• úvod
  • témata
  • události
  • tržiště
  • diskuze
  • nástěnka
  • přihlásit
    registrace
    ztracené heslo?
    TUHOKlimaticka zmena / Thank you so much for ruining my day
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TADEAS: v tomhle smyslu by se pak ve vztahu k tem emisim melo taky mluvit bud o tom 'kolik emitoval' (spotreba, osobni vyuziti infrastruktur), vs. nad jakym mnozstvim emisi mel kontrolu (investice, prip. jine druhy moci ve vztahu k infrastrukturam)
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    TADEAS: ja si to neberu osobne, ale nestiham to tady procitat natoz reagovat ,))
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TUHO: jinak neber si to osobne, ale me prave prijde 'symptomaticky', ze se smesuje ta rovina penez-investic a penez-luxusu/spotreby. je to prave ta karikatura-figura "bohaty miliardar", ze ktery chcem dostat jeji realitu, tzn. ukazat, kde je takova postava mocna, tu moc ji priznat a chtit po ni s tim souvisejici zodpovednost. tzn. mluvit o jachtach, private jetech a domech je prave uplne nedulezity, protoze tahle spotreba ze systemickyho hlediska neni zajimava, zajimava je jedina ta moc (vyjadrena v tom kolik investicnich penez dana osoba ma), ktera znamena moznost alokovat prostredky, tzn. moznost smerovat civilizacni energeticko-materialovou realitu nejakym smerem. aneb na investorovi je zajimave to investovani, ne kde bydli, kde byl na dovolene a co mel k veceri.
    PER2
    PER2 --- ---
    DNF: co2 stoupa pres 8000 let, takze je samozrejme uplne jasny, ze je na vine clovek, tak se asi uplne nestiha "nerozpoustet"
    clovek porad generuje nejaky sklenikovy plyny navic, at to tocis jak chces .... reagoval jsme hlavne na nazor, ze prumysl co vypousti co2, by mel stejnou merou odsavat z atmosfery stejny mnozsti, hlavni myslenka byla, ze to neni technicky mozne a jediny dusledek je absolutni omezeny veskery prumyslovy cinnosti = vpodstate kolaps nynejsi civilizace
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    pro me je to ohnisko diskuze v tom, co pise YMLADRIS tady.

    zestatnime soukromy kapital, rozbijeme monopoly, zrusime miliardare a budeme mit jen milionare, oslabime soukrome ve prospech statniho... zaruci to neco? ve skutecnosti jsou to otazky preferovaneho mocenskeho usporadani, akceptovatelne miry majetkovych a mocenskych nerovnosti.

    pak je ten smer, ze se to "demokratizuje" (rozhodovani) - financnictvi, energetika, atp. zarucuje to neco?

    ja v tom porad jako klicove vidim ty rozhodovaci, systemove-regulacni praktiky. jak to to spolecenstvi dela, jak se rozhoduje, aby zustavalo v nejakem kontextu, v jakem chce?
    DNF
    DNF --- ---
    PER2: kecy :) Kdyz lidi bydleli za mestem v chysi, tak se jejich co2 stihalo rozpoustet v prostredi. Pokud budes v chysi obklopenej konzumem, tak to samozrejme nepomuze, to je uz asi lepsi panelak, minimalne z hlediska dopravy.

    Spis prumysl a vyroba. Chces spalovat? Tak pouzivej technologie co umozni neutralitu. To nejde, to by stalo majlant a vsichni by zkrachovali. Hm, nekde se s novym radem zacit musi. Holt by toho luxusu nebylo tolik a nebyl by tak luxusni. Ale to je daleko za ramec posmesneho steku co jsem mel v umyslu puvodne, pardon.
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    INK_FLO: neresim nejaky spineni rukou. resim to, zda to 'bude fungovat'. ... umira ekosystem, ale kdyz si koupis na lokalni pomery moc pozemku a zkousis si tam regenerativni metody, jsi spatnej. kdyz postavis solary v nevhodnou dobu, jsi spatnej. kdyz mas moc penez, jsi spatnej. bla, bla, bla. okopavani kotniku misto venovani svy energie potrebnym smerem... to mam na mysli. co bude fungovat? jaka cesta je schudna... a tak :)
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TUHO: ad 90 procentni zdaneni bohatych v USA po WW2

