Posts by swiftdriver11

Linda Hughes88 said:Look, I'm talking about Americans who are actually living below the poverty line, so maybe do a little better digging into your data first😉

Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the U.S. Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in New York City, Washington, D.C., the United Nations, and other cities throughout North America. These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries.
Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.
Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color Television ; over half own Two or more color televisions
Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm

Interesting enough...
It certainly challenges some common assumptions...

Anthony Rivera17 said:You can't truly grasp the consequences without fully understanding the catalyst... look,
there is no conflict that makes sense unless you dig into the psyches of those who
ignited it... there is always some underlying narrative, whether it's driven by capital,
ideological friction, or simple dominance... profit is an eternal constant, and one must
search for the true "purpose" behind these wars, even when the stated reason for fighting
seems perfectly obvious...

I get that, but I'm trying to figure out if there's some grander, singular reason sitting above all those petty motivations.
Something natural, or perhaps divine... I don't know. 🤷

Anthony Rivera17 said:To label something a conspiracy theory, you have to be absolutely certain that you actually KNOW the truth—otherwise, you're just talking nonsense.
He leaves absolutely zero room for anyone to disagree with him... honestly, people like that always end up getting humbled eventually.
They’re asking...How on earth is this even possible?And in quite a few instances, they end up checked into a psychiatric ward... if they don't lose their minds entirely before then.
If you don't lose, you usually don't learn the lesson—and then you just keep insisting that something is impossible when it clearly isn't.

Look, that’s not what this thread is about. I didn't start this discussion to sit here and listen to people whine about war profiteers; the whole point was to explore the connection between nature and conflict.

placidranger said:I agree—that logic held water back when global violence was higher, but it doesn't really hold up today.
What percentage of the global population actually dies a violent death now? Should I go look up the stats? It's a tiny fraction. Negligible, really.

When I say "today," I mean roughly the last fifty years.

True, but you can't just ignore the fact that wars, in some twisted way, give nature a breather.
My grandfather used to tell me stories about how, during the first ten years following World War II, he could pull about 150 pounds of fish out of the water with just a small hand net, whereas before World War II, he'd barely get 90 pounds. It was simply because nature finally got a moment to catch its breath and recover.

placidranger said:A lot—but relatively speaking.

During the Crusades?

Nobody knows for sure.

Wars fought against or for terrorism?

Not many.

(compared to the population of the country)

Just try to wrap your head around every single war ever fought in history. Think about how many people were never even born because their entire lineages were wiped out in those conflicts. Once you realize that, you'll see that we aren't talking about some negligible statistic here...

placidranger said:Not enough people die in wars. Think about the losses during the American Civil War—maybe 30,000?
Compare that to how many people die from, say, smoking cigarettes.
I struggle with viewing nature as this separate, sentient entity, but I’ll concede that war does allow for a certain kind of survival of the "fittest" individuals or societies.

If you were part of a tribe a thousand years ago, war was an efficient tool for weeding out the weak so only the strongest survived to breed.

Look, don't go branding me a heartless sociopath or start throwing examples from the American Civil War at me—but if you really sit down and think about it, this is just nature playing with its food.
People will argue that there have always been wars, but let's be honest: we've never had weapons this lethal, and the scale of death has reached levels we can't ignore.
I want to hear what you all think.

Statistically speaking, far more people died from combat wounds a thousand or two years ago than they do today. Wars used to drag on for decades; almost every man was drafted, and civilian casualties were massive...

And how many perished in World War I and World War II?
In the Crusades?
In the War on Terror?

Jack Ortiz7 said:Look, wars aren't even enough
it's just some minor, petty chaos... people need something way more efficient than that than just fighting.

like, what about an A-Bomb, Hiroshima, or chemical and biological weapons?🤷

silvertiger11 said:At first, you’re the one feeling crushed by everyone else's presence. But once you finally claw your way to the top and wipe out the competition, you realize you’ve just become the new bully. Honestly, maybe wars are inevitable because people will always disagree on how the world should work. However, since we aren't exactly out there hunting for survival anymore—unless you count the food chain in the wild—most modern conflicts are really just driven by two misguided politicians on opposite sides of the aisle.

Spot on. Honestly, I couldn't agree more.👍

rustymaker5 said:I highly doubt it. Because nature regulates itself, you know, it establishes its own equilibrium... you can still see that in those rare, untouched spots where humans haven't messed things up yet.
But humans have disconnected themselves from nature, and even worse, they've disconnected themselves from their own true nature. You can tell by the way we exterminate entire species and irrationally strip-mine every single natural resource—hoping, I guess, that nature will just magically replenish itself—but we do it at such a frantic pace and in such insane quantities that nature can't keep up with the rhythm we've forced upon it without "responding" with some sort of catastrophe. That disconnect is also proven by the very way people think about things like "hardwired chips," innate aggression, or the supposed biological necessity of warfare...
....Anyway, I’m just throwing my thoughts out there like everyone else, not trying to claim I'm anything special.
Everything we’re going through, which is probably what happened to all the ancient civilizations before us, is likely just the fallout from the gap between our technological advancement and the basic awareness that we are all, fundamentally, stuck on this planet together... it’s just that we have such a hard time grasping or accepting that reality. But I suppose that's just our karma...

That is exactly my point.
I believe this inherent aggression was hardwired into our DNA during the earliest stages of human evolution, and if you ask me, this suicidal level of aggression is only escalating as we continue to destroy the natural world.🤷

rustymaker5 said:Personally, I’m convinced that wars are fought strictly to grab economic control and social dominance—it's all about power plays orchestrated by sociopaths and bad actors at the top, and honestly, I don't see any connection to balancing population numbers whatsoever. So, I'd argue they aren't "natural" events at all, nor are they required, especially since only a tiny fraction of people actually profit from them while the vast majority are left dealing with nothing but suffering, misery, and a deep sense of disillusionment regardless of whether the conflict ends in a win or a loss...
At our core, humans are fundamentally good, not evil, which makes the state of war something completely unnatural, a condition forced upon us by malicious forces...

Look, let me put it this way. I believe all those economic and political justifications are merely the immediate excuses used to trigger these conflicts. I suspect the true cause—if you can even call it that—is some kind of biological chip nature has embedded into our subconscious.
I’ll give you a clear example of how this works in the wild. For instance, if humans wipe out a sparrow population, the byproduct is an explosion in the worm population (which they eat). The following year, you'll see a much larger surge in the sparrow population than usual, simply because nature demands that balance be restored.
Could something similar be happening with humans?🤷

So, I’ve been chewing on this idea for a bit, and I think I’ve landed on a specific conclusion. It seems to me that nature—which is constantly being squeezed by the relentless expansion of the human population—has essentially found a way to check our species' monopoly over the planet.
Given that modern medical breakthroughs are constantly extending human lifespans, which places massive pressure on the entire ecosystem, it feels like warfare has evolved to take the place that diseases used to occupy.
Do you all think that wars are just another mechanism through which nature manages us? In other words, we're just animals, and we're the ones most threatening the balance.
If that logic holds up, then it follows that war isn't necessarily an absolute evil.🤷

Look, I know, I know—don't go labeling me some kind of heartless monster or start throwing examples from the American Civil War in my face. But if you really step back and think about it, this is just nature playing its hand against us.
I can already hear people saying that war has always existed, but let's be honest: we have never seen weaponry this devastating, and we have certainly never seen death tolls on this scale.
I'm curious to hear what you guys think.