Joe Rogan: Are There TOO Many People On EARTH?!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 жов 2024
- Jordan Peterson speaks to Joe about his thoughts on overpopulation and a possible climate crisis.
Jordan Peterson is a Canadian psychologist, author, and media commentator.
Clip Taken From JRE #1933 w/ Jordan Peterson
Host: Joe Rogan
Guest: Jordan Peterson
Producer: Jamie Vernon
#jre #joerogan
I was telling a well educated friend at work about an interview with JP and his immediate response was something akin to "that guy is evil", to which I asked "Have you ever heard him speak or read anything he's written?" He said, "I'd never listen to that guy". This is the world we live in.
I would literally kill a man to be in a Peterson classroom!! Or I could just work hard and do it the right way but STILL!!!
I do not think he is evil. I think he is wrong when he says that the world is not overpopulated and all he does is just give scenarios of wishful thinking. How come these rich guys do not tell people do not have children that you can not support? That is the root of poverty in my opinion. Every child should have access to food, education, healthcare and roof over its head. Instead all they talk about is hypotheticals that will likely not happen while the world continues to be overpopulated with poverty and ignorance. And yes, the world is overpopulated. 3 people live in my house but I could fit 10 or 15, does that mean that I want that? No, I like to have space to move around and find my isolation spot when I need it, space for the pets too, space to keep things in order etc. Cities are so overpopulated or why is housing so damn expensive and unaffordable? I just do not understand why people admire these kind of guys so much. He is wrong when he says that I am insinuating to get rid of people bc what I am insinuating is that people should start breeding less or better yet, poor people people with low income should start breeding less and governments should make a priority for all people to have access to birth control and yes, abortion is also a form of birth control and is ethical for a woman to decide what to do with their bodies. Do these rich MF's talked about that?
@@cecarblanco9933 i lowkey believe the world is overpulated too! After living in Seattle I very much appreciate the wide open spaces out here in Texas!
@@rilorobinson7685 Yet if you take a 20 minute drive out of Seattle, there is nothing. Same with every city in Canada and most of the Americas. There is plenty of land and opportunities for natural food production.
@@chrisweidner4768 Not true at all for Seattle.. Renton Tukwila Kent ect all crime ridden homeless infested shitholes, same with Cali until you get to the gated community and burbs. Maybe that's the case with a city like Austin Texas soooo try again...
If course there are way too many people. Even debating this is ridiculous.
I live in New Jersey and it’s packed. The traffic, the grocery stores absolutely packed, houses being built destroying nature. I’ll never understand how people say, “yes more of that please.” Just imagine living in India where the trains are packed with human meat like sardines. These people are delusional.
Overpopulation is an absolute myth. Densely populated cities aren’t proof of overpopulation.
Multiply last years birth rate by todays life expectancy. Is the birth rate net positive or negative?
It’s NEGATIVE. Birth rate has been cut in half since 1969. You need people to run the World. More not Less.
I have been in some seriously poor living situations. I was the guy that was homeless and addicted to drugs. I felt like I could never get out. I pulled my life together one step at a time, started with treatment. Then I got a job. I worked my ass off starting from minimum wage and eventually moved up. If the only job you can get is McDonald's then work hard enough to eventually own that McDonald's.
I think one of the biggest contributing factors to being poor is laziness. If you want it then work for it. To many people are not willing to take accountability for their own lives. No excuses
Disagree; imagine being in a place where your government needs you to be poor! To have “x” amount of wealth you have to have “x” amount of poor to sustain the rich… civics 101
Lot of people misunderstood about this term "there's too many people". They think, "oh, but planet earth is so big, we only occupied very little of it, there's no way it's enough yet". The thing about growing population is, the higher they grows, the more difficult things will become. Let me explain more. Imagine you're task to take care of 10 people. You need to make sure they're properly shelter and well fed. Of course, they're also will help with the work, but you are the one who's deciding who get what. It doesn't feel that hard right? Maybe some will say it is hard, not all people are good with certain task. But now, multiplied that number by a billion. Can you still say it easy? Of course you're gonna need a lot more help to manage that number. But the one who in charge of managing the people just can't keep up with the number. When you managing 10 people, can you imagine this problem occur: Corruption, organize crime, poverty, excessive usage of natural resources, and a lot more problem will come to surface as the number growing bigger and bigger. Right now it come to a point that we are literally affecting the earth temperature and overall well being. I can rant more, but I think this is enough to make my point.