    Having already established a wealth tax in 1935 to help pay for policies to fight the Great Depression, the Roosevelt Administration pushed through a variety of tax changes during and following WWII. The top marginal rate for personal income taxes was pushed above 90 %and would stay there until the 1960s; the individual income tax was expanded beyond the very wealthy to apply to tens of millions of Americans; the corporate tax rate went up, and a 90% tax on excess corporate profits was created. All of these measures helped to pay for the war, but they also were designed to combat inflation by reducing excess consumer demand. - https://ncpolicywatch.com/2022/10/06/u-s-history-lesson-taxes-on-rich-people-helped-to-beat-inflation-and-win-wwii/

    chapu to tak, ze tim vysokym 'top marginal tax rate' defakto zastropovali vysoke prijmy. zaroven ale zacali danit prijem i lidi, kteri predtim skoro zadnou dan neplatili, takze ta danova povinnost se rozsirila. vic zdanili koporace a zastropovali neocekavane zisky. tzn. vyssi zdaneni vic napric, a stabilizace excesu. prijem ale nic nerika o vlastnictvi a i kdyz se to jmenuje 'wealth tax', zatim jsem se nedocetl, ze by skutecne slo o wealth tax v dnesnim slova smyslu, kdy se plati nejaka procentualne mala dan z celkoveho deklarovaneho majetku.


    ad "jeste pomerne nedavno v socialistickym bloku zadny miliardari nebyli"

    ano, to je pravda, ale netyka se to jen socialistickeho bloku ale i napr. tech USA, miliardarstvi je dusledek nejakych historickych politickych rozhodnuti, hraje v tom svoji roli financializace, financni a danovy inzenyrstvi, je to soucasti celkovy exploze civilizacni nerovnosti.


    ad 'pokud mluvime o rozbiti mocenskych struktur fosilnich miliardaru, tak tam myslim, ze je to asi pomerne jasny ne? Tyhle struktury maj proste biliony dolaru v tom, ze nam rozbijou klima a nastartujou klimatickou katastrofu. Za poslednich 30 let meli dost prilezitosti byznys opustit.'

    tady ale musis upozadit ten aspekt penez (miliardarstvi) a mluvis spis o moci. tzn. prelozeno, existuji struktury moci, ktere svymi rozhodnutimi rozbiji klima atd. ... v tehle problematice me ale neprijde klicove, ze existuji miliardari (a ze by bylo lepsi aby neexistovali), ze existuje extremne asymetricka moc (a ze je lepsi, aby neexistovala). spis me to vraci k tomu tematu (sebe)regulace, tj. individuum musi nachazet specificky formy seberegulace, aby dokazalo smerovat sve potreby nejakym smerem (a kdo to umi a stanovuje to vedome, ze), podobne spolecenstvi nachazi nejaky formy seberegulace, aby uspokojovalo svoje potreby v nejakem sirsim (nedestruktivnim) kontextu. ale ktere spolecenstvi to umi. ... ta energie obsazena v mocensky asymetrii a energie obsazena ve fosilnich palivech se pak vhodne doplnujou .) a seberegulace je obtiznejsi.
    PER2
    PER2 --- ---
    YMLADRIS: "ze jedinej zpusob jak snizit sklenikove plyny v atmosfere, je uzakonit, ze kdo do atmosfery pridava sklenikovy plyn, musi ho zase odstranit. nic takoveho se ani vzdalene nikde nenavrhuje"

