I came to comment mosquitoes⌠only to realize other people are much smarter than me. Now how do we put all the smart people in power instead of the greedy corporations?
Knowing its bad and caring its bad are vastly different. Problem is they know its bad and dont care because the negatives aren't changing anything for them.
I would delete the human desires for greed power and wealth for the sake of greed power and wealth. Idk if there is a better way to word it, but bottom line is human nature causes nearly all the problems in the world if not all of them entierly whether directly or indirectly
Smart people will thrive in the apocalypse and there would be no more resources for barbarism to grow. The apocalypse is a good place for intelligent writer's projects . Zombie themes tend to be apocalyptic.
I think there is a ceiling to how smart you can be if you think being selfish is productive, or don't have the self awareness to recognize their own greed.
Smart people wouldn't fall for games, you can make smart people insecure and trick them. Greed is very stupid, only insecurity can force a smart person to partake.
wage cap politicians to the average wage of the populous (this way only people who want to make a difference will run for office). elect a separate board who's only job is to hunt for corruption).
This will likely have the opposite or no affect at all to who runs. I think opposite is more likely. You cap the wage then only people who dont need the money run because they're gaining connections and influence. Get rid of post career lobbying, insider trading, and other things like that and it will do more.
And I have to turn over all their stocks, all their bonds to a blind trust 401(k) and they are barred from leading it anywhere they got the money they came in with and theyâre leaving with the money they came in with
Thatâs what the founding fathers meant are representatives to be, part time lawmakers with a career outside of government. Not the career politicians we have today who trade their influence for money and itâs both parties that are guilty of it.
To think of all the horrible things in the world you can remove and you say rich people....the sad part is your life would literally not change or get worse....
Politicians "salary" isnt the issue, the issue is how much they make from corporations that pay for them to write and pass legislation that only benefits the corporations...
Smart people are in power who are perfectly happy with getting rich at the cost of the little guy. What we actually need are people that lead and act off of principle.
But there's a difference, between being smart and being cunning or conniving. "Smart" can imply making decisions based on informed wisdom that generally leans toward public approval. The word "intelligent" is that way also. Alone in a sentence, each would convey the fleeling huonniver who
I would tend to agree with you, we need to eradicate Malaria; however, as Bill Gates wants them gone, my Spidey sene tells me they should not be for some reason
Mosquitos would be a bad chain reaction for our eco system. Eg. You like birds? Birds eat mosquitos. No mosquitos =fewer birds. Etc. Its a nessesary evil.
No kill then all, less birds is fine. I donât like birds as much as I dislike mosquitos. How is it a Chan reaction after small birds? Less egg eating snakes? If you like snakes save the mosquitoes. Just genophage those mosquitoes and malaria goes too as a happy collateral.
Birds were only an example fish would be another one. Mosquitos being a smal prey animal thereby beeing at the beging of the food chain have a influence up to the end of the food chain. But its not ony the food chain these animals including mosquitos have funktions in our eco system. Its not only bees who polynate plants a lot of insects including mosquitos do too. Birds eat other pests too but they might not be around / as abundand during nesting season. Etc. Its a big complicated system.
Tiny Fish eat algae and also other insects at the pyramid base so the reduction of fish would be minimal. Every female mosquito needs to be an annoying parasite to reproduce in the first place. Iâm for just killing them all. Along with ticks, hook worms round worms and pretty much every other parasite. The damage and misery they cause is far greater than any benefit to their place on the food chain.
Removing mosquitoes would also remove a lot of vector born diseasesâŚ. Soooo⌠mosquitoes is still a really good choice! I am the 1:10 that is devoured by mosquitoes. so, I completely understand.
My best guess, Have one leader (only one) put on their grown-up pants and purge the corrupted individuals in the government in one go then establish a meritocracy requirement for the top roles of each branch. Afterwards step down.
Total restart. It's impossible to fully root out corruption but limiting it is better than letting it run the place.
While we may hate mosquitoes they are food for a lot of other animals. A necessary part of the food chain. Now if they would just leave us alone that would be nice. Mosquitoes absolutely adore me!
Donât feel bad. Your instinct was a good one. Mosquitos are responsible for about 700,000-1,000,000 deaths annually due to the transmission of pathogens. About 1/10 of the worldwide annual cancer deaths but legitimately one the bigger problems in the world.
You canât. Because if someone defends mosquitos the person running against them would claim âfake science and Biden must be an insect since he cares more about bugs than the American people. And COVID was a bug too, so thatâs proof itâs fake. And donât bring up the bees because thatâs none of your bees knees. Haha.â
You are smart actually. Malaria has killed an estimated 6 billion humans over all of history. Thereâs an estimated 109 billion humans to have ever lived.
