It’s true that China represents a threat to American hegemony on the planet. Personally, I expect all this to happen by entirely peaceful means, but the U.S. would be ill-advised to ignore China’s military buildup.
In any case, here’s what life was like here when the picture was taken, i.e., before our global economy in which all eyes are on China. One hundred years ago, American:
Life expectancy was 53.6 years (vs. 79.1 today).
Real (adjusted for inflation) gross domestic product was 0.8 trillion (vs. $25.5 trillion today).
Then consider illiteracy rates, indoor plumbing, and all the other miracles that come with a booming world economy.
I know this is not a popular viewpoint, but I believe that the majority of the tension between the U.S. and China would dissipate the moment the United States drops its claim to leading the world financially and militarily, by forcibly excluding other large countries.
Here’s a video presented by a gentleman who calls himself “Rich,” making me wonder, for a millisecond, why he didn’t use his full name.
It’s an offer to sell instructions on how to build a small solar PV array that generates electricity for “one-tenth the current price per kilowatt-hour,” using panels that are “100% efficient.”
Their introduction: “This free video presentation reveals an MIT-Designed “Smart Tower” capable of generating up to 20x more electricity than conventional solar panels.”
Coincidentally, I was just explaining to an old friend why all this is scientific bs. The first and most obvious is that the “100% efficiency” claim violates the second law of thermodynamics.
Also, current day PV is ~25% efficient. To say that these solar panels generate 20 times more energy means that they are now, not 100% efficient, but 500%.
My friend totally gets that part, but what she didn’t understand is why the theoretical limit of PV efficiency is far below that. It’s because the energy of the sun’s photons that are incident on the Earth’s surface have a huge range of frequencies, thus energies. Some are too low to dislodge an electron in the substrate, and others are so great that, although they do dislodge an electron, the rest of their energy is lost.
Epictetus said this, though not in modern-day Spanish.
It’s just another way of saying what is attributed to Bertrand Russell: “The problem with the world is that fools are completely sure of their beliefs, where wise men are so full of doubts.”
Everywhere we look on social media we see references to the concept that Donald Trump is the leader of a cult, and that his supporters are incapable of understanding that they are following a sociopath.
Fortunately, it seems that his support base is shrinking, as the former president’s behavior becomes increasingly unhinged.
Having said that, with the general election 14 months away, we need to understand that Trump will receive votes from two distinct camps: a) what’s left of his support base, and b) those who would rather vote for an orangutan than a Democrat.
A couple of comments on the meme.
There is a distinction to be made between a natural disaster like an earthquake, which has virtually nothing to do with human activity, and wildfires and hurricanes which are greatly exacerbated by human-caused climate change.
The frequency and severity of disasters is not the only criterion for deciding on a place to live. If you’re not a hateful moron, you probably don’t want to live in a state in which you’ll be surrounded by rednecks. I would not live in Florida, even if its physical environment were Shangi-la.
The ridiculous claims made by cleantech scammers are made possible by Americans’ amazing level of ignorance when it comes to science.
Ask yourself how it is remotely possible that driving a hydrogen fuel-cell based car purifies the air.
Between environmental collapse, world fascism, and nuclear holocaust, it’s not easy to name the threat that is most likely to take us down.
And let’s not forget runaway AI. Carl Sagan warned us many decades ago that we are a civilization built on the exponential development of technology in the context of a society that is almost entirely ignorant of even the most basic elements of science.
We Americans have a tendency to be insular in our thinking, i.e., to entertain the belief that nothing of any real consequence happens outside our borders. Yet, I think there is a great deal of validity to the idea that the U.S. is at a make-break point, and, that if we can stave off the attack on our democracy and restore rule of law and the acceptance of science in the policy-making, we can lead the world back into some level of rationality and normality.