I agree that there are and were good female teachers, but looking back, I can also say that my male teachers were what made me enjoy school. I think people go into teaching with specific societal motives and just get crushed by the system and/or become complacent. Some do not lose their energy. Some are there for the wrong reasons, for sure.

Yeah, that's basically what I wrote.

I'm going to go with shorter sessions and more active unstructured unsupervised outdoor time in dangerous environments as well. Not to start a gender war, but especially for boys. And especially considering spectrums. I think it's just wrong to expect energetic young men to sit still and pay attention to (mostly female) teachers for hours every day; it actually stifles their development and makes weak men (strong men are not misogynists). Education is important, but we also need factory workers and trade workers, and they don't need a lot of the crap thrown at them by the public schools, which are largely daycares where I live anyway. Former developmental psychology/child development major here, with focus on pathology.

100% agreement. I think it's mostly the extreme left that's insane though, not the average, and we have to fight that as well. There are plenty of leftists that are quite unhappy about many of the things that have happened in the USA since about 2020. There must be a center somewhere, although my perspective is that society leans left over time. Let's just not go too far left. Either extreme is very dangerous and excludes the majority.

I try to separate MAGA from the Republican party. Otherwise, when MAGA turns on itself, there will be nowhere for those brainwashed to go. There will be no third party. I disagree that MAGA represents freedom for everyone.

Here is some context for my perspective:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [Daniel Schmachtenberger - Why We're Creating a Future That Nobody Wants]

What follows appears to me as evidence that global climate change will almost certainly continue irreversibly, maybe until we reach some saturation point. I never understood the explanation, but I read somewhere that somehow there should always be enough oxygen to support combustion.

https://media.springernature.c...

I post these all the time. Of course, that doesn't change anything in the world.

Not just that, but it's a weird narrative because he caused all this destruction, and all this move does is reduce it a little bit. China doesn't seem to be jumping at the option. I think they're in a different Signal group anyway. And somehow MAGA will give him credit as a five-dimensional checkers player.

Well, we disagree; I am no shill for oil. We can't exactly just stop producing oil. We can't even seem to limit it. This is not just a production problem. What is your financially-viable-and-incentivized solution? Of course it's possible, but I don't think it's realistic. Because reality. Which means because economics. A lot of people are poor.

I was in a small plane at about 1,500 feet above a refinery in the bay area about 25 years ago. I don't know about CO2 there, but OMG the smell. And that was in California.

Good points, but I also think that we consume a whole bunch of shit we don't need. Vacation travel for instance, though that's a relatively small percentage. Concrete production and distribution is another opposite example; there's a lot of emissions in the industry, but I don't think anyone would want to live without it, and there really don't seem to be viable alternatives. I think it's pretty clear that a (debt-based in some places) consumption-based capitalist economy is part of the problem. I am not arguing in favor of any other system.

Good point. Did you see that recent video of the ocean (I think near Mexico...err, New South Trumpland) "on fire"? And I've heard that flaring is unnecessary, but there is a cost to containment.

It kinda sucks for the people in really hot places that are getting hotter and drier though. I heard an estimate of 1B expected climate refugees in the next decade. World isn't ready for that.

Citation? But likely true. I saw a global emissions visualization once. China was an absolute disaster. And that was probably a decade ago. But again, who gets those goods? Who chooses to conduct those trades? Because money, and people really benefit from cheap manufactured goods. They also often buy things they don't need and are otherwise wasteful. Again, consumption is the problem.

"They" will always maximize profits, and if you own stock... I heard one large US egg company tripled profit recently. Economy seems to need management, but humans can't seem to manage economies and/or the environment well, especially with equitable outcomes. I am not arguing for managed economies, but it seems inevitable to avoid collapse. I'm also not arguing for equitable outcomes.

It's much better here.

Stopping release in one country wouldn't stop that country from experiencing the result. It's the "prisoner's dilemma" that results in basically a race to the bottom. I am not denying climate science or saying we should do nothing. I just don't see a solution, especially without reductions in lifestyle, which is actually improving (until 2025 maybe). Asia is big too, and most of the people are even less informed on these issues than in the USA. They really don't have any choice anyway.