    tolik co2/metanu co vyprodukuju ja jako jedna osoba nezvladnu odstranit ani kdyz budu bydlet na poli v chysi uplne mimo civilizaci a jist korinky (brethariani to mozna maji lehci)
    nase civilizace by zkolabovala, protoze to proste neni mozne splnit
    MATT
    MATT --- ---
    je mozny, ze jsem tu potkal zpravu, kde se psalo o novych prumyslovych plynech s vysokym polocasem rozpadu a neznamymi interakcemi? hledat tu "gas" je dosti kontraproduktivní ;))
    INK_FLO
    INK_FLO --- ---
    TADEAS: omlouvám se zase za toho Fishera, ale na vánoce (svátek konzumu je na četbu tohoto typu ideální :-)) mám připravenou tuhle knihu, tak uvidím, jestli tam s něčím příjde. On byl dost uznávanej kritik úskalí kapitalismu/kap. realismu a na sklonku života (spáchal sebevraždu jakožto výsledek celoživotního boje s depresemi) se snažil více hledat naději a přicházet místo kritiky s pozitivní vizí (jedna z jeho teorií se jmenovala "acid communism" kde se lehce vracel do 60. let :-)). V K-Punk sborníku je víceméně jen kritika, v Capitalist Realism se už snaží ty východiska nalézat v poslední kapitole. Ale přišlo mi trochu, že jak je velice trefnej v pojmenovávání toho, co je špatně, tak je dost stručnej a vágní v tom, jak by to mohlo být lépe. Přišel tam s pár nápady typu "věci na příděl", což nevím no. Tak snad v téhle tam bude těch pozitivních vizí víc. Je to propojený s tím pohledem Adama Curtise, jak byly poznatky moderní psychologie použity na modulaci tužeb lidí. A teď stojíme před výzvou ty libidózní síly nasměrovat někam jinam, protože tímto směrem to už asi moc dlouho nepůjde...

    Postcapitalist Desire: The Final Lectures by Mark Fisher
    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/54650835-postcapitalist-desire

    "Beginning with that most fundamental of questions — “Do we really want what we say we want?” — Fisher explores the relationship between desire and capitalism, and wonders what new forms of desire we might still excavate from the past, present, and future. From the emergence and failure of the counterculture in the 1970s to the continued development of his left-accelerationist line of thinking, this volume charts a tragically interrupted course for thinking about the raising of a new kind of consciousness, and the cultural and political implications of doing so.

    For Fisher, this process of consciousness raising was always, fundamentally, psychedelic — just not in the way that we might think…"
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    INK_FLO: proste kdyz to cely pretocis do smysluplny otazky namisto 'kritiky', tak ta otazka zni - jaka je struktura 'chteni', jaka je struktura osobnich potreb a jaky jsou praktiky jejich naplnovani, tak aby vysledkem byla v nejsirsim smyslu stabilizace klimatu, regenerace ekosystemu, ... jak v tomto ramci naformulujes 'spravedlnost', 'rovnost' a jiny pozadovany vlastnosti lidskejch spolecenstvi
    YMLADRIS
    YMLADRIS --- ---
    Jinak jak se často skloňuje to "nejbohatší procento" tak to by mělo být majetek cca 10 milionů dolarů. Procento z osmi miliard lidí, versus 6500 miliardářů.
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TUHO: krivka vypada takto TADEAS

    FB-IMG-1659355126784

    v zasade jde o to, ze jakmile dosahnes na private jety, jachty a podobny sragory, tak ti ty emise z excesivni osobni potreby rapidne narostou. ale zase se to tyka tak malyho mnozstvi lidi, ze agregovane to v celkovym kontextu je nejaky desetiny procenta globalnich rocnich emisi... cili na invidiuum hrozne moc, v celku zas tak moc ne. ... opet ale otazka, kolik tech private jet letu je relevantnich pro organizaci ty civilizacni struktury, zda jsou nutne nebo ne, to nejsem schopny posoudit.

    me prijde, ze je relevantni na to poukazovat napr. z duvodu ze to ilustruje extremni nerovnost lidskyho spolecenstvi v soucasnosti, ze to poukazuje na excesy osobni spotreby, ale pokud jde o klima, tak v tom celkovym kontextu to proste zas takovej problem neni. nasere to, ale je to tak a kdyz nekdo tuhle linku pouziva, tak si proste jede 'miliardarskej hate' a je to ukrok stranou, jak rika ymladris.
    INK_FLO
    INK_FLO --- ---
    Nějaký data k tomu tématu psychologický profil miliardářů (z těch výsledků, co jim z toho lezou jako nižší schopnost empatie nebo větší podíl psychopatologií se dá asi trochu usuzovat, jak se tyhle věci následně promítají do zájmu o osud lidstva či planety). Googloval jsem "bilionaire psychology study", v těch lincích jsou odkazy na ty konkrétní studie. Ten první výzkum, který je hodnotí pozitivně (ten big 5 test nezjišťuje psychopatologie) to vyhazovalo opakovaně, primárně na self-help/life-coach webech. Ten druhej je na podobný téma. Ten poslední odkaz je naopak o tom, jak a proč vnímají "ti dole" milionáře.