There is a huge flaw in your mental exercise here. You say if their was 10 people, YOU need to make sure they are properly well fed and sheltered. But that's not how reality works, THEY need to figure that out for THEMSELVES. sure some of those people might be disabled or some other thing keeping them from doing it. But most of the human population is functioning and can work, build, and feed itself and if this mysterious entity who is in charge orf cooking and sheltering all these people suddenly disappears (if it could ever exist in the first place) people will still feed and shelter themselves irregardless. So when you scale 10 to billions, it's not fair when 9 of those 10 can take care of themselves.
It is too hard for the followers to comprehend that while these MFs continue getting richer.
@@johndoethethirdjohnsoninspecto I know you did not ask me that question but I can answer that: These rich MFs could start by asking their governments to make birth control more accessible to people and especially the ones with lower incomes. They could tell their followers not to breed children that they can not support instead of insinuating that we want to get rid of people. How is that for a start? Did you like my answer?
@@johndoethethirdjohnsoninspecto The person nicknamed "This Was" has given you the solution in these comments. I hope you'll move soon.
❤
People who accuse Dr Jordan Peterson to be a right-wing capitalist, really need to watch this. Dr. Peterson is neither pro-right or pro-left, he's pro-people. A man who is not scared to mention facts.
They accuse of right-wing because some of his beliefs align with being right-wing, but people don't understand that having morality doesn't mean you're politically motivated. Either way it's just a big word game and most of that political BS is just grifting, otherwise a lot of left and right leaning folk would be out of a job.
People are so driven by their own political ideologies they assume everyone else is to.
@@Psilocybin77 so true and if they don't agree to what they say their the enemy or with the enemy its such a pathetic way of thinking
Pro right wing and pro capitalist are very good things
Oh shit it
I agree with Jordan Peterson in many other regards, but I disagree on this one. There are way too many people for us to sustain the quality of life we have today for a prolonged period of time. Fossil fuels will run out, aquifers will empty, and a multitude of resources will become increasingly hard to acquire. I'm not a tree hugger by any means (I burn my own trash and I'm a pig/row crop farmer, used to be certified organic but now I use chemicals), but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out or believe that we are raping the planet, and destroying the quality of life for future generations. Think for a moment if we go down to say 50 million people. All required electricity could probably be made by hydroelectric dams, we could also use hydro power to make hydrogen via electrolysis for use in semi trucks/trains equipped with hydrogen fuel cells when you need the power to move heavy loads. The most cost efficient way to produce hydrogen at the moment is propane, IIRC. Crop ground could be left fallow most of the time, and with legume cover crops for nitrogen fixation, we could virtually eliminate synthetic fertilizer. And I'll gladly give my life, sign me right up. Who wants to live with all the evil present in the world, anyway? You have to delude yourself into being happy, the logical default state of humanity should be depression in our current world. Not to mention all the rich lawyers and doctors making numerous "shitstains" of developments on what was once farmground, having lawns of a couple acres or more that serve absolutely no purpose, especially for wildlife. But then they probably say they care about the environment, give me a break.
This comment needs more likes...
You’re not understanding what he he is saying what he is saying is we have to have limits to wealth and what we use and how we use it and what is bi product of all this! Long story short capitalism hasn’t worked in over 300 years
I agree 😊@@nexuscross3233
Overpopulation is an absolute myth. Densely populated cities aren’t proof of overpopulation.
Multiply last years birth rate by todays life expectancy. Is the birth rate net positive or negative?
It’s NEGATIVE. Birth rate has been cut in half since 1969. You need people to run the World. More not Less.
I love that he is wearing a suit like his Heaven and hell suit! It’s just so much fun since people are already acting as though he is some sort of comical villain and now he just dresses the part to laugh at them 😂
the twoface suit
yeah I think someone gave it as a gift for him
Mommy 🥺
Yeaah hahaha, he's great.
More like two face
Why am I seeing only the clips of this interview, but having a hell of a time finding the ENTIRE interview?
Joe Rogan signed a deal with Spotify. Most of his full interviews are there
@@jaskim5723 thx
@@therawksaw2135 thx
@@therawksaw2135 Not American. Never had Spotify. Only heard about it being used abroad. What is it, and how does it work?
