Especially if you are depending upon the private sector to develop them.    

Did you know that no private company ever developed a Chip-fab lab?    

Couldn't afford to.    

 

 It was always done with government funding 

but farmed out to feed the baby weasels in the private sector.   

 

Fifty years after we went into space, 

the private sector is now beginning 

to be able to afford the economie of scale and 

pay their shareholders 

to have a "private" space project.     

 

We wouldn't have had Hubble 

if it was dependent upon the private sector.     

 

Hell we can't even have a repertory chorus 

with fully paid personnel 

with the rules of the private sector.    

 

Is your chorus in Bath paid a living wage?     

 

Did Handlo make a profit?   

 

What exactly is it that the private sector does well?  

 

Fund the upper 1% of the nation, but just barely?       

 

Look what its done to the rest of us.   

All we can do is breed.    

That's why abortion 

is an atrocity to the lower classes.    

 

Flooding the wealthy with children is their only power.     

 

How much would you 

be willing to pay them 

NOT 

to have children and 

to go to school?     

 

No?   Humm!   ...       

 

They hired a black janitor 

to clean up the mess and 

now all they can do  

is complain about the streaks.    

 

Humm!    

 

With a song.. in my heart.    

 

Or is it:    

 

"No man is in island,  

no man stands alone,  

each man's joy is joy to me, 

each man's grief is my own.    

 

We need one another so I will defend 

each man as my brother, 

each man as my friend.     

 

That's what they taught me 

in school in the Quapaw reservation.  

That was government as well.

The private sector would have preferred 

Ayn Rand.

 

  :>))

 

REH

 

PS.  You boys gettin' tired?    You seem tired these days.

How ya feelin?

 

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Keith Hudson
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 9:45 AM
To: [email protected]; RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Pew Poll: American's Predict Life in 2050

 

Steve,

At 08:37 02/07/2010 -0400, you wrote:



Asleep at the wheel... Food? Water? Energy? 'The Spirit in The Gene' at
work.
Steve


I agree. I just wonder what the point of these sorts of polls are. Most
people have little idea of the scale of things, or the complexity of things,
nor the cost of them.

look at the first para, for example!





Poll: Americans Predict Life in 2050




A joint poll from the Pew Research Center and Smithsonian magazine finds
high hopes about science but anxiety about the environment
By T. A. Frail
Illustrations By Serge Bloch
Smithsonian magazine, August 2010

Within the next 40 years, most Americans believe, the United States will get
the bulk of its energy from sources other than oil.


Maybe not from oil but certainly the US (and all other advanced countries)
will still be heavily reliant on fossil fuels. There's no way that wind
turbines, solar technology, nuclear power (all needing massive governmental
subsidy anyway) or whatever can be scaled up to producing even half of
electricity requirements. None of these can produce stock organic chemicals
either (particularly nitrogenous fertilizers) at anywhere near economic
cost.




 Computers will converse like people.


Unlikely in the extreme. Ever since Japan's attempts at 5th Generation
computing 30 years ago every possible algorithm-based approach has failed.
Artificial Intelligence is a wasteland.




 Cancer will be cured,


There are many sorts of cancers and most of them involve incredibly complex
associations between scores and sometimes hundreds of genes. As now, only a
few of the many cancers will be treatable (or postponable)




 and artificial limbs will outperform natural ones.


Hardly. Nature has spent hundreds of millions of years perfecting limbs with
every conceivable ability. We can certainly invent prosthetics which can do
a few unusual things which our natural limbs can't do, but not the all-round
performance.




 Astronauts will land on Mars, 


Technically possible but will astronauts be able to remain fit and sane on
the journey there, and then on their return?  All the evidence about basic
physiological and psychological limitations of the human body and brain is
pointing the other way. Robots perhaps, but live humans never.




and ordinary people will travel in space.


When ordinary parents cannot afford more than one or two children in
advanced countries how are they going to be able to afford the price of a
space ticket? Most ordinary people in advanced countries will still be
paying off their governmental debts in 40 years' time -- if there hasn't
been a catastrophic hyperinflation in between, and if they're lucky enough
to have a job.

