to think our politicians aren't fit for the 21st century

[raisinsarenottheonlyfruit]

We're on the verge of a massive revolution in technology - computers will be smarter than humans within 10-30 years (depending on who you listen to) and once there will keep on getting smarter. The amount of data we can process is immense.

We should be having discussions about what we'll do once the computers have all the work covered, while concerning ourselves with solving climate change and trying to make sure the computers don't take over or fuck it all up for us some other way (this is a real threat now, not sci fi).

If there was the political will, we could all live very comfortably, thank you very much.

But instead this government are hell bent on implementing austerity for ideological reasons, and Brexit for no good reason at all - it's a corner they've backed us all by mistake. Fucking farcical. But we're the ones who will suffer. Food prices will likely rise while standards will drop, the NHS will be trashed, human rights and workers rights will be damaged.

Why is all this even on the agenda?

Why the fuck are this government not doing more about climate change - the biggest threat ever to face humanity? Why are they not doing ANYTHING positive about putting technology at the centre of the agenda, the biggest opportunity humanity has been presented with? The limits to what's possible with technology is pretty much resources now, not our imaginations.

Are they even aware they live in the 21st century?

Total lack of vision, compassion or humanity.

We should all be a lot angrier about this shit show IMO.

I think about this too, not sure what the solution is.

Two party politics is so focused on rubbishing the other side and appealing to grass roots and marginal voters. Also the need to change things for the sake of making your mark. And never admitting errors. Would be viewed as a really bad way for making decisions in any other area!

In China rising up through the government is like the civil service, by promotion not by election. And government careers are competitive and prestigious. Obviously massive problems there too. But it's an interesting example of theoretically advancing politicians through merit and experience (I say theoretically because I don't know how much is due to contacts) and the country achieving economically.

Obviously democracy has lots of good points that we want to keep. But I despair when a politician is at the head of, say, the NHS deciding on major changes. What do they know about running the nhs? What of running the NHS is political? Surely the political decision is what the broad overall aims of the nhs are, and then people already working within the NHS are best placed to decide practically how to work towards that, and if they don't succeed initially they can stay and learn from that and do better, rather than being voted out and a new novice MP be appointed who decides to change everything again.

Also I knew several aspiring politicians at uni and they were all interested in party politics but not interested in genuinely original thought. They seemed to view everything through the prism of their party.

Also it feels like our politicians are tinkering round the edges rather than trying to really address problems. The two party system seems to encourage this, if you suggest something big and innovative and the other side successfully rubbish it you can be voted out. Also the need to present definitive policies when campaigning, any uncertainty is leaped upon as incompetence, when it actually seems healthy to say "our aim is this, our broad plan is doing x, y, we definitely wouldn't do z, we will achieve what we can within those parameters", rather than everything being a finished 100% guaranteed plan.

Perhaps we need more of them with a scientific background. There was a research chemist by the name of Thatcher, whatever became of her?

Gee whiz I can't wait for us to go fuck up the climate on another planet.

Oh wait, the other planets don't even have a climate. They don't even have a biosphere. And if they did have such things they'd probably be lethal to human life already.

The two party system seems to encourage this, if you suggest something big and innovative and the other side successfully rubbish it

Yup, there's always someone who pops up to stamp on visionary thinking.

lljkk I'm looking at you.

Did you read my post above about the ways going to the moon has changed our every day life? Do you even care? Do you just want to have a go?

Yes we have lots of issues here on Earth. Space travel isn't an irresponsible luxury though, it's vital to our survival and has plenty of benefits for life on Earth in terms of technological advancement. Also, it's not impossible to change the climate on other planets - we've done it here without even trying in a fairly short space of time. Not saying it'd be easy - but space travel would have seemed impossible a couple of hundred years ago, let alone some of the advances we've made since then.

It may not be your interest and that's fine. But the rate technology is increasing is accelerating.

If what you're saying is that if humans so royally fuck up this planet we can't live on it we don't deserve another one, that's a moral argument but it's still got nothing to do with whether it's possible or not.