    Many millionaires share these 5 personality traits, study says
    https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/07/many-millionaires-share-these-5-personality-traits-study-says.html

    A new study from the Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) at the German Institute for Economic Research and the University of Munster found that millionaires, especially self-made ones, tend to be more risk-tolerant, emotionally stable, open, extroverted and conscientious than everyone else.

    Understanding The Psychology Of The Super Rich
    https://www.wealthbriefing.com/html/article.php?id=184895

    Which skills and qualities did the ultra-high net worth interviewees believe had been particularly important in achieving their far above-average financial success and great wealth? Sales skills are crucial, Gut feeling is more important than analytical skills, The joy of swimming against the current, Dealing with setbacks

    Five Studies: The Psychology of the Ultra-Rich, According to the Research - Pacific Standard
    https://psmag.com/social-justice/five-studies-bernie-sanders-says-the-rich-are-deranged

    People from higher socioeconomic classes do worse on a test where they’re asked to identify emotions in photographs of human faces. They’re also less accurate at perceiving the emotional states of others in real-life interactions. In fact, researchers can reduce people’s empathy just by prompting them to think of themselves as relatively high-status. Test subjects who are asked to imagine an interaction with someone from a lower social rung get worse at understanding other people’s emotions. The trouble higher-status people have recognizing emotions is tied to the fact that they tend to think about themselves and others in terms of fixed traits (“She’s a nervous person.”) In contrast, people from lower social classes are more likely to use contextual explanations for people’s behavior (“This interview is making her uncomfortable.”)

    It turns out that low-income Americans are less likely to believe in meritocracy if they live in counties with extreme economic inequality—places where they’re likely to run into much richer people a lot. For high-income people, the effect is exactly the opposite. The study’s authors suggest that rich people could be using a defense mechanism to stave off guilt and justify their relatively privileged position within a visibly unequal system. But, for whatever reason, the more inequality rich people see in their home county, they more likely they are to believe that meritocracy is working.

    Psychology’s “Dark Triad” and the Billionaire Class | Psychology Today United Kingdom
    https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/dangerous-ideas/201910/psychology-s-dark-triad-and-the-billionaire-class

    Psychological research suggests that the super-rich, as a group, aren’t necessarily the role models we collectively need if our goal is to advance the common good and build a more decent society. In particular, one reason to be skeptical involves a constellation of interlinked personality traits — Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and narcissism — that psychologists call the “Dark Triad.” The originators of the term summarize it this way: “To varying degrees, all three entail a socially malevolent character with behavior tendencies toward self-promotion, emotional coldness, duplicity, and aggressiveness.”

    The first trait of the Dark Triad — Machiavellianism — refers to one’s willingness to deceitfully manipulate and exploit people and circumstances for personal gain. In an illuminating series of studies, psychologists have found that this tendency is more common among those with greater wealth and status.

    second trait - Psychopathy - research by psychologists supports the view that, compared to their “lower-class” counterparts, “upper-class” individuals act with less compassion — and also fall short on certain basic skills necessary for building positive connections with other people.

    In one experiment, for example, lower-income participants were substantially more willing to take on extra work to help out a distressed research partner than were the upper-income participants. In another study, lower-class participants demonstrated a stronger compassion-related physiological response than did their upper-class counterparts after watching a video of children suffering from cancer. In a related study, the lower-class participants in a stressful interview process showed greater sensitivity and compassion toward their competitors than did the upper-class interviewees.

    And in an experiment with four-year-old children, those from less wealthy homes behaved more altruistically than those from wealthier homes, donating more of their prize tokens to children they were told were hospitalized.

    In other studies, individuals from a lower social class were significantly better than upper-class participants at judging the emotions being portrayed when they were presented with photos of human faces. The researchers concluded that this enhanced ability may reflect the reality that those who are less well-off must rely more on accurately reading their social environment, because they depend more on interpersonal relationships and collaborative efforts in their daily lives.

