Nostalgia

[DarkRange55]

Wdym? I've never heard the term "knock it" before

For example, you've never heard, don't knock it till you try it?

 

[Throwawayacc3]

I wish I could be a kid again. I feel so much nostalgia for the past and my childhood. I wish that I could go back to better days. I wish that I didn't have to be independent and make my own way in the world. I don't want to have to support myself. There's nothing that I would hate more than having to adult (work for a living, pay bills, rent, taxes etc). I never even wanted to grow up anyways, and I wish that I were never born in the first place. I never asked for any of this, yet I'm burdened with all of these problems (of life and survival). My uncle said that my mom has no more (legal) obligation to (support) me since I'm past the age of 18, and that it's "shameful" that I'm still living at home with her, but I don't agree with this. Parents should support their children unconditionally, as it was they who brought them into this world and burdened them with existence.

I'm going to be really blunt and to the point. Your uncle is also a piece of shit which isn't surprising. Are all boomers/gen X mind controlled with the whole move out at 18 shit? In Italy you would stay with parents until you are married. I mean that's just one culture difference.

Say you'll move out but the only way you can pay is to sell your body - see what his reaction is. Fuckign hypocrites. "Oh but a job will pay you well" Ok - show me. Where are these imaginary jobs that won't involve me ending in a ditch due to malnutrition and lack of exercise.

This stuff winds me up so much.

 

[sserafim]

For example, you've never heard, don't knock it till you try it?

I've only heard "knock on wood"

 

[DarkRange55]

I've only heard "knock on wood"

Basically don't hate or dismiss something

 

[sserafim]

Basically don't hate or dismiss something

Oh okay lol

 

[Throwawayacc3]

There is literally no point if you don't want to do it, if you have a good degree there are ways to just save and be able to retire/move to a cheaper country when young but that requires a lot of work and being frugal
That is assuming the "retirement" after is even worth it to you
I'm not sure about the legality of suggesting this lol, so all I will say is that in America guns are easy to get

anything can be work tbh
I would much rather be retired and just work on my hobbies
don't know how slaving to make some rich fat fuck richer is any more valuable than jsut doing whatever I genuinely enjoy

lol retirement. Are you awake? They are raising the retirement age in the UK. No one is having kids - who's going to pay for the retirement? No tax from new "bodies". The lovely doctors and engineers coming in on boats daily aren't going to pay taxes.

 

[sserafim]

lol retirement. Are you awake? They are raising the retirement age in the UK. No one is having kids - who's going to pay for the retirement? No tax from new "bodies". The lovely doctors and engineers coming in on boats daily aren't going to pay taxes.

Society is a pyramid scheme and it's collapsing. The house of cards is falling apart

 

[Throwawayacc3]

Society is a pyramid scheme and it's collapsing. The house of cards is falling apart

Exactly. You're being gas light by your mother and uncle. I'm getting the same nonsense from my parents. A lot of people here seem to have child trauma as I have to keep posting this Opal video as it explains things a bit better. It's absolutely insane.
And people enjoy it! The amount of people that found the Wolf Of Wall Street (film) funny but don't understand that what he did is small fry to what governments are doing. He destroyed thousands of lives. Now it's going to be millions (hundreds).

 

[dödsängel]

lol retirement. Are you awake? They are raising the retirement age in the UK. No one is having kids - who's going to pay for the retirement? No tax from new "bodies". The lovely doctors and engineers coming in on boats daily aren't going to pay taxes.

Really depends on your career and where you're going to live/how much you earn lol
As well as what your parents do.
If you don't see a path to it, just NEET and leech off of parents/welfare or kill yourself. Slaving for 40 years is definitely not worth it.

