submission to authority is not the only way to live a normal life.
https://theauthoritarians.org/
The remaining top 1 percent would take their place and things would continue as usual. Maybe some of their heirs would spread some money around but I doubt it. We need structural change.
There’s a movie where a virus kills only billionaires, there’s a quick chaos as they try to hide their wealth but it turns very stupid quickly, society collapses as people stops trusting the rich and burn everything for some reason. Such a wasted premise
Right, i get a feeling few would notice how it immediately felt like the boot was removed from our neck.