16:45 I noticed at this time stamp that it may be best to switch "dependent" for "alliance" as 1) there's already a dependent variation above (interdependent) and 2) dependent is seen as weak. The term alliance still requires dependency yet it tells us what the ultimate goal is for. 3) in Ego Evolution Theory, the hyper-masculine motivation of "Desire for Absolute Dominance" is swapped in for "Aim for Absolute Alliance" Just something I noticed, love your channel!
but what do you do when some countries follow the ever growing GDP mentality, while others grow up and start thriving in balance. Won't the self interested countries gain an edge? There starts a political issue of competition. Or does it?
I like to believe that a happier and healthier population is more innovative and intrinsically productive. Whether that translates to economic growth or not will depend on the quality of our organizations and their ability to position people in their ideal niche. Technology and automation can give us a headstart to building new systems but we need policy and culture to catch up and keep up. Our communities need to be strengthened and supported at the local level to support the transitions required at higher levels. We have a lot of work to do.
I'm curious, does anyone think that the growth economy is perpetuated by men because of an inability to think in terms of multitasking between short term and long term gains? I'm not trying to hate on men because I truly think men and women have unique skills that balance each other and are equal in their value. I believe that men have this insanely awesome ability to be emotionally stable in any situation. Emotional maturity, patience and emotional discernment are quite valuable. However, I think that emotionally immature men are volatile, aggressive, and short sighted. Is it possible that capitalism has prevented men from being able to emotionally mature? In a capitalist system which is based on having more more more, emotionally development has been stunted so dramatically that social norms reinforce men being emotionally immature and materialist? Women have the ability to multitask and to effectively predict and work towards long term gains while managing other things simultaneously. Even an emotionally mature woman, will have moments of emotional outbursts because more often than not she is managing many things at once (a job where she's not treated equally, society where she is met with hostility, socially where she is pushed towards competing with others rather than collaborating, even at home there is the expectation that women keep a home in better order than a man). Isn't keeping a home in order all about multitasking various chores simultaneously (getting the laundry going, while checking grocery and other supply levels, while planning/preparing the next meal, while straightening up common areas, while prioritizing the importance of other tasks that come up, while checking the schedules of everyone in the household for conflicts). That's a lot of different things to manage at once but isn't running a country/an economy essentially very similar to running a household? There has never been a time in human history where women participated equally in positions within the government, or in higher positions of power. Men have always dominated seats of power at every capacity. Their lack of emotional development then, when in power is not only affirmed but its reinforced to equal "success". Then men continue to believe and think that emotional development makes me weak because the immature counterpart is "successful". They wouldn't want to develop emotionally understanding if all the men in power are territorial, aggressive, and ego focused rather than intellect driven. I'm just wondering how much those aspects of our world contribute to the idiotic idea that growth is better than sustainable. I mean, its obvious that a sustainable system is going to be more reliable for longer than a system that continuously gets larger and faster ...right?
No, nothing to do with that. It is a question of ' do you want to survive?' If the answer is yes then this is what we need to do. If you want to be instrumental in the destruction of all living things on the planet including your children then carry on but I want my children to survive and have good lives. This is not anyone's 'agenda' it is science. And no, all the scientists are not in a conspiracy against us to enable 'control' by the 'elite'.
Hope this finansial structure becomes the standard in the western world in my life time! Thank you for sharing this concept!
Just amazing. Thank you for touching on the very important topics that often get overlooked
16:45 I noticed at this time stamp that it may be best to switch "dependent" for "alliance" as 1) there's already a dependent variation above (interdependent) and 2) dependent is seen as weak. The term alliance still requires dependency yet it tells us what the ultimate goal is for. 3) in Ego Evolution Theory, the hyper-masculine motivation of "Desire for Absolute Dominance" is swapped in for "Aim for Absolute Alliance"
Just something I noticed, love your channel!
I love it when economists discover what philosophy and sociology have been writing about for decades 💅
Love this a lot
Bravo 👏🏾. Sounds like a political shift from Capitalism to Socialism.
Great 👏👏👏👏
but what do you do when some countries follow the ever growing GDP mentality, while others grow up and start thriving in balance. Won't the self interested countries gain an edge? There starts a political issue of competition. Or does it?
I like to believe that a happier and healthier population is more innovative and intrinsically productive. Whether that translates to economic growth or not will depend on the quality of our organizations and their ability to position people in their ideal niche. Technology and automation can give us a headstart to building new systems but we need policy and culture to catch up and keep up. Our communities need to be strengthened and supported at the local level to support the transitions required at higher levels. We have a lot of work to do.
I'm curious, does anyone think that the growth economy is perpetuated by men because of an inability to think in terms of multitasking between short term and long term gains?
I'm not trying to hate on men because I truly think men and women have unique skills that balance each other and are equal in their value. I believe that men have this insanely awesome ability to be emotionally stable in any situation. Emotional maturity, patience and emotional discernment are quite valuable. However, I think that emotionally immature men are volatile, aggressive, and short sighted. Is it possible that capitalism has prevented men from being able to emotionally mature? In a capitalist system which is based on having more more more, emotionally development has been stunted so dramatically that social norms reinforce men being emotionally immature and materialist?
Women have the ability to multitask and to effectively predict and work towards long term gains while managing other things simultaneously. Even an emotionally mature woman, will have moments of emotional outbursts because more often than not she is managing many things at once (a job where she's not treated equally, society where she is met with hostility, socially where she is pushed towards competing with others rather than collaborating, even at home there is the expectation that women keep a home in better order than a man). Isn't keeping a home in order all about multitasking various chores simultaneously (getting the laundry going, while checking grocery and other supply levels, while planning/preparing the next meal, while straightening up common areas, while prioritizing the importance of other tasks that come up, while checking the schedules of everyone in the household for conflicts). That's a lot of different things to manage at once but isn't running a country/an economy essentially very similar to running a household?
There has never been a time in human history where women participated equally in positions within the government, or in higher positions of power. Men have always dominated seats of power at every capacity. Their lack of emotional development then, when in power is not only affirmed but its reinforced to equal "success". Then men continue to believe and think that emotional development makes me weak because the immature counterpart is "successful". They wouldn't want to develop emotionally understanding if all the men in power are territorial, aggressive, and ego focused rather than intellect driven.
I'm just wondering how much those aspects of our world contribute to the idiotic idea that growth is better than sustainable. I mean, its obvious that a sustainable system is going to be more reliable for longer than a system that continuously gets larger and faster ...right?
What is your reaction to WEF....and their goals, actions ?
This COVID PANDEMIC, however has been shown for what it is....Not zoological, but Lab origin !
This actually sounds like it is straight out of DAVOS/WEF....AGENDA ! Correct ?
No, nothing to do with that. It is a question of ' do you want to survive?' If the answer is yes then this is what we need to do. If you want to be instrumental in the destruction of all living things on the planet including your children then carry on but I want my children to survive and have good lives. This is not anyone's 'agenda' it is science. And no, all the scientists are not in a conspiracy against us to enable 'control' by the 'elite'.