@@odanedmcdonald started as a music app, now has podcasts and videos on it, basically a radio station with ads and shit
Too many people. Its not a question of who has to "go" , or who gets to decide who "goes". That is decided for us. Everyone dies or "goes" eventually. The real question is DO WE REPLACE THEM and sustain the population growth. No need to talk about devil possession or hitler.
Yeah there are too many people . "Who gets to decide who goes?" Its already decided for us. We all die one day. The question is do we replace them and continue the population growth. No need to talk about Hitler and genocide. That rhetoric just shuts down discussion and fuels hate
I'm puzzled by the reactions, the thoughts, of both of these men. I'm someone that thinks that human population reduction would be a very good thing. And I'm talking about down to about a billion or even less. It never occured to me to even inconvenience another human being in the process. Much of the world birth rate is below replacement level. I'm in favor of that. Fewer people would mean less need for energy. Technology is growing exponentially. We don't know the wonderful inventions and discoveries that await us. I'm in favor of everyone having a house with electricity, fresh running water and a full pantry. What's wrong with that?
Totally agree. 1/2 billion - 1 billion is likely the carrying capacity of the Earth now.
Over population is what will end human civilization
did you even listen to this lmao. Typical rofl.
You're right.
Damn straight ❤
Come here to south florida at 5pm rush hour traffic on a tuesday and tell me we aren't over populated
Your not! The entire worlds population can fit in texas! The problem lies within the wealthy you vote for! Like trump giving free money billions of it and now we have inflation like that wasn’t the plan 😂 we are in the predicament we are in the USA because of the amount of money trump gave to wealthy and now middle and poor class have to pay it back while they continue with there tax write offs and not paying taxes 😂😂😂 capitalism doesn’t work and hasn’t worked look at china! Socialism has been better form of govt that capitalism for over 200 years they been growing economically! Congrats bud your part of the problem 👏 round of applause for the googin
clown to clown conversation
WEF does get challenge , everytime its challenge they censore the shit out of you
When you get a stain on left side of maroon suit and a RIP on right side of blue suit, you sew the 2 good sides together into a blue and maroon suit coat and wear that on tv. Right.
Why I don't dress up like him, cause he paid a fortune to look like a moron. Just keep it simple.
Haha so true
WE MUST OPPOSE EVERYTHING BILL GATES AND THAT ILK PROPOSE.
What is the ILK?
I support Bill Gates.
Yes too many. The highways use to be some what empty. Now its traffic everywhere. All the chill spots are now crowded the malls too. And this is Toronto!!
Soon you wont be able to go on a silent peaceful getaway in a forest. There would be people there too.
You have to remember this housing goes vertical for the most part roadways are flatline. There are approximately four cars per household. You could take every single human being on this planet and stuff them in Texas overpopulation is not the problem. People are having less kids now than ever because of affordability.
I like his suit!
Heeeeyyyy isn't that the same suit Tommy Lee Jones wore in Batman Forever?
Jordan Peterson and Elon Musk are all great entreprenueurs. They depend on the numbers of the masses. Thats why they advocate for more masses.
Coal plants are on again in Germany because of the ukraine russia conflict, also why the prices for energy are up. Because of the cutting off natural gas supply.
excuses🥱🥱🥱
I usually tend to agree with what JP says, but this one was very odd. Like "they" (who ever this is supposed to be) intentionally crank up energy prices just to send poor people over the edge? C'mon, that's some conspiracy-level bollocks. There are very real reasons (of which some you already mentioned) to why that is and its no rocket science to figure that out. JP should really stick to psychology, anything else doesn't seem to be his strong suit.
Natural gas 😂😂😂 lemme guess run it through Indian land the whites stole from them in the first place and trying to do it again lmao this guy
Not just energy, price of everything obviously right now
Yeah there are too many people and I don't say that out of hatred for humans I say it because the more people there are the more everyone suffers.. I genuinely believe this, just look at the disgusting methods of food production required to feed everybody as a demonstration of how stretched resources are. How to resolve such an issue? Dunno, as a species we're just too good at survival. I don't think there is a practical/ethical way to overcome being too good at life and anyhow, who would get to decide how to address such an issue, a politician?! Nah.
But, but, but.. _if_ we had to start culling people then it's a simple decision; start with the fly tippers and litterers. Find me one decent person who would go to the wall to save one of 'em. Only once they're wiped out do we get onto the animal torturers and kiddie fuckers..