 

[DarkRange55]

Society is a pyramid scheme and it's collapsing. The house of cards is falling apart

Well -
Over the past 50-100 years we've had a massive increase in the global population. We've had massive productively gains with technology and overall the world has been pretty prosperous. A big part of that comes from demographics where you have a population pyramid of more young people supporting not that many old people. You have a huge workforce that is paying payroll taxes (at least in the US) and paying Medicare taxes, ect. And that helps support old people and finance the system. Now birthrates are collapsing globally especially in east Asia and the US. America's population pyramid is all from immigration (we'll see how long that lasts…). But overall we've had an inversion of population pyramids. At least in democracies, the old cohort is going to be a massive voting block and they will continue to vote themselves as many benefits as possible as the younger generations continue to shrink as they don't have as much say in politics. Maybe this will lead to some kind of fascism, I don't know. The whole current financial system is based on population growth, productivity gains and the transfer payments from working individuals to retired individuals. So in 100 years when the population begins to collapse and the taxes are much higher - global stock markets, government debt and taxes to support an aging population globally (this will even come for Africa, too, at some point. They probably have it worse because they have huge birthrates now that will probably reverse), whats going to happen? I imagine its going to be worse - taxes and government debt will be high and the stock market (depending on what is representative of the stock market) may not do as well because you have fewer people working in corporations. The only thing that I think would save us would be some type of new technological revolution which maybe enhances lifestyles or lifespans and makes massive gains in productivity for a shrinking working population. Which is entirely possible. If we don't have massive increases in productivity or reverse this crisis, government finances may be so strained that retirement benefits are cut and maybe the global economy starts to flatten out or decline.

I think you might need to save way more than expected (even with an index strategy), live frugally and work longer than expected (even if its part time)

The social security system is not a savings account. It's a transfer system - The US Social Security system is primarily a transfer system rather than a savings account. It operates on a pay-as-you-go basis, where current workers' payroll taxes fund benefits for current retirees, survivors, and disabled individuals. It doesn't function like a traditional savings account where individuals' contributions are invested and accumulate over time for their own future use. Instead, it redistributes income from current workers to current beneficiaries. The Social Security Administration (SSA) invests a portion of the Social Security trust funds in special-issue, interest-bearing federal government securities, which are essentially government bonds.

This is a whole area of research and analysis for the USA and many other countries that I do not know very well. YES, demographics and intergenerational transfers in many different countries with many complex financial and tax issues.

https://www.nber.org/programs-proje...-disability-research-center?page=1&perPage=50

It's not a Ponzi scheme - it's a transfer system. You to your parents, your parents to your grandparents and your children to you, ect.

 

[sserafim]

Really depends on your career and where you're going to live/how much you earn lol
As well as what your parents do.
If you don't see a path to it, just NEET and leech off of parents/welfare or kill yourself. Slaving for 40 years is definitely not worth it.

I don't want to participate in society though. I guess I could, but the thing is that I don't want to have to work for a living in any case. My parents wanted me to go to medical school and become a doctor (lol Asian parents), but I don't see the point or value of work itself

 

[dödsängel]

I don't want to participate in society though. I guess I could, but the thing is that I don't want to have to work for a living in any case

Yeah then just NEET or rope.

 

[Throwawayacc3]

Really depends on your career and where you're going to live/how much you earn lol
As well as what your parents do.
If you don't see a path to it, just NEET and leech off of parents/welfare or kill yourself. Slaving for 40 years is definitely not worth it.

That's it. Even having a business that fails basically puts you in immediate NEET status. I've already said before to stop funding this broken system (by working) at all costs if you can. I've dealt with some many UK companies and how they operate and it's a complete joke while all their failures are rewarded with big salaries and large bonuses when they are "sacked".