    The third trait of the Dark Triad — narcissism — refers to an individual’s sense of superiority over other people and convictions about personal entitlement to special treatment. Once again, in a diverse set of psychological studies, individuals of higher social class displayed greater levels of narcissism and entitlement than did their less wealthy counterparts.

    In one study, for example, participants who rated themselves higher on a measure of socioeconomic status also scored higher on a scale designed to measure psychological entitlement; a sample item from that scale is “I honestly feel I’m just more deserving than others.” Another study instead used a nonverbal measure of entitlement. Participants looked at sets of circles of varying sizes and were asked to identify which size circle best described how they saw themselves compared to others. Those of higher social status picked larger circles as their self-descriptors than did those of lower social status. In a third study that used a behavioral measure of narcissism, upper-class participants were more likely than their lower-class counterparts to make use of a wall mirror before having their photos taken. In a survey study, researchers in Germany directly assessed a sample of very high net-worth individuals. They too found that this group scored higher on a measure of narcissism compared to a separate sample of people of lesser economic means.

    I’m a therapist to the super-rich: they are as miserable as Succession makes out | Clay Cockrell | The Guardian
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/22/therapist-super-rich-succession-billionaires

    Over the years, I have developed a great deal of empathy for those who have far too much. The television programme Succession, now in its third season, does such a good job of exploring the kinds of toxic excess my clients struggle with that when my wife is watching it I have to leave the room; it just feels like work.

    What could possibly be challenging about being a billionaire, you might ask. Well, what would it be like if you couldn’t trust those close to you? Or if you looked at any new person in your life with deep suspicion? I hear this from my clients all the time: “What do they want from me?”; or “How are they going to manipulate me?”; or “They are probably only friends with me because of my money.”

    Then there are the struggles with purpose – the depression that sets in when you feel like you have no reason to get out of bed. Why bother going to work when the business you have built or inherited runs itself without you now? If all your necessities and much more were covered for the rest of your life – you might struggle with a lack of meaning and ambition too. My clients are often bored with life and too many times this leads to them chasing the next high – chemically or otherwise – to fill that void.

    These very wealthy children start out by going to elite boarding schools and move on to elite universities – developing a language and culture among their own kind. Rarely do they create friendships with non-wealthy people; this can lead to feelings of isolation and being trapped inside a very small bubble.

    There are few people in the world to whom they can actually relate, which of course leads to a lack of empathy. The next time you watch Succession, see how the Roys interact with their staff and others outside their circle. Notice the awkwardness and lack of human connection and how dreadfully they treat each other. It’s fascinating and frightening. When one leads a life without consequences (for being rude to a waiter or cruel to a sibling, for example) there really is no reason to not do these things. After a while, it becomes normalised and accepted. Living a life without rules isn’t good for anyone.

    Succession is built on the idea of a group of wealthy children vying for who will take the mantle from their father – none of them are able to convince him that they can do it. And that is because they have reached adulthood completely unprepared to take on any responsibility. The wealthy parents I see, often because of their own guilt and shame, are not preparing their children for the challenges of managing their wealth. There is truth in the old adage “shirt sleeves to shirt sleeves in three generations”. On numerous occasions the child of a wealthy family has said to me: “We never talked about money. I don’t know how much there is or what I’m supposed to do with it. I don’t know how to take care of it. It’s all so secret and dirty.”

    Study Finds a Strange Paradox When It Comes to How We Feel About Taxing Billionaires : ScienceAlert
    https://www.sciencealert.com/people-are-more-tolerant-of-billionaires-if-they-know-their-personal-story-study-reveals

    But when we look at one person at the top, we tend to think that person is talented and hard-working and they're more deserving of all the money they made." Previous research has shown people tend to attribute the successes and failures of an individual more to their internal traits and aspirations than the outcomes of a group. A person who has made it to the top 1 percent of all wealthy people in the world is, therefore, more likely to be considered 'hard-working' and 'talented' than the 1 percent as a whole. That tendency is probably driving some of the results of the current paper, as well as what psychologists refer to as the "streaking star effect", in which people are more inspired by individual success than group success. The findings come from a total of eight studies, each involving up to 600 participants. The first study included more than 200 respondents who were asked to make a call on the appropriate compensation for CEOs.