We as a race have virtually defeated natural selection. Part of me say that if _we_ have played god to such an extent then _we_ should take full responsibility, not just for the nice fluffy bits like extending each others lives. There's a harsh side that needs attending to as well. Many people in the west live out there last days alone in mental anguish. That alone is indicative of something systemic being anti-life.
@@johndoethethirdjohnsoninspecto I live in a small rural town.
If Covid taught us anything, we don’t all need to live in cities. 🤠
Growing cities are the direct result to global warming las Vegas has grown 3x and the heat index has gone up close to 20 degrees. Perfect model to why we should spread out like it used to be .
@@therawksaw2135 If we all drove electric cars, sure. Otherwise this is beyond the dumbest argument you could make. Public transit exists and is efficient in higher population density areas. Even as someone who likes living in the 'burbs, I fully admit it is a high environmentally unsustainable way to live
Ehh, actually not really.
You need money to move to the countryside or do you think that is cheap to move to the countryside?
@@cecarblanco9933 For the Price of anything in a City is outrageous. A decent one bedroom Apt in NYC is around 3k a month. I've seen closets size rooms rent for over 2k. In the County 1k could get you a 3 bedroom with land. It may cost to move but it's so much Cheaper. Jobs in big Cities do pay more but you're forced to pay more for everything. You can make a quarter of what you make in the City and live just as comfortable in the country and have a Bigger place with a yard lol. I only Pay 450 a month for a 500 square ft Apt, the same Apt in the city would cost around 3k a month and I'm only 1 hr away from the City.
I had a nice ex-tweaker guy that helped me with projects. Every time we payed him he’d blow it on dinner and drinks and call in sick the next day.
Hence why capitalism doesn’t work hasn’t in over 300 years
ok BUDDY....
There's not to many people on the planet. It's that the planet is completely miss managed.
By people who are telling is the sky is going to fall on our heads sometime soon.
Yes, the world is overpopulated and I can debate you on that if you want. I could debate these guys in that too but not idea how to get a hold of these rich MFs.
Are you a USA citizen Mike? If so, tell me how do you feel about immigration?
A ridiculous statement
You realize
Wars are good in a bad way…
"The main thing that you get with these so called primitive people is that they are in the moment; they know how to have fun, they know how to work, they know how to live. This is because they are focused within the confines of the felt presence of experience. They do not live by abstraction. Abstraction is the knife pointed at our hearts. We are so much the victims of abstraction that with the Earth in flames, we can barley rouse ourselves to wander across the room to check the thermostat." - Terence McKenna
Not enough people for humanity, sure, but what about for the planet? Is everything else supposed to suffer and die for our prosperity?
There's enough for their families just not yours because yah poor.
@@MrMr-ws3tv Well, that's the whole truth
Thank you this is the thing all these human enthusiastists never say
@@avastone5539 That's a rather facetious take. If it could "easily" support 100 Billion, it would already have been done, and this topic wouldn't even be an issue that would warrant a discussion.
Rather, it seems to actually be the complete opposite and is extremely difficult beyond belief due to the exact things you want to attribute towards it being "easy".
"Methods, tech, and science" aren't things to be viewed in an idealistic vacuum. They are connected to a complex web of other things that require finite resources and/or involve unreliable human behavior, both of which are detrimental to the already delusional concept of "sustainability".
@@avastone5539 The reason why it is idealistic is because you are still viewing individual variables in a vacuum. Everything is connected by a complex web. The fact that we can produce food for 15B but 800M are still starving should indicate how unsustainable it is. Sure, if you want to ignore everything else and just focus solely on the "amount" of food produced, then you would be correct. However, this isn't an issue that can be viewed by its individual variables in a vacuum. You could produce food to feed infinite people, but if human corruption won't allow systems to function ideally which still results in mass hunger, then it is still unsustainable. Thus, making "sustainable" an idealistic concept which is currently nothing more than a profitable sales pitch for people and companies to profit off of.
Only 10k views after 7 days? YT must be suppressing
This is just a fanpage youtuber and there's tons of reposts of this exact thing, snippets, etc.
If peterson talks about psychology I'll listen but still check out myself. Any other topic I tend to be more skeptical. I believe the way to a sustainable earth is advancement in technology.
