I suspect that you will find my post here to be frustrating, foreign, and confusing. These are some of the things that I experienced when I tried to work through the rationality of my enviornmental beliefs explained here. I will try to read your post carefully and give you some feedback.
fascist in the White House
Maybe not technically a fascist, but close.
Our current model for society is based on the so called free market, with profits being the driving force behind progress.
I would say that you are not describing the received view of free markets. The received view is closer to the idea that people who are able to interact freely will provide things that are mutually beneficial to each other. You get a loaf of bread for a decent price, and I can make some money by baking the bread.
===
However, profit is a poor incentive for sustainable change;
I would disagree... profit is a TERRIBLE incentive for sustainable change!
===
Now the next quote is where you introduce a great potential for error and lose perspective on how people can get along in a society filled with people who have different ideas:
and sustainable change is critical.
I think what you mean is two things:
- You have a subjective preference for sustainability rather than filling every square inch of earth with humans and destroying nature or destroying our standard of living.
- You think a carefully considered guideline for using natural resources will allow us to maintain a relatively good life without creeping toward something that looks like Mad Max or Water World.
[EDIT: I deleted stuff about an inference that tawasi was not trying to make!]
[EDIT: added ] You do not appear to be forcing these ideas on anybody. you appear to be recommending it to people who think it is a good idea for them to do for themselves... awesome!
========================
Jobs are outsourced, wages are stagnant, and retirement age keeps being pushed back,
Keep in mind, If you want higher income so you can spend more, that is counter-sustainable. Who do you want to have higher wages, just people in your country or people around the world? If China and Africa rose to anything close to the standard of living in the U.S., that would be an environmental catastrophe and unsustainable. Do you want those things just for people of your race/religion/country? Obviously it would be contradictory to want it for all because it would be unsustainable from an environmental perspective.
======
I know my life is meant to be lived for more than profit.
I have no problem with your statements about your worth.
=========
However in the USA we pretend that money is the real value.
Maybe say that OTHER people believe that money is the real value... not you.
[EDIT: i now write this as a warning to others about something that you do not appear to be doing here:] If you label other people as being WRONG for their subjective beliefs that you dislike, you are more prone to try to "fix" them by making them do things against their will. I ask you to recognize the possibility that you are not perfect and that the thoughts in your head are your subjective preferences, not facts about how the universe can live. Understanding this point is super important if you have any interest in living in a world that is not in perpetual civil war or other type of conflict.
=========
(EDIT .. i deleted some junk about and inference that tawasi was not trying to make!!!)
That is probably enough to think about for now. I'm sure that you wold want people to carefully consider their ideas to avoid making mistakes that lead to conflict, so I am asking you to take that time and make that effort. You can comment here and I'll answer.
thx
You make too many assumptions for rational debate.
If you could ratchet back your assumption level to a more sustainable level I could address your comments with a more constructive eye, however you straight up tell me what I mean to say, and that is, in my mind more than a little wrong headed if your intention is to find understanding.
To broadly address your concerns, the above is my opinion and not intended as a peer reviewed fact sheet of foot noted studies.
My opinion is a right which the internet broadly upholds, your agreement is not required, nor would I use force to coerce your agreement. I am simply making observations based on my life experiences, not trying to force anyone to believe my way, as you mention that is where civil war lays.
I am grateful for your reply and for your difference of opinion, it's civil discourse and genuine responses like yours which lend value to steemit.
Many thanks!
I see now that you were not trying to use your observations as justifications to do things against the will of other peaceful people. I made some big edits above and put notes in what and modified. There first part of your post had declarations that suggested that you understood factual information about what a problem is and that something needed to change (I still see it that way), but you seemed to address that need to change without trying to force things on other people... so that is cool with me. I generally see factual claims about sources of a social problem as a precursor for acting against other people (including environmental regulation), but it does not apply to this post, so I was hasty in my original post.
I did leave a note about the "sustainable change is critical" statement. I was referring to the distinction between (a) a subjective preference for a certain kind of sustainability and (b) a declaration that it is some kind of fact that compels others to do things. You seemed to be making a statement that it is an objective fact that sustainability is critical, but you do NOT seem to try to force that idea on others.
I think overall, you are applying your insights to a personal ethic, which exactly is the kind of solution that I would try to pursue in any conflict.
thx for you patience