    "Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me. They possess and enjoy early, and it does something to them, makes them soft where we are hard, and cynical where we are trustful, in a way that, unless you were born rich, it is very difficult to understand. They think, deep in their hearts, that they are better than we are because we had to discover the compensations and refuges of life for ourselves. Even when they enter deep into our world or sink below us, they still think that they are better than we are. They are different."
    —F. Scott Fitzgerald
    SHEFIK
    SHEFIK --- ---
    TUHO: heled to neni dojmologie, ale selskej rozum. Vypichnul si konkretni cases, ktery se hodej do narativu. Kdyz se podivas na jiny miliardare a do ceho investuji penize, od charit pres investice do zachrany klimatu, tak ti to ten generalizovany narativ skodlive spotreby hned rozbije...

    Mimo to, root cause klimaticke krize je uplne jinde, ale to uz bych se opakoval.
    INK_FLO
    INK_FLO --- ---
    BLAHOVEJ: tak zatím to nejvíc do roviny ideologického boje háže imho stávající režim, který soustavně tu věcnou debatu posunuje do té ideologické a hystericky jakékoliv návrhy na změny nálepkuje komunismem, socialismem, návratem na stromy atd. (mladí bolševíci chtějí, abychom se měli špatně..přitom ale sami chodí do starbucks a mají iphone, tzn. pokrytci) a tím cíleně mlží a odvádí pozornost od toho jádra...vrtěti psem, každý měsíc navíc se počítá. Což je to, na co jsem poukazoval, že ten střet na té ideologické rovině je možná nevyhnutelný. Na té rovině, kde nejde o fakta, ale o emoce (respektive vždy minimálně jedné straně vyhovuje, když se to tlačí přes emoce. A druhá strana s tím buď počítá a pracuje nebo ne)
    BLAHOVEJ
    BLAHOVEJ --- ---
    INK_FLO: Zdar. Vždy když se pohybujeme v rovině toho, co by se "mělo dělat" nejsme v rovině faktu, ale hodnot. Hodnoty patří do nějakého rámce životní formy která si ssebou nese útržky různých příběhů a "charakterů" které ty hodnoty ztělesňují. Ideologie je většinou nějaké pejoratovní pojmenování struktur někoho jiného. Tam je vidíme často líp než u sebe. V tomto ohledu nevím jestli má smysl cíleně vytvářet nějaké "funkční ideologie pro masy" -nebo aspoň tak rozumím tomu co říkáš. Jestli spíš není lepší přiznat si a lépe vyjádřit tu svou vlastní "story" kterou třeba ostatní zas vidí jako ideologii a vědomě pracovat s ní. Třeba ji i popularizovat a zjednodušit, ale ne vytvářet jen jako nástroj. Nevím jestli je to k věci... snad.
    INK_FLO
    INK_FLO --- ---
    TADEAS: ještě k té ideologii - chápu, že když vidíš tu problematikou v hlubší vrstvě reality (systemická regulace, management systémů), tak ti příjde navíc "špinit si ruce" ideologií. Otázka zní, jestli se kdy dokázalo uvést uvedení jakékoliv teorie do praxe bez jejich použití. Zní to jako nějaká forma technokratického idealismu, že stačí pochopit tu strukturu a tu ideologickou omáčku k tomu není potřeba. Respektive i kdyby lidi držící v ruce klíč k řešení/pochopení tento pohled měli, tak i přesto budou vždy vystaveni tlaku různých ideologických skupin, které budou chtít použít to jejich pochopení ke svým účelům. Ale obecně chápu, proč to může vypadat jako dvě nezávislé nádoby, jejichž spojování není dobré. Ono asi není dobré, pravděpodobně to ale je nevyhnutelné, aby to poznání bylo filtrovaný pomocí nějakýho sexy narativu vstříc nějakýmu laičtějšímu pochopení a přijetí, zvnitřnění, osvojení. Což se může dít i skrze vzdělání, který je ale vždy taky nástrojem nějaké ideologie, co se učí, proč a jak.
    Kliknutím sem můžete změnit nastavení reklam