 

[sserafim]

Well -
Over the past 50-100 years we've had a massive increase in the global population. We've had massive productively gains with technology and overall the world has been pretty prosperous. A big part of that comes from demographics where you have a population pyramid of more young people supporting not that many old people. You have a huge workforce that is paying payroll taxes (at least in the US) and paying Medicare taxes, ect. And that helps support old people and finance the system. Now birthrates are collapsing globally especially in east Asia and the US. America's population pyramid is all from immigration (we'll see how long that lasts…). But overall we've had an inversion of population pyramids. At least in democracies, the old cohort is going to be a massive voting block and they will continue to vote themselves as many benefits as possible as the younger generations continue to shrink as they don't have as much say in politics. Maybe this will lead to some kind of fascism, I don't know. The whole current financial system is based on population growth, productivity gains and the transfer payments from working individuals to retired individuals. So in 100 years when the population begins to collapse and the taxes are much higher - global stock markets, government debt and taxes to support an aging population globally (this will even come for Africa, too, at some point. They probably have it worse because they have huge birthrates now that will probably reverse), whats going to happen? I imagine its going to be worse - taxes and government debt will be high and the stock market (depending on what is representative of the stock market) may not do as well because you have fewer people working in corporations. The only thing that I think would save us would be some type of new technological revolution which maybe enhances lifestyles or lifespans and makes massive gains in productivity for a shrinking working population. Which is entirely possible. If we don't have massive increases in productivity or reverse this crisis, government finances may be so strained that retirement benefits are cut and maybe the global economy starts to flatten out or decline.

I think you might need to save way more than expected (even with an index strategy), live frugally and work longer than expected (even if its part time)

The social security system is not a savings account. It's a transfer system - The US Social Security system is primarily a transfer system rather than a savings account. It operates on a pay-as-you-go basis, where current workers' payroll taxes fund benefits for current retirees, survivors, and disabled individuals. It doesn't function like a traditional savings account where individuals' contributions are invested and accumulate over time for their own future use. Instead, it redistributes income from current workers to current beneficiaries. The Social Security Administration (SSA) invests a portion of the Social Security trust funds in special-issue, interest-bearing federal government securities, which are essentially government bonds.

This is a whole area of research and analysis for the USA and many other countries that I do not know very well. YES, demographics and intergenerational transfers in many different countries with many complex financial and tax issues.

https://www.nber.org/programs-proje...-disability-research-center?page=1&perPage=50

It's not a Ponzi scheme - it's a transfer system. You to your parents, your parents to your grandparents and your children to you, ect.

Lol are you saying that I should have kids to get the bang for my buck? Each generation feeds off of the newer generation though, so it is a pyramid scheme (I said pyramid not Ponzi). Society is literally a pyramid/cycle, the new cohorts go into the system to provide enough money and generate enough value for the old ones to retire

 

[Throwawayacc3]

I don't want to participate in society though. I guess I could, but the thing is that I don't want to have to work for a living in any case. My parents wanted me to go to medical school and become a doctor (lol Asian parents), but I don't see the point or value of work itself

That's projection. They are basically doing the dad from Opal - he needs constant mirrors so he can see himself and not be judged by others.

YOUR parents wanted to be doctors. If you don't become one they now see failure. It's also more an Asian cultural thing as well.

 

[DarkRange55]

So are you saying that I should have kids to get the bang for my buck? Each generation feeds off of the newer generation though, so it is a pyramid scheme (I said pyramid not Ponzi)

No, its not a Ponzi scheme. A Ponzi scheme is fraudulent investments that benefits the initial investors. Social security is a transfer system that invests in government bonds. Population pyramids are a factor that is under research. Technology will likely yield a solution to productivity. Most developed countries are dealing with this issue.

Lol are you saying that I should have kids to get the bang for my buck? Each generation feeds off of the newer generation though, so it is a pyramid scheme (I said pyramid not Ponzi). Society is literally a pyramid/cycle, the new cohorts go into the system to provide enough money and generate enough value for the old ones to retire

Most economic models are dependent on population growth. Technological progress can provide a constantly growing economic model that is not dependent on population growth (it also enables population growth).

