Other possible benefits of such a system include that it could make it easier to launch rescues, deal with emergencies and the unexpected, and plan missions. But the tether could also serve as a connection for data, fluids, and energy between earth and a space station/platform. Liquids are very heavy, and with rockets- every tiny bit of weight counts. The longer the distance- the more every single ounce matters. It takes more fuel to launch more weight. A craft with more weight take more fuel every time it is under thrust. Fuel also adds weight. At a certain point- your craft becomes so heavy that adding more fuel won’t get it to escape velocity. Those on a station could benefit from air and water sent to and from earth. Trash too.

It also means we could possibly avoid much of the heavy, complex, expensive, fragile heat protection for re entry- if the vessel launched from space and then docked in space on return, without ever touching atmosphere- that changes a lot about its construction.

For one thing- any vehicle we send up has to be designed to work both in earth’s atmosphere to some degree- and in space. Space shuttle bay doors are so flimsy that without support they break under their own weight in earth gravity! But instead of sending up a vehicle even- we could send up materials and have the vehicle assembled in space. That means we could do away with aerodynamics and things specific to a current space vehicle and design a pure space vehicle, optimized for space.

The idea would be to create some sort of tether to a platform or space station. This would THEORETICALLY allow us to send things into “near space” without costly, complicated, dangerous rockets. Theoretically this would reduce payload costs- but it would also potentially remove certain design challenges inherent to soar launches.

If I tell you that it’s ok to drive your car to the grocery store this week even though you need an oil change, it isn’t great for the car but should t hurt it- and you hear: “An engineer told me I don’t need to change my oil- it’s all a scam! Not changing oil WONT hurt your car!” Well... no. No. That’s... that’s not what was said. Nuance, context.... important things. And most politicians either lack the brain power to give them- or withhold them because then people will... well, this.

What you hear, what you parrot back to me in question form is: “HA! See?! You said a cloth mask isn’t as good as a hazmat suit- so you admit it is WORTHLESS!!!” Nooooo. That isn’t what I said. I said that a cloth mask isn’t the BEST thing for the job- but they need N95 and higher for the most at risk people. So a cloth mask is the best thing most people can easily and cheaply make with little special knowledge or skill, that can reduce the risks to everyone- just not as much as other masks that are more specialized and engineered.

But when I say go you “Masks work. Cloth masks work. Hospitals have been using them, and still do in some places, for almost a century. Improvised cloth masks can be very effective when correctly applied. Purpose made ones are better. Better than that are surgical masks. Better than that are N95. Better than that are full respirators. Better than that are a hazmat suit...”

Which is- you can’t really give most children nuanced instructions. It must be simple, actionable, and not open to debate. Because... they lack the ability to understand nuance, and the subject matter expertise to speak informed on something like why they aren’t allowed to use the stove. “Jimmy’s parents let Jimmy and Jimmy is fine!” “I used the stove once and nothing f bad happened so you’re wrong!” Well... no. That’s not how it works.

I was just pointing to Trump as a pretty universally known example of a politician who often comes off as a moron, masks and Trump are only casually related through circumstance. But to your other statement about lies- no. I do not admit it. I admit that you prove my point right there, and prove why the narrative has to be so “DO IT DO IT DO IT!”

Otherwise you’ve taken away their choice, and once they are in your car it may be harder or worse or impossible to find another way home if your schedule doesn’t suit them.

I think it depends. But- if it’s too far for a bus- anything but the more involved of errands would likely still make the ride beat the alternatives... depending. If they are in a rush- then the time taken for errands may defeat the purpose. It comes down to a question of if you’d known about the errands- would you have preferred an alternative? If I’m in a hurry and for some reason don’t have transportation- I may prefer to call a paid service for a ride if it will be faster, or bother another friend to come get me. Maybe I could take care of some work while I wait or something. It all depends I think- which is why personally I think the person offering should inform the other party there will be errands, so they can make an informed decision on wether it’s a sweet gesture but not actually a help; or wether they think that’s best for them.