Keith





But that optimistic outlook on scientific achievementdocumented in a
nationwide opinion poll conducted by the Pew Research Center
<http://people-press.org/report/625/>  and Smithsoniandoes not extend to the
environment. A small majority of those polled said most of the United States
would face severe water shortages by 2050. Six in ten said the oceans would
be less healthy than they are now, and seven in ten foresaw a major energy
crisis. Overall, fewer than half expected the quality of Earths environment
to improve.

If the U.S. has a national religion, the closest thing to it is faith in
technology,said Scott Keeter, director of survey research for the Pew
Research Center <http://people-press.org/report/625/> . But technology is
not seen as a panacea for fixing the environment.

The poll, occasioned by the magazines 40th anniversary and designed to
assess attitudes about the next 40 years, also documented a drop in
expectations. Americans remain generally positive, with 64 percent of those
surveyed saying they were somewhat or very optimistic about what the next 40
years holds for them and their families; 61 percent said the same about the
nations future. But in a Pew poll taken in May 1999, the questions garnered
response rates of 81 percent and 70 percent, respectively.

Of course, the 1999 poll was taken at the height of the high-tech boom and
on the eve of a new millennium. Since then, terrorists attacked the United
States, the nation has engaged in two wars, the cost of living has outpaced
wages and a recession has damaged the economy, among other things.

In the new survey, 58 percent of respondents said a world war would occur in
the next four decades, 53 percent said terrorists would attack the United
States with nuclear weapons, and the same majority said the nation would be
less important in the world than it is now.

The Smithsonian/Pew poll was conducted April 21-26just after the BP oil
spill began in the Gulf of Mexico, but well before its magnitude became
apparent. The survey included 1,546 adults in the United States reached by
residential telephone or cellphone. The margin of error for the total sample
is no more than plus or minus 4.5 points.

The documented belief in technological advancement extended from the
laboratory (half said an extinct species would be resuscitated through
cloning) to outer space (half said evidence of life would be found elsewhere
in the universe) to the marketplace (a small majority said gasoline-powered
cars would go out of production).

In an exception to the pessimism about the environment, the poll found a
ten-point drop in the percentage of respondents who say the earth will get
warmer: from 76 percent in 1999 to 66 percent in 2010.

That trend is very consistent with data we've gathered on the issue of
global warming more generally,Keeter said. There are many possible
explanations, but one thing is quite clear: there is a strong partisan and
ideological pattern to the decline in belief in global warming.The vast
majority of the change since 1999, he said, has occurred among Republicans
and independents who lean Republican.

Because the U.S. population is expected to increase by more than 100 million
by 2050, the poll asked about such growth. More than twice as many
respondents (42 percent) said it would be more harmful than beneficial (16
percent). And there was ambivalence about immigration. Roughly a third of
respondents said legal immigration had to be decreased to keep the economy
strong, but a slightly higher proportion said legal immigration had to be
kept at current levels; a quarter said it should be increased.

A clear majority expected race relations to improve (68 percent). Even more
expected a Hispanic candidate to be elected president of the United States
(69 percent). And 89 percentthe largest majority in the entire pollsaid a
woman would be elected president.

There was broad agreement that the cultural landscape, however else it
changes over the next 40 years, will have less paper. More than six in ten
respondents said they believed that paper currency and printed newspapers
would disappear and personal letters sent by mail would be exceedingly rare.

And a hopeful outlook on the U.S. economy56 percent said it would be
stronger in 2050 than it is nowcame with a caveat: 86 percent said Americans
would have to work into their 70s before retiring. Those longer careers, in
the respondentsview, would not be accompanied by longer lives. Those who
thought more people would live to be 100 (42 percent) were outnumbered by
those who did not (50 percent).

T. A. Frail is a senior editor at Smithsonian.



Read more:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/specialsections/40th-anniversary/Poll-American
s-Predict-Life-in-2050.html#ixzz0sTuGIa51

 
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Keith Hudson, Saltford, England 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to