Recent comments in /f/explainlikeimfive

RockyMtnBullTesties t1_j28ourg wrote

Collecting samples is VERY different from mining for resources. The tech may be related but it’s like digging a hole with a garden spade vs a mechanical backhoe. A lot of money/development needs to go into that and our governments choose to use that money elsewhere instead. That’s not to say it won’t ever happen. We’re closer than ever. But I don’t think it’s going to happen anytime soon.

1

A_Garbage_Truck t1_j28orys wrote

the coin itself is not important if its not backed up by either its value in some other commodity(like gold, when the gold standard was still a thing) or the promise of economic staiblity of the entitiy issuing the coin(essentially guaranteeing you at you can at any time exchange said coin for its value on the respective currency)

the1st requires that you actually have said commodity in stock ready ot exchange, whiel the latter requires that your nation has the economic might to be good on this promise else i will not trust that coin.

2

Spiritual_Jaguar4685 t1_j28oqfz wrote

In some ways yes. Humanity has largely left natural selection behind.

How do we define "huge catastrophe"? Something like COVID probably applies and that was probably a wake up call to our fragility. Thankfully vaccines and social measures muted the worst of it, but we still a massive die-off of the old, immune compromised, and genetically unlucky.

I would argue it's less humans we should be worried about and rather things like our crops. If you research monocultures you'll get my point. Humans still have a tremendous amount of genetic diversity, it's unlikely a single plague lets say will wipe us out 100%. But most our major crops are essentially clones of each other. If there arises a COVID for wheat, then yes, if it kills one plant it can potentially eradicate wheat from existence. Look up the Gros Michele banana for information there. That should be a major concern for the future of humanity and something we strive to improve upon.

7

Luckbot t1_j28oehj wrote

>Marx believed that there should be a revolution

Slight correction:

Marx believed that there inevitably MUST be a proletarian revolution as logical next step after the bourgeois revolution (french revolution and later the 1848 springtime of nations) kicked out the aristocracy. He thought it was a natural law that this second revolution would eventually come when the proletariat that originally supported the liberal revolution realized that they didn't gain anything from it yet.

1

Spiritual_Jaguar4685 t1_j28o3t9 wrote

Great synopsis by u/dogmeatjones25

I'll just add that Marx lived in the mid-1800s, in Germany, and was very influenced by the Industrial Revolution and economics and politics of his day. His theory shouldn't be taken as "all Communism" any more than the Founding Fathers of the United States should be equated to "all Democracy".

His ideas though, which you can better call "Marxism" or "Marxist Communism" where the germ that grew into 20th century into things like Leninism, Stalinism, and the communism we saw in Soviet Russia and modern day China. It's not fair to say that modern day China is "Marxist" or to equate things like Socialism or Soviet Russia to Marx either.

2

DavidRFZ t1_j28nyg2 wrote

I was under the impressions that the “trillion dollar coin” proposal was an accounting trick to try to get around the artificial “debt limit” that Congress imposes on itself.

There have been structural budget deficits for over twenty years, so every couple of years the debt limit is raised.

Every so often, a group of newly-elected House members decides they are going to engage in brinksmanship with raising this limit — not fully comprehending the global financial meltdown that would occur if the government actually defaulted on its debt. In the end, the debt limit is ALWAYS raised. There is no other option.

So, people get annoyed with this game and try to find ways to render the “debt limit” meaningless. You could pass a law eliminating the debt limit! But if you don’t have the votes for that you get creative.

This old proposal was for the treasury to mint an trillion dollar coin and then deposit it in the Federal Reserve. It is not circulated. I don’t think something like that could even be “spent” (anyone got change for a trillion?). But in accounting terms it would count as an asset which would keep us below the “debt limit”. The government wouldn’t default. Brinksmanship by newly-elected Congressmembers is no longer a thing.

They’ll never do it though. It sounds too insane and “it’s just an accounting trick” is not an explanation that would sit well with potentially horrified voters.

