>>16054749>Maybe some things in life would be more convenient, but with that convenience there'd be downsides as well.Yeah. People vastly overestimate the life of the rich and famous, and are seemingly blind to the negatives. For example, if you're a billionaire, it'd be nearly impossible to form meaningful relationships or connections, because you'd never know if people are being genuine or if they just want your wealth and influence.
>Basically, being very rich isn't everything, but not being really poor is.Very true.
>over-population and resources being stretched thinI could write a lot about this but I would want to look up information first, and I just don't feel like doing that right now. I'm almost done writing for this session, did 10k in 2 hours which was really good for this thread. I was a lot slower for the first replies in this one.
I guess I could write a bit on it regardless. I wonder how concerned experts are about over-population, because essentially the birthrates in developed nations drops significantly, so as Africa modernizes they'll contribute less and less to the global population. However, then the question becomes how quickly is Africa modernizing? I'm not sure. Maybe their contribution is going to get worse before it gets better. Then, how low are global birth rates anyway?
And, there's also the matter of visibility. If millions of people were starving in Africa, would the world actually care? Aren't they starving now? Sure, every now and then you see some tear-jerking commercial, but I feel like this is already a problem, and nobody really seems to care, so it could get worse there but things actually wouldn't really change. Not to mention all the future advances in technology for production of food.
>At some point, you could very well just only be able to live off stuff like bugsRight, but I wonder how it would get to that point. If everything else was gone, sure, but naturally? It's hard to imagine.