 

[Throwawayacc3]

Well -
Over the past 50-100 years we've had a massive increase in the global population. We've had massive productively gains with technology and overall the world has been pretty prosperous. A big part of that comes from demographics where you have a population pyramid of more young people supporting not that many old people. You have a huge workforce that is paying payroll taxes (at least in the US) and paying Medicare taxes, ect. And that helps support old people and finance the system. Now birthrates are collapsing globally especially in east Asia and the US. America's population pyramid is all from immigration (we'll see how long that lasts…). But overall we've had an inversion of population pyramids. At least in democracies, the old cohort is going to be a massive voting block and they will continue to vote themselves as many benefits as possible as the younger generations continue to shrink as they don't have as much say in politics. Maybe this will lead to some kind of fascism, I don't know. The whole current financial system is based on population growth, productivity gains and the transfer payments from working individuals to retired individuals. So in 100 years when the population begins to collapse and the taxes are much higher - global stock markets, government debt and taxes to support an aging population globally (this will even come for Africa, too, at some point. They probably have it worse because they have huge birthrates now that will probably reverse), whats going to happen? I imagine its going to be worse - taxes and government debt will be high and the stock market (depending on what is representative of the stock market) may not do as well because you have fewer people working in corporations. The only thing that I think would save us would be some type of new technological revolution which maybe enhances lifestyles or lifespans and makes massive gains in productivity for a shrinking working population. Which is entirely possible. If we don't have massive increases in productivity or reverse this crisis, government finances may be so strained that retirement benefits are cut and maybe the global economy starts to flatten out or decline.

I think you might need to save way more than expected (even with an index strategy), live frugally and work longer than expected (even if its part time)

The social security system is not a savings account. It's a transfer system - The US Social Security system is primarily a transfer system rather than a savings account. It operates on a pay-as-you-go basis, where current workers' payroll taxes fund benefits for current retirees, survivors, and disabled individuals. It doesn't function like a traditional savings account where individuals' contributions are invested and accumulate over time for their own future use. Instead, it redistributes income from current workers to current beneficiaries. The Social Security Administration (SSA) invests a portion of the Social Security trust funds in special-issue, interest-bearing federal government securities, which are essentially government bonds.

This is a whole area of research and analysis for the USA and many other countries that I do not know very well. YES, demographics and intergenerational transfers in many different countries with many complex financial and tax issues.

https://www.nber.org/programs-proje...-disability-research-center?page=1&perPage=50

It's not a Ponzi scheme - it's a transfer system. You to your parents, your parents to your grandparents and your children to you, ect.

I think you might need to save way more than expected (even with an index strategy), live frugally and work longer than expected (even if its part time)


It's way worse than this even though it's true. They keep churning the printers so saving won't work in the long run. Living frugally is what everyone is doing now - forced to live in a box and eat processed food. Work longer is people still sticking to the routine of corporations.

 

[dödsängel]

Lol are you saying that I should have kids to get the bang for my buck? Each generation feeds off of the newer generation though, so it is a pyramid scheme (I said pyramid not Ponzi). Society is literally a pyramid/cycle, the new cohorts go into the system to provide enough money and generate enough value for the old ones to retire

As a guy I might have kids, just because I don't have to get pregnant and deal with shit lol
just fulfill my biological purpose, and fuck off/die

 

[DarkRange55]

I think you might need to save way more than expected (even with an index strategy), live frugally and work longer than expected (even if its part time)


It's way worse than this even though it's true. They keep churning the printers so saving won't work in the long run. Living frugally is what everyone is doing now - forced to live in a box and eat processed food. Work longer is people still sticking to the routine of corporations.

Money printing empirically does not cause inflation. It's actually the velocity of money, the turnover rate.
Secondly, our living standards have improved since the 1900's.

 

[davidtorez]

It is definitely a procreational ponzi scheme. No escaping that hard truth

 

[sserafim]

No, its not a Ponzi scheme. A Ponzi scheme is fraudulent investments that benefits the initial investors. Social security is a transfer system that invests in government bonds. Population pyramids are a factor that is under research. Technology will likely yield a solution to productivity. Most developed countries are dealing with this issue.

