No, living under survival pressure is good for mental health. It's what we're evolved to do. Why does it feel good to crack a tough bug, or finish a project, or win a game? It's the same achievement reward a hunter feels bagging a deer.
Some pressure is good but there's a difference between constant pressure and regular sessions of pressure similar to hunting. I don't think we necessarily evolved to be under constant pressure, I'm not saying it's impossible but humans wouldn't thrive under constant pressure, we'd never have had the time to evolve language or the intelect under constant pressure.
Maybe slightly unrelated, but I've done a lot of road trips throughout the US, and there is so much land that is used unproductively, it's really incredible. Land that could be used for energy, food, or housing, just sitting empty or with abandoned structures.
Imagine if we just paid people to coat their properties in solar panels - throw them on your roof, lawn, wherever you have the space. We could drive energy prices down to nothing. We could pay people to install ADUs. The resources are there, but the imagination and commitment are not.
Instead, I'm looking at a $40k+ solar install for my very small house and a breakeven on investment in maybe 10 years for a house I probably won't live in by then.
Payback time in Scotland is 6-ish years. Same seems to be true in Massachusetts. Solar Panels have a lifespan of around 25 years. Inverters may need to be replaced sooner than that, but still last at least a decade.
There is no way that is true unless those solar panels are very subsidized. The energy needed to make a PV is 2x what that panel would harvest over its entire lifetime in Scotland for example. Scotland is a terrible place for PV. The numbers you give are probably accurate for central Mexico though. Also, the mean lifetime of a PV panel is 20 years.
We spend billions every year in gas subsidies. We spend billions every year in food subsidies. For energy independence and the carbon reduction alone, this is a worthwhile investment even if the upfront costs are substantial.
That's because we didn't built enough housing. And that's solely due to politics and a lot of questionable policies based upon science that the lawmakers often don't understand. There have been housing crises in every type of economic system.
Also, capitalism is the natural state of how humans operate. Money literally predates writing and the first pieces of writing we have are sales invoices.
Living under its constant threat sure is bad for the ol MH tho isn't it.
The pathology is that we have this system in the first place.
No, living under survival pressure is good for mental health. It's what we're evolved to do. Why does it feel good to crack a tough bug, or finish a project, or win a game? It's the same achievement reward a hunter feels bagging a deer.
Some pressure is good but there's a difference between constant pressure and regular sessions of pressure similar to hunting. I don't think we necessarily evolved to be under constant pressure, I'm not saying it's impossible but humans wouldn't thrive under constant pressure, we'd never have had the time to evolve language or the intelect under constant pressure.
I know lots of people struggling to get by and I can assure you their situation doesn't improve their mental health.
Agreed, struggling and not ever winning is bad, I should have clarified that.
You realize that's literally what we're talking about -- a permanent underclass that is never permitted to win?
This stance is just 'acceptable losses' with more typing
Maybe slightly unrelated, but I've done a lot of road trips throughout the US, and there is so much land that is used unproductively, it's really incredible. Land that could be used for energy, food, or housing, just sitting empty or with abandoned structures.
Imagine if we just paid people to coat their properties in solar panels - throw them on your roof, lawn, wherever you have the space. We could drive energy prices down to nothing. We could pay people to install ADUs. The resources are there, but the imagination and commitment are not.
Instead, I'm looking at a $40k+ solar install for my very small house and a breakeven on investment in maybe 10 years for a house I probably won't live in by then.
> We could drive energy prices down to nothing.
Not when you're paying people to coat their properties in solar panels. As you noted, that would cost plenty.
Solar panels also degrade over time. By the time the "free" electricity has paid for the installation, you'll need to replace it.
Payback time in Scotland is 6-ish years. Same seems to be true in Massachusetts. Solar Panels have a lifespan of around 25 years. Inverters may need to be replaced sooner than that, but still last at least a decade.
So it pays for itself 3-4 times over.
There is no way that is true unless those solar panels are very subsidized. The energy needed to make a PV is 2x what that panel would harvest over its entire lifetime in Scotland for example. Scotland is a terrible place for PV. The numbers you give are probably accurate for central Mexico though. Also, the mean lifetime of a PV panel is 20 years.
We spend billions every year in gas subsidies. We spend billions every year in food subsidies. For energy independence and the carbon reduction alone, this is a worthwhile investment even if the upfront costs are substantial.
Your information appears to be 20 years out of date.
How often do you think solar panels need to be replaced?
>>By the time the "free" electricity has paid for the installation, you'll need to replace it.
You are going to have to back this up with credible citations. Otherwise it sounds like skepticism from 2008.
"this system" is wild when you are talking about the universe we evolved in
which law of physics says that you pay a landlord rent or else the cops come and beat you up?
Breathtaking that you view trillionaires and casino capitalism as a state of nature.
I imagine you imagine our primitive ancestors in the canopy, glancing at their iPhones to see how their property value is doing.
But the truth is, we didn't even have this level of thoroughgoing, casual precarity as recently as fifty years ago.
Or even twenty.
There was a time, even in my memory, where rents were tolerable and housing within reach.
That's because we didn't built enough housing. And that's solely due to politics and a lot of questionable policies based upon science that the lawmakers often don't understand. There have been housing crises in every type of economic system.
Also, capitalism is the natural state of how humans operate. Money literally predates writing and the first pieces of writing we have are sales invoices.
I am certain it is not.
[dead]
I’m sure Big Pharma would love it if it was.