Or the earth has sustained for a long time, and people have figured out they can milk a hell of a lot of money from people to solve this" while they are living the life with the largest carbon foot print of everyone"
Population growth with human capital = economic growth
Does Human Capital Tilt the Population-Economic Growth Dynamics? Evidence from Middle East and North African Countries
Abstract
Various studies have investigated the population-growth dynamics and the human capital-growth dynamics without assessing the human capital-population-growth dynamics in a single context. This study fills the lacuna in the literature by interrogating if human capital tilts the population-economic growth dynamics in MENA countries. It provokes a new perspective and highlights findings on whether human capital is relevant in influencing the impact of population on economic growth? This empirical investigation uses two indicators of human capital: education enrolment and life expectancy at birth on an unbalanced panel data of 19 MENA countries from 1980 to 2020. The novel methodology of feasible generalized least squares and panel-corrected standard errors technique addressed our three objectives and we find that: (i) population growth and human capital indicators individually influence economic growth positively; (ii) the interaction effect is mixed; and (ii) the net effect of population growth on economic growth when human capital is accounted for is mostly positive. Further examination of the results reveal that primary education exerts the most impact among the education indicators while life expectancy is the most potent human capital indicator. These outcomes highlights the relevance of both measures of human capital and supports the discourse that neither education nor health is a perfect substitute for the other as a measure of human capital. Policy recommendations are discussed.
Hi in 1 of jp comments not just in this interview be careful for what u wish for advancement in tech is good to a point but I would say some agencies figured out a long time ago about free energy ect I also say it's laughable that nasa said they want to investigate and figure out the ufo uap situation when they knew back in the appollo and Gemini project I could go on but I understand what yoyr trying to say
I don't believe AI will 'save the planet' and the supposed climate threat. And AI is the only new tech being developed.
And less population.
Environment?!?! What does that even mean?!?!? It's just like climate.!!!!
WHY IS HE WEARING A SUIT LIKE 2 FACE FROM BATMAN😅
Well as you probably know or should know central Europe: Germany, Poland, etc were and still are dependent on gas for the energy production that they bought from Russia until the war in Ukraine started. Although they are starting to import more and more Liquified natural gas from countries like the USA, UAE, etc it is still not enough to replenish their natural gas demand.
But I also think that especially in Germany which got so dependent on natural gas was a very stupid idea because now they get the consequences of it, instead of having a common sense mind about energy where you build nuclear, solar, wind, etc to diversify the energy production... Because in reality nuclear energy is the best way for both production of energy and reducing carbon emissions since they don't produce any carbon emissions, unlike natural gas power plants.
Give every person over the age of 35 one million dollars and the world would change for the positive to many people that are poor an never had a chance to make anything out of themself so that’s why our world an the USA is falling apart
Giving 45% of the US population a million dollars (170 trillion) would destroy the economy instantly. But nice try I guess.
Is JP playing fancy dress as Two-Face?
So Jordan, who did most of the eradicating of poverty in the last 15 years?
Atleast he did not cry on this one…
The worlds population could fit into a 3rd of Australia if it was as densely packed as NYC
So? 100 people can fit in my house but only 3 live in it. I like my space the way it is.Would you like 100 people living in your house?
Are you moving there? On which third?
@@cecarblanco9933 i do if their a bunch of young hottie babes XD
@@cecarblanco9933 "if it was as densely packed as NYC" Not a concert type of cramped or 100 people in your house. Your comment is completely irrelevant.
@@Borshigi What? Do you speak English? Can you elaborate please.
Did he say we can have archaic and eat it too?
"have our cake and eat it too"
@@slatestat oh I guess I have listened to too much Terence McKenna
Yuval Harari is the danger in wef
No more India and China
Sounds like he is going into the "free and abundant energy business" to make everyone rich. How magnanimous. 😂
I used to wonder that too, but started seeing ''mostly empty country'' videos show up on UA-cam. That was amazing compared to Greta thunberg's tirades.
Not even close
Are there too many people on Earth?..Some people seem to think so.
Some people are just ignorant on how populations works or just contemptible weaklings who hate people. There’s such a thing called Population Bell Curve and they willingly disregard it or just outright ignore it.
Nope, do some research on demographics, and year over year, reduced fertility rates across the world.
Thanos was right!
Who decides that there are too many people on the planet?
I do, andd there are too many
Wef
@@S00rabh 😂😂
Mother Nature
there aren't too many people on the planet were just being stupid with our resources, technology and people put in power
Almost 4 billion ladys on earth can make almost a billion babys a year
Bring on the Ice Age
Cheap, renewable energy…is nonsense. Do you fools actually think that me and my fellow Powerlinemen, are going to do this work for free? Grow up.