Most economic models are dependent on population growth. Technological progress can provide a constantly growing economic model that is not dependent on population growth (it also enables population growth).

Doesn't capitalism depend on infinite growth

Money printing empirically does not cause inflation. It's actually the velocity of money, the turnover rate.
Secondly, our living standards have improved since the 1900's.

Yeah but things are getting more and more expensive every year

 

[DarkRange55]

I think you might need to save way more than expected (even with an index strategy), live frugally and work longer than expected (even if its part time)


It's way worse than this even though it's true. They keep churning the printers so saving won't work in the long run. Living frugally is what everyone is doing now - forced to live in a box and eat processed food. Work longer is people still sticking to the routine of corporations.

They have increased the money supply radically but it really doesn't matter very much because there's no velocity, there's no turnover of money. M2. The Austrian Neo-Keynesian Monetarists all agree that if you create money you're gonna get inflation. Thats not empirically true. In 2008 the Federal Reserve balance sheet was $800 billion dollars. In 2015 it was $4.5 trillion. Before Covid it was about $7.5 trillion. There was no inflation, so inflation doesn't correlate to money supply. The key to inflation is velocity, its the turnover rate. And right now they're creating money like crazy and giving it to the banks to buy Treasury notes thats how they increase the money supply. The stick the Treasury notes on the Fed balance sheet and they just sit there. The banks have the money but they give it back to the Fed in the form of excess reserves. And they get a little bit of interest on it. But the money doesn't go anywhere. It's the lending, spending basically the increase in turnover of money that could give you inflation.

The Fed and economists measure inflation amongst all sectors. I don't dispute that groceries prices are up. But TV sets, computers, laptops prices are going down. Tuition is actually going down after going straight up for 30 years. So you can't just look at a quart of milk. If you're out to buy a quart of milk you might notice that the price went up. But when you look at everything else I mean clothing they're practically giving it away. And that is how they compute CPI. As you know it's a basket and its got groceries and clothing and gasoline, ect. So psychologically people tend to dwell on the number of prices that they see going up and they ignore the price decreases. But again clothing is a big item, they're practically giving it away.

Doesn't capitalism depend on infinite growth

Yeah but things are getting more and more expensive every year

Technology is inherently deflationary.
ford model t was ~800 in 1908, which would be ~$25K in today's $.
You can get a much better car for $25K today, so more bang for your buck. Cars are mostly computers now.

In 1904 a one minute call was a full day's pay. After WW2 calls got more affordable- more automation and more efficiency
In 1984 the cell phone costs $4,000 in 1984 money and had 30 minutes of talk time and took 24 hours to charge the battery. No texting, no apps, no camera.

Doesn't capitalism depend on infinite growth

Yeah but things are getting more and more expensive every year

The Federal Reserve targets a 2% inflation rate. All central banks target some level of inflation. You need a low-level of inflation for economic growth, its healthy. Deflation is much, much worse: see the Great Depression.
We averaged something like 1.8-1.9% inflation over the last 20 years. This recent spike is above average but still below the high of the 1980's.

It is definitely a procreational ponzi scheme. No escaping that hard truth

It's a biological imperative to reproduce.
The purpose of gene-based life is to pass on genes. If we didn't die, the purpose would be to duplicate genes.
(Some lucky and skillful bacteria don't die for many, many, many generations. In a sense, the first life form is still alive now, since there is a continuous chain of life from it to all current life. In another sense, it has changed enough to no longer be considered the same life form, but where do youdraw the line?).

Doesn't capitalism depend on infinite growth

Yeah but things are getting more and more expensive every year

many capitalist economies do aim for continuous growth as a measure of economic health and prosperity. While growth is a common goal within capitalist economies, it's not necessarily tied to the notion of infinite growth. Instead, capitalism can accommodate fluctuations in growth rates and adapt to changing circumstances within the constraints of the economic system and broader societal considerations.