8

homeboi808 t1_j28nx62 wrote

The stock exchange is where companies willing to publicly sell off ownership of their companies do such trades (they have to be approved of course, and follow a lot of regulations). In America the 2 largest ones are the New York Stock Exchange located on Wall Street, and the NASDAQ which is digital.

These pieces of ownership, shares, sometimes allow you to have voting rights as well as receive profits, dividends, which are in-line with the % of the company that you own. Now, not all shares come with either/both, so just do some research (you can just Google: “Does Apple stock pay dividends?”). You could cash out these dividends, but since it usually is a few pennies/bucks for most people, they instead choose to opt-in/enable a feature called Dividend Reinvestment Plan (DRIP), where they money is instead used to buy more shares of that company, that way you earn more shares and also earn more dividends, and this repeats and repeats (you could do this all manually especially since nowadays it is commission free and fractional shares can be bought; it used to be much more appealing before this, as now you could take the money and buy fractional shares in another company if you wish).

A broker is a person/app that handles the transactions (think Leonardo DiCaprio in Wolf of Wall Street); you yourself can’t just walk up to the NY Stock Exchange on Wall Street and do business). Historically brokers have charged commission fees but now most are free (they make money from offering other services, such as financial advising, they also require the money you wish to use to make purchases to be in their fund for them to invest in, rather than just charging your bank account).

1

dogmeatjones25 t1_j28m5d5 wrote

Karl Marx was a philosopher who lived a long time ago.

Marx believed that there were two main groups of people in society: the bourgeoisie, who owned the businesses and factories, and the proletariat, who worked for them. He thought that the bourgeoisie were always trying to make more money and get ahead, even if it meant exploiting the proletariat and keeping them poor.

Marx believed that there should be a revolution, where the proletariat would rise up and take control of the businesses and factories, so that everyone could work together and share the wealth more equally. This idea is called communism.

12

AdditionalRabbit4516 t1_j28jhq8 wrote

That’s why I said “related” and not “caused by,” since we don’t know the exact causal mechanism. But beta amyloid PET imaging is used to make Alzheimer’s diagnoses because levels do correspond to severity, for the most part. I work in neurology research.

Edit: also the article you’re referencing really only proved one lab was completely corrupt and shady. There are DOZENS of other b amyloid labs (and subtypes) and quite literally HUNDREDS of preclinical studies whose b amyloid work is supported, which is why clinical trials keep going that direction. Unfortunately they fail. There isn’t some big conspiracy to NOT cure AD. The Science article claiming otherwise was really really sensationalist. But I agree we don’t have a handle on it right now, and other therapeutics are needed.

8

tiredstars t1_j28iypj wrote

Also it is possible for the government to create this money, then take it out of circulation. It produces a billion dollar coin, and then raises taxes (but not spending) by a billion dollars.

Of course, if you pay me $1bn for my debt, then immediately hit me with a $1bn tax, I'm not going to be very happy.

2

Meme-Dozer OP t1_j28hky3 wrote

I mean , they don’t have to worry about resources , if they were just able to mine from asteroids or the solar system. We could have drones , bases to make it automatic. Resources wouldn’t be a worry , if we could just stop mining on earth, I just don’t get why stuck in a bubble and not expand.

1

Flair_Helper t1_j28hc6w wrote

Please read this entire message

Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

Subjective or speculative replies are not allowed on ELI5. Only objective explanations are permitted here; your question is asking for speculation or subjective responses. This includes anything asking for peoples' subjective opinions, any kind of discussion, and anything where we would have to speculate on the answer. This very much includes asking about motivations of people or companies. This includes Just-so stories.

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please use this form and we will review your submission.

1

Flair_Helper t1_j28gz81 wrote

Please read this entire message

Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

Discussion of religious or political beliefs are not allowed on ELI5. These usually end up being discussions rather than requests for simplifying complex concepts. They also tend to have a large subjective bent.

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please use this form and we will review your submission.

1