Peterson doesn't understand basic economics. If you use capitalism as the driver of wealth - you have things like monopolies. He asked why the system doesn't work with the lowest energy costs to increase people's ability to save and reach his goal that he read - about $5000 -throughout the world. How many competing energy companies does he know about? Unless it is socialized with a mandate to provide low cost or free energy - the incentive is to get the most money out of people. Even capitalist systems have to regulate energy - but money to elect politicians who keep a robust power grid become hard to find - when they owe their elections to energy companies. All they have to do is look at the fragility of the Texas grid to understand that between two corrupt systems - socialism and capitalism - focusing on low costs for the public - is in neither political system over-arching interest.
Your comment is too smart for viewers of this podcast and fans of these two Ding-Dongs.
Your argument fails to recognize no country on planet earth operates economically under a Capitalist system.
@@Psilocybin77 Capitalism was defined as -an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. I would say to a degree you are correct, since most countries have economic rules or laws that come from Governments. No country is specifically operated by private owners of a large corporation like in the movies "Blade Runner" or "Alien".
By having a marketplace where private individuals and companies compete - you have the main engine of economic growth for nearly ALL countries on the planet.
Even China's Communist Party recognized that fact - or at least at one time they did. I am not sure the current leader of China understands that fact.
Monopolies happen from capitalist competition - where winner takes all. It is very good for the winner - but very bad for those who depend on the product or service - because monopolies do things in their own interest - and do not cater to the interests of their consumers.
It is the competition in a capitalist system that produces the best outcome for society as a whole. That has been the main driver of increasing wealth for the vast majority of the world since the end of WW2 - when the United States opened trade routes to everyone in the world. The term for that is "Globalism".
@@jeffthompson1869 Peterson should just stick to psychology.
I enjoy hearing rich people talk about if the world is sustainable or not
Lets makes more babies guys🔥🔥🔥
Economies of scarcity do wonders for corporations while instilling fear in everyone else. Remember when Al Gore made a movie to sell CFL lightbulbs that contain mercury? Good times.
Mommy 🥺
As brilliant as Peterson is, he can also be very gullible.
What part was the worst for you? I loved the "The whole planet would clean iself up".
@@otowa2299 For me is when they insinuate that believing that the world is overpopulated means that we want to get rid of some people. Very idiotic logic.
@@cecarblanco9933 well you would have to if there had to be 1 billion people on the planet are you not aware how many people on the planet there are?
@@DangerZone200 That is irrelevant bc no one is saying that
@@cecarblanco9933 the world has 8 billion people you can't reduce that number without reducing the people.... It's not an insulation it's a fact...
TRUE WORDS
So what I heard is, we don’t have to many people, we have to many UNPRODUCTIVE people. Probably not what he said, but I’m high right now.
Same
Another option is to create a Non-Profit based infrastructure, where all that is exchanged within will be done so without a profit added price…basically instead of people needing to make more, a exchange system will be in place where people can work and spend less and get an save more…if we introduce minimalistic non-profit based societies, people won’t want or need as much and what they do want and need won’t cost nearly as much…also after a company meets its quota of expenses all additional revenue earned will go to transparent charity organizations; like starving kids in Africa, instead of going into wealthy CEOs pocketful books. We need to start examining what effect our way of making money is having on the environment, as well as the effect we are contributing to, by choosing to perpetuate what we buy, what effects come from our chosen consumption? A whole new and harmonious infrastructure can be made with the help of The Hemp plant and by creating this we will also be making many new jobs that are actually good for the individual and the collective…Thanks for all your work guys, Take Care🙏
Why would they go to a non profit based infrastructure from a money infrastructure,
Keep themselves rich so they can be above everyone else
Sadly, nobody does things for "free". The project you are suggesting sounds like it would take quite a bit of funding, resources, and ideological reorientation to accomplish, and unfortunately, not enough people would foot that bill and/or be willing to sacrifice their personal comfort. The vast majority of people in this world hope to achieve wealth/success and are rather adverse to the concept of "minimalism". Even though it may be far from the truth, media and human tradition has already irreversibly inundated society with this belief that "extravagance" is synonymous with "success" and "minimalism" is synonymous with "failure". This is why people fantasize/romanticize becoming a "prince/princess" and hope to never become a "pauper".