 

[Throwawayacc3]

They have increased the money supply radically but it really doesn't matter very much because there's no velocity, there's no turnover of money. M2. The Austrian Neo-Keynesian Monetarists all agree that if you create money you're gonna get inflation. Thats not empirically true. In 2008 the Federal Reserve balance sheet was $800 billion dollars. In 2015 it was $4.5 trillion. Before Covid it was about $7.5 trillion. There was no inflation, so inflation doesn't correlate to money supply. The key to inflation is velocity, its the turnover rate. And right now they're creating money like crazy and giving it to the banks to buy Treasury notes thats how they increase the money supply. The stick the Treasury notes on the Fed balance sheet and they just sit there. The banks have the money but they give it back to the Fed in the form of excess reserves. And they get a little bit of interest on it. But the money doesn't go anywhere. It's the lending, spending basically the increase in turnover of money that could give you inflation.

The Fed and economists measure inflation amongst all sectors. I don't dispute that groceries prices are up. But TV sets, computers, laptops prices are going down. Tuition is actually going down after going straight up for 30 years. So you can't just look at a quart of milk. If you're out to buy a quart of milk you might notice that the price went up. But when you look at everything else I mean clothing they're practically giving it away. And that is how they compute CPI. As you know it's a basket and its got groceries and clothing and gasoline, ect. So psychologically people tend to dwell on the number of prices that they see going up and they ignore the price decreases. But again clothing is a big item, they're practically giving it away.

I don't know how you are typing this so fast lol. I'd have to go to my laptop and have a folder on finance but would have to itemise it like i did with my autism folder.

I don't agree with the living standard from 1900. Most of us here don't have good living standards. Just because we can live to 90+ because of the advancement of medicine doesn't mean it'll be a "comfortable" life. Plus the amount of resource hoarding has skewed things to the extreme. Even Covid was the biggest wealth transfer activity I've seen. In the UK anyway - a lot of smaller/medium businesses were either bought out or went bust (or but this is more rare - shifted at auction).

Even now I get a lot of emails from dealers who are dealing with Fixed Charged Receivers - essentially the developer can't continue with the development due to funding issues so the banks stepped in in order to scrape back what it can. I never used to get a lot of those email a few years ago.

 

[DarkRange55]

I don't know how you are typing this so fast lol. I'd have to go to my laptop and have a folder on finance but would have to itemise it like i did with my autism folder.

I don't agree with the living standard from 1900. Most of us here don't have good living standards. Just because we can live to 90+ because of the advancement of medicine doesn't mean it'll be a "comfortable" life. Plus the amount of resource hoarding has skewed things to the extreme. Even Covid was the biggest wealth transfer activity I've seen. In the UK anyway - a lot of smaller/medium businesses were either bought out or went bust (or but this is more rare - shifted at auction).

Even now I get a lot of emails from dealers who are dealing with Fixed Charged Receivers - essentially the developer can't continue with the development due to funding issues so the banks stepped in in order to scrape back what it can. I never used to get a lot of those email a few years ago.

A short well researched book showing the challenges of growth, inequality and class over 300 years. Lots of challenges ahead

https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674273559

I don't know how you are typing this so fast lol. I'd have to go to my laptop and have a folder on finance but would have to itemise it like i did with my autism folder.

I don't agree with the living standard from 1900. Most of us here don't have good living standards. Just because we can live to 90+ because of the advancement of medicine doesn't mean it'll be a "comfortable" life. Plus the amount of resource hoarding has skewed things to the extreme. Even Covid was the biggest wealth transfer activity I've seen. In the UK anyway - a lot of smaller/medium businesses were either bought out or went bust (or but this is more rare - shifted at auction).

Even now I get a lot of emails from dealers who are dealing with Fixed Charged Receivers - essentially the developer can't continue with the development due to funding issues so the banks stepped in in order to scrape back what it can. I never used to get a lot of those email a few years ago.

The poorest people in America today live better than the richest did 300 years ago.

