[DesuMaiden]

1) Making our society not so dependent on fossil fuels. We can't keep being so reliant on nonrenewable resources.

2) Preventing the population from growing anymore. This way we can actually support the population. That way when our population crashes downwards, it doesn't crash as hard downwards. If our population crashes at 7 billion people to only 2 billion people, then it wouldn't be as bad as a population of 9 billion people being reduced down to 2 billion people.

Currently, no governments in the world are addressing these issues, and no government is trying to implement these solutions. So I believe our current world leadership is inept.

[sparky]

.
governments by their very nature are focused on surviving next year , nothing else matter
that's why government will never be the solution , unless the problem is strait in their face
that's why they are so easy about waging war ,it solve all problems about their legitimacy

[GHung]

Governments are largely event- and circumstance-driven, not the other way around, especially as societies get into the hyper-complexity zone. Peak government?

[americandream]

They aren't inept but act out of self interest as we all do. Cradle to grave conditioning. You've only to observe those around you.

[Pops]

All persons act out of self-interest to one extent or another, people in government are no different. What is different about representative government, and the representatives in it, is they must eventually act out the will of their constituents. It is a cop out to say they have all the power and we have none.

So ask not what your government can do;
Tell it.

[Newfie]

I can't think of any answer that is not depressing.

[MD]

I can't think of any answer that is not depressing.

Why? Because you and yours or me and mine might not make it through the culling?

Downsizing is inevitable. I'm not saying to embrace it joyfully, but it does need to be accepted as reality.

I like the term "downsizing". It makes it sound so corporate and impersonal. The stock value for survivors will rise!

btw: I was thinking of correcting your title word "focusing", but I kind of like foe-cussing, because that's what politicians do best!

[Poordogabone]

Carter had the right idea by wearing a sweater and telling americans to turn down their thermostat during the 70's energy crisis. As a matter of fact we could live comfortably cutting our energy use by half. Driving at 55 M/h instead of 65 drastically reduces fuel consumption. Air resistance goes up exponentially the faster you drive. Unplugging devices chargers when not in use and weather proofing your house goes a long way in saving energy as well.
Unfortunately Carter was not re-elected and the next guy in office tore out the solar panels installed on the white house and became the most popular president of modern times. No president since then ever talked about energy conservation.

[Pops]

PDB, I was thinking about Carter and that exact speech when I made my post.

He lost out to the guy who said it was Morning in America - because the constituency was not ready for turning down the t-stat or anything else.

Turned out to be mourning for america.

[americandream]

All persons act out of self-interest to one extent or another, people in government are no different. What is different about representative government, and the representatives in it, is they must eventually act out the will of their constituents. It is a cop out to say they have all the power and we have none.

So ask not what your government can do;
Tell it.

However, do you yourself know what OBJECTIVELY needs to be done. Oh, we all know what we WANT. That however is a world away from the objective facts which it has to be said, are staring us in the face.

Therefore, someone in a cushy political job faced with demands to nationalise, denationalise, liberalise, conservatise, naziise, christianise and all the rest is naturally going to choose the easiest road and keep as many of the most powerful happy so as to ensure his or own future; There is no room for sentiment in capitalism. Why do you think I as a Marxist have upskilled myself with the most powerful tool in capitalism, pure market knowledge, in order to function effectively at my many and distinct levels.

My advice would be to first understand the system beyond the normative senses then take the steps you see appropriate.

[americandream]

I can't think of any answer that is not depressing.

Why? Because you and yours or me and mine might not make it through the culling?

Downsizing is inevitable. I'm not saying to embrace it joyfully, but it does need to be accepted as reality.

I like the term "downsizing". It makes it sound so corporate and impersonal. The stock value for survivors will rise!

btw: I was thinking of correcting your title word "focusing", but I kind of like foe-cussing, because that's what politicians do best!

Contemplating downsizing within exponentiality is as absurd as it gets. Hence my advice...get past these incomplete notions as you clearly have a searching mind or else you would not be here.

[Shaved Monkey]

Part of the problem is the conservative side of politics dont think there even is a problem.
Half the voters believe them and governments are elected by a few percent swings.
These people that swing dont want to vote for bitter medicine,they want BAU.
So the alternative forces dont stand a chance until its blatantly obvious to a few more than 50% of the population.

[Newfie]

I can't think of any answer that is not depressing.

Why? Because you and yours or me and mine might not make it through the culling?

Downsizing is inevitable. I'm not saying to embrace it joyfully, but it does need to be accepted as reality.

I like the term "downsizing". It makes it sound so corporate and impersonal. The stock value for survivors will rise!

btw: I was thinking of correcting your title word "focusing", but I kind of like foe-cussing, because that's what politicians do best!

Yup, that's about right.

The governments should focus on the five biggest problems. Here's my list.
1 over population
2 climate change
3 water
4 resource depletion
5 overly fragile global economic system

Feel free to post your own.

[americandream]

Part of the problem is the conservative side of politics dont think there even is a problem.
Half the voters believe them and governments are elected by a few percent swings.
These people that swing dont want to vote for bitter medicine,they want BAU.
So the alternative forces dont stand a chance until its blatantly obvious to a few more than 50% of the population.

