Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MrGate t1_j7oxpg4 wrote

i feel like the georgia guidestones already said this. whoever had these built spent a lot of money to do so, and most likely probably had a think tank or something to figure out the estimated number of people etc.

i mean lets be honest, for advanced tech per say, not a lot of the population contributes to it. so if you were able to pick and choose who to keep, im sure you could pick enough smart people, enough laborors, and enough people who specialize in medicine etc to continue on humanity in the way it is today!

12

strvgglecity t1_j7q376c wrote

Those people would have to be farmers to survive if there were no farmers. Or they'd have to be miners if there were no miners. Or clothing makers. Or waste disposal.

The only reason anyone can pursue technology is because all other needs are already provided for.

9

MrGate t1_j7q6vrb wrote

obv some would need to be farmers etc. but for example, with the tech and advancments we made, you dont nearly need as many people running farms as you use to.

and over time a lot of things like this could be automated by machines even more

5

[deleted] t1_j7rw718 wrote

We farm, and I work in Tech with a good Internet connection. AI can't go out and repair lines though. It's no where close. The real shitter is we're building battle bots before we're building infrastructure bots.

This will put the minimum tipping point population much higher. Also, there have been doomsayers since forever making the same claims and every time there's a new new discovery that makes that problem vanish.

Right now I see the rich trying to shift the food supply and the power and money that comes with away from the cattlemen into their own favor.

​

To which I I say, I will first eat the people that demand I eat the bugs.

1

socialcommentary2000 t1_j7q9tkr wrote

>i mean lets be honest, for advanced tech per say, not a lot of the population contributes to it.

This is so utterly and completely wrong, it's sort of mind bending.

The stupid boxed set of silverware from the local Bed Bath and Beyond (Pre-bankruptcy) involves multiple cross globe border crossings by transport to bring to that silly store shelf. The complexity only goes up from there.

People massively underestimate just how many people come into play in modern supply chains.

7

wansuitree t1_j7p4l8c wrote

That's just the ideal population with a very sick and disgusting rationale and ideology behind it.

A couple of million would probably be enough to continue and progress further.

4

whooops-- t1_j7r53sb wrote

Umm the modern society need a huge population to maintain and also all our arts and literature achievements are based on the society. If you purposely eliminate population, the science and arts based on that would decline.

1