In most senses, yes, but not if you wanted things or services that required skilled hand labor (butler, inlaid carpentry).

Our ability to purchase fantastic electronics for very little cost is because our ability to produce electronics advances even faster than the ravagesof inflation.

MUCH faster. And wages rise to partially compensate for inflation.

This pretty much depends on subjective stuff, 300 years ago there were no electronics - we can't compare it to nowadays?

We can compare what we utilize (live music versus music via electronics). Also things like ability to travel, health care, etc.

 

[Throwawayacc3]

A short well researched book showing the challenges of growth, inequality and class over 300 years. Lots of challenges ahead

https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674273559


In most senses, yes, but not if you wanted things or services that required skilled hand labor (butler, inlaid carpentry).


MUCH faster. And wages rise to partially compensate for inflation.

We can compare what we utilize (live music versus music via electronics). Also things like ability to travel, health care, etc.

The biggest challenge of them all….

Death.

 

[DarkRange55]

I don't know how you are typing this so fast lol. I'd have to go to my laptop and have a folder on finance but would have to itemise it like i did with my autism folder.

I don't agree with the living standard from 1900. Most of us here don't have good living standards. Just because we can live to 90+ because of the advancement of medicine doesn't mean it'll be a "comfortable" life. Plus the amount of resource hoarding has skewed things to the extreme. Even Covid was the biggest wealth transfer activity I've seen. In the UK anyway - a lot of smaller/medium businesses were either bought out or went bust (or but this is more rare - shifted at auction).

Even now I get a lot of emails from dealers who are dealing with Fixed Charged Receivers - essentially the developer can't continue with the development due to funding issues so the banks stepped in in order to scrape back what it can. I never used to get a lot of those email a few years ago.

100 years ago we did not have the internet, cell phones, MP3's, streaming services, medical tech of today, cheap international travel, ect

The biggest challenge of them all….

Death.

Replacing everything should be possible – first would be a mitochondrial replacement that would basically cut most aging processes to a few percent of what they are now, and then massive injections of stem cells coupled by drugs to get rid of senescent cells.
I picture the process of being taking multiple current mitochondria, sequencing them to figure out, and then re-create what the original mitochondria you inherited were like, replicating those new "original" mitochondria, packaging them in tailored stem cells, and letting the stem cells inject them into your cells.
A Similar process would be applied to stem cells; multiple current cells from various organs would be sequenced to re-create your original pluripotent stem cells, probably with a few enhancements such as ramping up repair mechanisms.
In both cases the body would do most of the work of replacement.
That still leaves long-lived cells like neurons to worry about, but at least those would be healthy due to the mitochondrial replacement.

 

[sserafim]

They have increased the money supply radically but it really doesn't matter very much because there's no velocity, there's no turnover of money. M2. The Austrian Neo-Keynesian Monetarists all agree that if you create money you're gonna get inflation. Thats not empirically true. In 2008 the Federal Reserve balance sheet was $800 billion dollars. In 2015 it was $4.5 trillion. Before Covid it was about $7.5 trillion. There was no inflation, so inflation doesn't correlate to money supply. The key to inflation is velocity, its the turnover rate. And right now they're creating money like crazy and giving it to the banks to buy Treasury notes thats how they increase the money supply. The stick the Treasury notes on the Fed balance sheet and they just sit there. The banks have the money but they give it back to the Fed in the form of excess reserves. And they get a little bit of interest on it. But the money doesn't go anywhere. It's the lending, spending basically the increase in turnover of money that could give you inflation.

The Fed and economists measure inflation amongst all sectors. I don't dispute that groceries prices are up. But TV sets, computers, laptops prices are going down. Tuition is actually going down after going straight up for 30 years. So you can't just look at a quart of milk. If you're out to buy a quart of milk you might notice that the price went up. But when you look at everything else I mean clothing they're practically giving it away. And that is how they compute CPI. As you know it's a basket and its got groceries and clothing and gasoline, ect. So psychologically people tend to dwell on the number of prices that they see going up and they ignore the price decreases. But again clothing is a big item, they're practically giving it away.