Lol. The poor fish probably did nothing wrong. I doubt the person plans to eat it- I lack the information to know if it is an invasive species or something. Just the overall statement seemed off to me- beyond the fish. But please don’t take my reply as some indication I didn’t enjoy your meme, or that I took some offense. I quite liked it. I enjoyed it on the surface level- and then as I do from time to time I decided to look deeper from a few angles and see if anything g else stood out to me.

Truth. Better yet is one in the right place- but in a pinch if you put 10-20 haphazardly in the “close enough zone” then your odds get better than either.

That was the point. It isn’t about quality with institutions like this- the two biggest factors in quality of education are access and effort. Ivy League schools primarily exist as social clubs. They way they prepare people for success is by having them meet the “right people” and giving them a chance to network with the children of powerful and wealthy or connected individuals. That’s what a “legacy” is. It’s a fancy way of saying entrenched wealth and privilege.

Lol. Yeah. I’m not “s*it shy myself either, but I know some people are. Or are quite... “modest.” Points on the power move.

So- it may just be that in the somewhat distant to not too distant future- the fertility rate will fall far lower and the world population won’t just level out- but it will decline. Because with increasingly advanced automation humanity may be able to come to a point in history where you don’t NEED slaves and servants to build pyramids and coon meals and peel grapes and clean and fix and protect you. Machines may be able to do it. If that were to happen- the rich really wouldn’t need masses of “unskilled” workers to complicate things- just robots and some “lowers middle class” people to Fox the robots when they can’t fix themselves, and for those things the robots couldn’t yet do. Then “someone higher up the class tree just has to design newer better robots as things go along, and the rest is, hopefully not, (future) history.

This is important because historically- they didn’t have a choice. They NEEDED people to exist. Large mobs of people well below their station existing to hold up the other people below them who all, in their mind, basically exist just so they can have the life they want and choose. Large groups of people who can cause them problems, who use resources and have wants and needs that at least need SOME attention sometimes. Large groups who vastly outnumber and out power- who are only kept in line through some idea of mutual need and other thin leashes that are easily snapped.

The private plane (or for the less wealthy, the first class seat that put more space and ability to ignore other people than regular coach.) private clubs and golf courses, private and exclusive restaurants, security and handlers and blah blah- all go help pretend you don’t exist.

Asides risks of theft or revolution or usurping etc- those below are generally unpleasant to those above, with the more layers between your social groups the more that is true. Keep in mind that a major portion of most wealthy peoples lives goes to essentially trying to pretend you don’t exist. Wether it’s a giant mansion they can do anything in without having to risk seeing or hearing you, in a private community or secluded gated location to keep you off the private drive way they don’t have to worry about you or others being on.

Pretty much every society in history has either required an optimum number of people to share responsibilities in a community- OR has required a much larger number of laborers, serfs, peasants, whatever- workers. These workers, from the POV of whoever was in power, existed simply because they need them to. A stratified society is a pyramid. It needs a lot of people at the base to hold up the slightly smaller class above and so forth up to the top where only a few can be.

And ultimately- it’s too long a topic to get into here as I’ve gone on enough, but I’ll try to be brief here too:

There’s also possibilities that certain people, especially those who don’t want to see change in their home demographics, would increase fertility rates in an attempt to avoid an influx of people non assimilated to their culture and way of thinking and living.

Keep in mind however that this flattening is most likely temporary. The demographics who are projected to continue having kids, their kids will likely do the same and so on. In fact- you have to remember that many of the reasons that people from more developed countries are choosing not to have kids are cultural. New immigrants from places where crowding is much more common, and/or values and family are more “traditional,” when introduced in large numbers to countries with much more space- may actually respond by INCREASING birth rates for those demographics as their living conditions and earnings improve- for many of those people, what those from developed nations would call “not enough” after the cost of a child, would still be more than they have now- so to them it could still be a win win.

It all gets incredibly complex- but the main reasons the population is projected to flatten out are as stated- based on current trends in population growth- more people are simply choosing not to have kids- especially in developed countries.