Skip to main content

People’s frame of reference in the western world is their lifestyle


As much as they see different life standards on TV or in the newspapers and magazines they are prisoners to their own experiences and strandards. As they bask in SUV, smartphones, flat screens, paved roads, …. They take these for granted. 
  • In an article about extreme poverty, they comment that nobody can live on 1 or 2 dollars a day (how could people do that?). The fact that half of the population has escaped extreme poverty is dismissed then. Check out @nickgillespie’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/nickgillespie/status/958795258107760640?s=09
  • It’s only good if you reach my standards, my lifestyle. The only one I know. BUt damn, I will hate you if you dare owning more than me after that.
  • They tell you Bitcoin is stupid because “we” already have a banking system that works well. Dismissing the billions who don’t and who could use a little a permissionless tech like Bitcoin.
  • They can think dynamically, improvement from 0.1 to 1 is a 10 fold improvement and it shows strong momentum but it’s seen at only 1. Just like the 1% are not the same 1% people. THe rich come and go. A basketball player squanders his money while a hustler builds a carwash empire. It’s not static. Different people benefit while overall everybody gets richer on average. But’s that’s not enough. They abhor inequalities to the point where having a car, a flat screen and a smartphone, a roof, power and cheap food everywhere is not considered progress because there are people who have yachts and helicopters. 
It’s really hard to not think from our vantage point (it’s even harder when they try to virtue signal in the process). Can’t think outside of that proverbial box, outside of our universe. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What I’ve learned walking 3 hours a day for the past 3 years — Part I: fitness

It won’t make you slim but… — Use it or lose it — Who needs yoga ? — Interval train with skin in the game — hormesis IT WON’T MAKE YOU SLIM BUT… Increasingly more people are waking up to the fact that exercising is an inefficient strategy to burn fat. I’ve calculated that at my bodyweight I burn approximately 150 net calories (calories that I burned due to the walking only) per hour.  See more details in this article here . You know what? 150 calories is 25 peanuts. A mere handful. I can wolf that down in 30 seconds. What’s easier? Skipping the peanuts or walking for 60 minutes? Waking 3h./day is a lot of exercise for only 450 calories burned. At first I didn’t see any results on my waistline although I really wanted to. My body adapted. It found ways to walk more efficiently, to rest more than before in between walks and above else, triggered more acute hunger signals more to offset some of the calories burned. Very tricky. When I eventually trimmed down w...
Post a Comment
Read more

It's free (or is it?)

We didn't buy flowers. But could take a good pic. For free. If you buy only stuff on Amazon you lose that. Also if you take more than you give (only consumes free stuff but don't give away free stuff) you're a net negative and destroy civilization. 
Post a Comment
Read more