That's the objective forces at play, forces that blow through the normative with such power and force that they compel cultural seismic shifts. However on this occasion, we have few luxuries as the planet is largely fully utilised and of course, we are playing with the climate in range transforming ways. Having said that, a significant portion of the population are in suicide mode (denial) as they are unwilling to break with resource and consumerist rich capitalist lifestyles, notably in the West. Thus I would be pleasantly surprised were I to see a truly transformative culture emerge.

[MD]

I can't think of any answer that is not depressing.

Why? Because you and yours or me and mine might not make it through the culling?

Downsizing is inevitable. I'm not saying to embrace it joyfully, but it does need to be accepted as reality.

I like the term "downsizing". It makes it sound so corporate and impersonal. The stock value for survivors will rise!

btw: I was thinking of correcting your title word "focusing", but I kind of like foe-cussing, because that's what politicians do best!

Contemplating downsizing within exponentiality is as absurd as it gets. Hence my advice...get past these incomplete notions as you clearly have a searching mind or else you would not be here.

wtf are you on about? I didn't think you were among the infinite exponential growth crowd. It's going to end some day, and "downsizing" will occur whether you like it or not, so forget your silly notions about permanent growth.

[Sixstrings]

Carter's "famous malaise speech:"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCOd-qWZB_g

What's so odd is that what he's saying is actually so true for today, as far as a crisis of confidence goes. But all he was doing was setting it up for Reagan to come and provide that lacking "confidence."

But anyhow, if you're the darn president and you've got the most powerful job in the world, then you don't wear a sweater and complain about how depressing everything is.

You get out there, and inspire people, and you actually DO something. People don't elect a president to hear him complain. Nobody wants a leader that just depresses them.

The 70s economic problems needed just a BIT of Reaganism, what it didn't need was the total offshoring and wholesale looting of everything which is what happened after Carter.

(that is a kooky speech lol, was he high? his speech actually makes no sense, you guys say I rant lmao. Good lord Carter was trying to solve an energy crisis by telling people they shouldn't want to use energy anyway, they shouldn't want "Stuff" and consumerism. That's just depressing, nobody wants to watch that on the tv.

By the way, what ended the gas crisis? There weren't any gas lines under Reagan. )

[Sixstrings]

To answer the OP,

The "governments of the world" and the "people of the world" want the same things Americans have always wanted. They want more money and stuff than they had, the year before.

You're never going to sell a "sweater speech" to the Chinese. They're very optimistic about their future. In polling they all think their lives will be better next year than this year. They want more, more, and more, and as much as they can get.

What I think "the governments of the world should focus on:"

* the anti-american blocs should give it up, they are just greedy, they're going to wind up in a world war with us, they'd better not start annexing any more places. If they need nationalist pride then they can do that with a space race, not east european or Japanese island annexations.

* the nations of the world need to appreciate the stability we have right now, and stop inviting world war, as some of them are doing, as their people yearn to be "empires" and want a "chinese century" or a "russian century." They want to dominate their regions, and other nations, same old sh*t since the beginning of time.

USA is facing a lot of challenges, now isn't the time to wear a sweater.

[americandream]

I can't think of any answer that is not depressing.

Why? Because you and yours or me and mine might not make it through the culling?

Downsizing is inevitable. I'm not saying to embrace it joyfully, but it does need to be accepted as reality.

I like the term "downsizing". It makes it sound so corporate and impersonal. The stock value for survivors will rise!

btw: I was thinking of correcting your title word "focusing", but I kind of like foe-cussing, because that's what politicians do best!

Contemplating downsizing within exponentiality is as absurd as it gets. Hence my advice...get past these incomplete notions as you clearly have a searching mind or else you would not be here.

wtf are you on about? I didn't think you were among the infinite exponential growth crowd. It's going to end some day, and "downsizing" will occur whether you like it or not, so forget your silly notions about permanent growth.

Calm down.

We have no idea whether we will have the luxury of downsizing given the circumstances. What we do know is that capitalism is a train wreck in the making.

In fact, thinking of some resolution of the current mess into an earlier golden age of fewer people is another part of the denial process as it fails to look at the very likely and terminal risk that running exponentiality on a finite plane poses.

[americandream]

To answer the OP,

The "governments of the world" and the "people of the world" want the same things Americans have always wanted. They want more money and stuff than they had, the year before.

You're never going to sell a "sweater speech" to the Chinese. They're very optimistic about their future. In polling they all think their lives will be better next year than this year. They want more, more, and more, and as much as they can get.

What I think "the governments of the world should focus on:"

* the anti-american blocs should give it up, they are just greedy, they're going to wind up in a world war with us, they'd better not start annexing any more places. If they need nationalist pride then they can do that with a space race, not east european or Japanese island annexations.

* the nations of the world need to appreciate the stability we have right now, and stop inviting world war, as some of them are doing, as their people yearn to be "empires" and want a "chinese century" or a "russian century." They want to dominate their regions, and other nations, same old sh*t since the beginning of time.

USA is facing a lot of challenges, now isn't the time to wear a sweater.

You talk the biggest load of crap, you know that. You have no idea how the global wealth creation machine works, do ya?

[Pops]

However, do you yourself know what OBJECTIVELY needs to be done.

I think our current big idea is everyone needs an iPhone, at some point I hope we all decide on a different priority. But "TPTB" didn't come up with the iPhone economy and force it down our throats (regardless of Jobs' ego). They only have our feathers with which to line their nest.

There is a greater portion of the human race living in representative democracies now than ever in the past.