take the money away from the people who have too much.
don't listen to their whining, their excuses.
they look at this sort of talk as biting the hand that feeds them because by their ideology, they're the hand that feeds (even though if you notice, they're the hand that takes).
but by their own ideology, they're failing to feed people.
so since they've failed, it's straightforward. if you have assets valued at above a cool million, you lose those assets and they become distributed and a new round begins.
there really isn't any other way this ends that's legal to speak about.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
For me, it's reducing worldwide population to sub 10 million
so we can continue our current lifestyle carefree
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Huh, ten million was what I figured too.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Lol based
and reduction pilled
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
The opposite must happen, ever greater economies of scale. Our fate must be in the stars, not in the Sentinel Islands.
Also 10m carrying capacity is for literal anprim life not any industrial system.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
10 mil was enough for early industrial era UK
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I meant that was about the maximum amount of humans Earth could sustain under an Anprim level of tech.
Also I doubt you'd like the reversion to the complexity levels of the early Industrial period in the UK.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yeah.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
The difference is we have the technology
and knowledge now. It renders 90% of humans obsolete.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
I need to groom you.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
100,000 people is more than you'll ever meet and in the case of particularly unadventurous people, more than they'll ever see.
100 of those is enough.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
You couldn't replicate the enter supply chain for a toaster with 1 million people. And that's just one good.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Don't need toasters. Literally
never 
owned 
one.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
but you know you would be one of the reduced ones dont you?
trans lives matter
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yeah, duh lol I've taken school
tests before 
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context