Also, there is a fundamental problem with defining the standard/definition of "minimalistic society". What exactly is the threshold? Are we basing minimalism through the lens of "first world" nations/lifestyles? Or, are we basing it through a global lens (which would be impossible for "first world" people to accept downgrading their current comfortable standards of living)? Mao-era communist China, North Korea, certain African nations, etc, all come to mind when thinking about "minimalistic societies" when viewed through a "global" lens which all don't sound very appealing for those privileged living in "first world" societies.
The biggest issue with Jordan Peterson's argument is that he is obviously viewing things from a "first world/privileged" lens if he actually believes that the "poor" are the ones "burning" all the resources to "survive". Maybe the "poor" in "first world" areas like the US and Europe are "burning" resources through their contribution to "consumption" of Big Corp goods, but "overpopulation" is a global issue that is far greater than just "first world" areas such as the US and Europe. Also, the "poor" in the US and Europe are considered "wealthy" in every metric when in comparison to truly impoverished people in "third world" areas.
The fact is that human greed, frivolous consumption and waste disguised as "ingenuity", "innovation" and "healthy capitalism" is what is actually "burning" through global resources at a concerning rate and the argument would be that there must be a tipping point where "sustainability" eventually becomes unsustainable because we live in a world where resources are finite. It's basic logic of supply and demand where the demands are high (based on population) so supply (resources) must be created to meet the demands. Whether we have already reached the tipping point is an argument on its own, but it is inarguable, undeniable, absolute truth that a tipping point does exist.
Currently, it is documented that the global population is over 8 billion people and an estimated 10% (800+ million people) live in hunger. It is also being reported that the global poverty statistics suggest that close to 50% of the global population survives off of less than $7 a day and over 80% survive off of less than $30 a day. Surely, Jordan Peterson can't believe that giving people more money would somehow solve the problem of over-consumption and limited resources.
Logically, giving people more money would just lead to more consumption, not less. If 10% of the world is currently living in hunger with the current availability of limited resources, and also knowing that over 80% of the global population survives off of less money than one of Jordan Peterson's YT video's ad revenue, it is highly illogical and somewhat delusional to think that the solution is just "make the poor not poor".
That's such a naive worldview. Profit motive is what brought the world out of the dark ages. Your entirely unrealistic, utopian idea would lead to economic and technological STAGNATION. Guaranteed. Not to mention horrific tyranny.
You should do yourself a favor and watch Milton Friedman's "how a pencil is made".
@@hlf_coder6272 Hey half_coder, thanks for sharing, I disagree a society motivated by doing the right thing and love does not sound stagnant to me, a lot of the greatest artists do what they do because they love to not because they are paid too and that among many other things is what I think this idea could help change, one thing that does seem to be a guarantee to me is that a lot of the evil and corruption in this world comes from a love of money and right now we are seeing the devastating effects of what happens to a whole planet when people put money in the driving seat of a Nation, as we have done. I am curious as to what you think is a remedy? I hope your day is going well and Good Inerchi to You!
@@avastone5539 In the end, it still is. I agree fully with your reply to OP, if you take the premise of that reply, and apply it towards this, it still becomes a limited resources issue.
There are projections that world population will reach 12 billion by 2050. Combine that projection with knowing that no ideal systems can be successful due to problematic human behaviors always being the negative x-factor for an ideal system's destruction, it is understood why there are not enough readily available food resources that are accessible to support 800 million people of our current world population of 9 billion.
The inarguable argument still stands that there is an absolute tipping point when the supply of resources will become unable to support the demand by total population if the population keeps growing exponentially. I am not claiming that it is right now, but based on current global affairs, one could reasonably anticipate it being sooner rather than later.
Also, this isn't simply about food resources, either. It is about ALL resources... food, shelter, clothing, energy, waste (human, livestock, industrial), financial (employment), technology (rare earth metals) etc. The list of "resources" goes on and on. Sustainability is an idealistic pipedream of a solution as the OP's neo-communist/socialist pitch.
I'm not against population growth and I understand the theoretical value for its promotion, but it's obvious that it is unsustainable at its current projected rate. A 25% global increase in 25 years isn't something insignificant that should be ignored. Sadly, this crisis is inevitable because of the human behavior x-factor. We are either too incompetent and/or corrupt to solve this issue, and unfortunately too many people will likely have to suffer miserably as a consequence. Hopefully, people living in "first world" areas will gain perspective and realize how good their lives are and complain less knowing that the ones that will be truly suffering will be those unfortunately living miserably in "third world" areas. But, even "perspective" is too difficult for most humans to understand, especially those coming from "first world" areas.