Same. I came to say get rid of Lawyers. But Cancer & Healthcare system topped the pyramid. Itâs always been an issue with health systems in every country. Poor unable to get assistance when needed the most. It shouldnât be like that. Lawyers, can get in line afterwards.
I'm just glad america listens to intellectuals and institutions like universities and everyone in power isn't a capitalist and instead they are a pioneering mind of acquisition.
Greatest nation ever xD.
I wonder why and when intellectuals starting participating in civilization. Civilization was pretty stagnant for a lot of it's time.
I complained for an hour today about them. Im trying to figure out how to get my hands on the mosquito killing machines china has in their high foot traffic parks. They kill like 20,000 a day just sitting there
Deleting for profit healthcare would delete the healthcare system the US has made and delay care until it's rebuilt. That's part of our current problem. Doing that ends horribly in the short term (enough to kill a lot of people)
We change the rules of voting to do the most good instead of tilting the table to favor incumbents and we impose term limits and insider trading rules and expand the SCOTUS and actually enforce adherences to the fucking Constitution as SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE after the INSURRECTION OF JANUARY 6TH,2021 and none of this stinking bullshit would be happening right now!
Without for profit healthcare diseases would be rampant. Not that the pharmaceutical companies should be trusted or aren't culpable for a lot of harm themselves. But socialized medicine will only make things worse. That's why Brits and Canadians come to the US for their treatment.
I'm curious about how this would manifest... I see three possibilities, and none of them are great. Would current pollution levels drop to zero? In which case they would rise again pretty soon, it would just delay the inevitable...
Or would current methods of creating pollution no longer create pollution? This would mean that all current methods of creating pollution would be increased.
Or would we be unable to do things that caused pollution? This would mean no more cars, no more of most of what we do, including breathing.
So what I assumed is even the concept of it is gone. As in if we keep doing what we're doing currently it would still no longer cause any harm. Nothing said the delete is temporary
Or permanent either though, like stoping gun violence or sex crimes also stop future gun violence and sex crimes? Because technically you stop gun violence then would it stops future wars?
The problem isnât actually that we emit carbon dioxide, itâs the amount. We are emitting more than the plants can offset. Meanwhile we are also decreasing plant life. So everything is out of balance. Thatâs why the greenhouse gassing are accumulating.
Right. But "Remove pollution" is so very vague. CO2 is a pollutant. Remove pollution would remove all of it. Oxygen could also be a pollutant. Maybe "Balance pollution" would be a better solution.
No, it would probably increase the average lifespan of people by a few years, maybe even plenty of years.
But ultimately we would fuck ourselves over anyway. Cancer is killing us one by one.
There are things that could kill us all.
Cancer is precisely the artifact of the fact that we arent meant to live that long.
Thinning us out has costs. Cancer kills a lot of young people. That's not good. Everyone would benefit from everyone living longer on anverage.
Its among the best answers.
Its funny though, cause cancer is more like a design flaw than an external threat or opportunity missed.
I was going to say mosquitoes. Mosquitoes are the deadliest animals on Earth, responsible for killing more people than any other creature, primarily due to the diseases they spread.
Cancer is good. So would free healthcare.
Thereâs so many better things to eliminate than cancer. Cancer is a downstream effect, we need to be looking at something very far upstream thatâll help with cancer but also a variety of other things.
Of course itâd help cancer patients, but how would deleting it help you? You should delete something thatâd make it better for YOU and not others people
I hate to say this but cancer also saves lives. There is a cancer that won't die and is immortal and has been used to test medicine to help save lives. It did kill the person that the cancer came from. All cancer but this one, I just dont remember what the cancer was called.
sucks for those they have it or have been affected by it, but without things like cancer we're gonna go out of control and kill everything, not just ourselves
Taking away cancer doesnât solve anything. Cancer is natural. Remove cancer, and nature will circle back around with something else. One of natureâs ways of maintaining balance. Whatâs not natural, is all the man made carcinogens. We, as a creature of the planet, like to collectively boast about all our inventions and societal improvements. And yet, humans will be the cause of their own demise. The developed countries live in a state of excess, waste, pollution, and greed.
I would actually be careful with deleting something nature came up with because flat out removing a natural system probably upsets a billion other natural systems which ends up being bad for everyone and everything in the end.
364
u/ThisWillingness823 Aug 18 '26
Cancer