Technology is inherently deflationary.
ford model t was ~800 in 1908, which would be ~$25K in today's $.
You can get a much better car for $25K today, so more bang for your buck. Cars are mostly computers now.

In 1904 a one minute call was a full day's pay. After WW2 calls got more affordable- more automation and more efficiency
In 1984 the cell phone costs $4,000 in 1984 money and had 30 minutes of talk time and took 24 hours to charge the battery. No texting, no apps, no camera.

The Federal Reserve targets a 2% inflation rate. All central banks target some level of inflation. You need a low-level of inflation for economic growth, its healthy. Deflation is much, much worse: see the Great Depression.
We averaged something like 1.8-1.9% inflation over the last 20 years. This recent spike is above average but still below the high of the 1980's.

It's a biological imperative to reproduce.
The purpose of gene-based life is to pass on genes. If we didn't die, the purpose would be to duplicate genes.
(Some lucky and skillful bacteria don't die for many, many, many generations. In a sense, the first life form is still alive now, since there is a continuous chain of life from it to all current life. In another sense, it has changed enough to no longer be considered the same life form, but where do youdraw the line?).

many capitalist economies do aim for continuous growth as a measure of economic health and prosperity. While growth is a common goal within capitalist economies, it's not necessarily tied to the notion of infinite growth. Instead, capitalism can accommodate fluctuations in growth rates and adapt to changing circumstances within the constraints of the economic system and broader societal considerations.

Are you gonna fulfill your biological purpose?

 

[EmpathyMinded]

I wish I could be a kid again. I feel so much nostalgia for the past and my childhood. I wish that I could go back to better days. I wish that I didn't have to be independent and make my own way in the world. I don't want to have to support myself. There's nothing that I would hate more than having to adult (work for a living, pay bills, rent, taxes etc). I never even wanted to grow up anyways, and I wish that I were never born in the first place. I never asked for any of this, yet I'm burdened with all of these problems (of life and survival). My uncle said that my mom has no more (legal) obligation to (support) me since I'm past the age of 18, and that it's "shameful" that I'm still living at home with her, but I don't agree with this. Parents should support their children unconditionally, as it was they who brought them into this world and burdened them with existence.

I miss the days before I disappointed my parents, and friends who all left, and coworkers, and exes. They said "things will get better" but they only gotten worse. I'll never match their expectations. Maybe they expect too much, maybe I'm not enough. In the end, what does it matter which is true? All the matters Is the result: pain and exhaustion. I'm so tired.

 

[DarkRange55]

Are you gonna fulfill your biological purpose?

I think it would upset the anti-natalists among us

 

[Throwawayacc3]

100 years ago we did not have the internet, cell phones, MP3's, streaming services, medical tech of today, cheap international travel, ect

Replacing everything should be possible – first would be a mitochondrial replacement that would basically cut most aging processes to a few percent of what they are now, and then massive injections of stem cells coupled by drugs to get rid of senescent cells.
I picture the process of being taking multiple current mitochondria, sequencing them to figure out, and then re-create what the original mitochondria you inherited were like, replicating those new "original" mitochondria, packaging them in tailored stem cells, and letting the stem cells inject them into your cells.
A Similar process would be applied to stem cells; multiple current cells from various organs would be sequenced to re-create your original pluripotent stem cells, probably with a few enhancements such as ramping up repair mechanisms.
In both cases the body would do most of the work of replacement.
That still leaves long-lived cells like neurons to worry about, but at least those would be healthy due to the mitochondrial replacement.

Reading all of your second section. Playing "god" . What you're suggesting in theory would be considered good but how long until someone abuses that power.

In the US it seems they want more people to get diabetes. Keeps the money coming in.

I think it would upset the anti-natalists among us

lol. I think we all understand the void. People getting upset about politics, pro life, anti natalists and all this stuff doesn't change anything.