Take any city, anywhere in the world, and multiply its population by 10, or 20, or 30….I appreciate Peterson’s mind on many levels, but I don’t think, when it comes to the planet’s ecological long term sustainability, that he knows what he’s talking about…..carrying capacity is real, with any biological species, including homo not really that sapiens.
Population isn’t the problem, it’s consumption. We don’t need to consume at the level we do to eliminate poverty.
@@avastone5539 ^^good point and I’ll amend my statement and say population isn’t the problem, consumption and waste is.
@@avastone5539 lol no you didn’t i wasn’t even sure you were replying to me. You started by disagreeing with me then you went on to agree with me
@@avastone5539 I disagree on many levels, by your logic biological diversity can go to hell, it’s all about humans.
It's called expanding, that's what happens when your population grows. Obviously if you multipled a city's population INSTANTLY by 10 or 20 times, you're going to have issues. I don't really see your example as a way to judge ecological sustainability over a period of time, not at all. Poor air and water quality, insufficient water availability, waste-disposal problems, and high energy consumption are typically the biggest factors, and it's up to city planning to invest and fix these issues. But it's never that simple, obviously.
Too many sub 90Q
what's 90Q? the irony.
@@Psilocybin77 He is talking about you.
Now that's real irony...
JP is the man. He understands the long game
You should derive inspiration from your nickname are remain SIlent.
@@cg000gc freedom of speech mfer 😁
@@cg000gc I don't get it?
Fake asz Harvey Dent
Tgis is the dumbest thing ive heard. The rich spend more at the cost of the poor. Ie tesla vs congo artisan mine
TWO - FACE :-0
I have no clue what this guy is saying 90% of the time. He likes to talk just to talk
Whyte supremacists babble
Bloody well remember that Jordan subscribes to many Christian ideologies so I wouldnt be bloody surprised if he endorsed the biblical notion of go forth and multiply - ideology over bloody logic and not bloody honest about it.
@@johndoethethirdjohnsoninspecto Yep, you got it. There are tonnes of studies on demographics that point to our society crumbling because of lowering fertility rates and people choosing not to have children. This idea that our planet is over populated is to create economies of scarcity. That is, scare people to thinking resources are finite and we're doomed.
Yet, Jordan Peterson's clinical and researched, fact driven teachings rarely if ever appeal to religious ideology. Having said thatt, spirituality and religion are important to the psyche and success of most people. Peterson teaches a lot of Jungian psychology, and Carl Jung has said this exact thing. You aren't smart because you're an atheist. In all things research and understanding are important to forming reasonable opinions, and you've obviously done none.
If you spread everyone across the landmass of the planet..not the entire planet but just the land you end up with a population density close to the average density of Texas. Way more than you need to live sustainably
Lol thought both of them were smarter than that. Clearly, plenty of room on earth for more people.
Jordan is a full grown batman villian now, just angry all the time, no wonder hes a manic depressive, its not good for your health
Someday you'll grow up, and with any luck you might achieve half the wisdom that Jordan Peterson freely shares. Right now though, you have nothing.
OR he's received unprecedented attention speaking on topics that are trying to improve humanity. It's never a smooth ride to have open-ended discussions about uncomfortable truths. It's a lot for a person to absorb. But who knows???
@@ClayCB yep 👍
I wouldn't call him a villain, but I will admit the Two-Face jacket doesn't help his image. He is guilty of making broad generalizations and ranting like a coke-head though.
Believe it or not, before all of the pronoun controversy he used to appear on various panels for a public broadcaster here in Ontario Canada and he was thoughtful and coherent. There's not much money to be made in reasonable dialogue though.
@@ClayCB when I grow up will I get to idolize pseudo intellectual drug addicts too? 😄
i live in europe i have most of my life and i love it, yes gas prices are gone up, the goverment help us with that you get that right?, what we dont have to worry about is our children being murdered in school, mass murder in America every day, so please dont talk about something you have no knowledge of Jordan, sort your own country out
I don't think Peterson was talking about mass shootings. God bless America and its first and second amendments. We would rather take care of ourselves rather than rely on the government.
Jordan is Canadian.
He lives in Canada
Europe knows a lot of acid throwing
goverment taking half your money and giving back a bit makes the saints? the social services have devolved into a racket some time ago.
most deaths here are knife attacks instead of shootings.