Captain Planet would've been completely justified if he straight up murdered his rogues gallery

Who will handle the inevitable reboot?

Walk into an average Walmart on any given Friday night and see all the welfare queens with their brood of 4+ kids all under the age of 6 and you tell me we don't have a breeding problem.

Could he though? Considering the games?
>Robotnik seems to be fast enough to keep ahead of Sonic long enough to get into whatever mech he needs to.
>Almost universally ends each game in some exploding, crashing vehicle, or stuck onboard a god damn exploding death satellite, yet survives each time.
The guy is made of iron (figuratively) (probably).

Sonic's speed may not be as broken as the Flash, but it's still pretty broken, and goes beyond the Flash when he has the Chaos Emeralds. If he wanted to, he could skin Robotnik alive in a second.

Especially given he is not a human being, but the embodied desire to live of the ecosphere.

Across all demographics those 4+ kids are more than likely to belong to different mothers than a single one. Even among Hispanics, the demographic most likely to have 4 or more kids, you're looking at only 20% of women have more than 3 kids.

Supermarkets routinely throw out around half of their total products, and there are more than enough vacant apartments and houses to feed, house and clothe everyone. We live in a post-scarcity world already, but people make too much money off of keeping people poor for us to have what we could. The problem is not, nor has it ever, nor will it ever, be with poor people scraping to get by. The problem is the people that make money off of keeping them poor.

Supermarkets are responsible for only 10% of US food waste and Wal-Mart is actually one of the best about reducing food waste. Half of all fresh produce is thrown out while still edible in the US, but that also includes consumer waste. As for housing, there are 135 million housing units in the USA for 128 million households. So while you're correct in that we could give a housing unit to every single homeless person in the USA (553,000), you're forgetting that long-term homelessness is correlated with substance abuse and mental illness, not economic deprivation, and simply giving them a home doesn't change the underlying issues. Housing issues are a matter of market distortions and allocation within a given area.

I do agree that homelessness is fueled by individuals, all with their own individual stories, but giving them a solid base, a fixed address, and the ability to take a daily shower is one from which most people can recover. I mean, getting a job when you're living on the streets is a sheer cliff climb more than an uphill climb, because you don't have a fixed address, don't have the ability to bathe on a daily basis, have nowhere to store clothes, and you don't have any of your documents.
Getting them off the street should never be considered the endgoal, but the beginning from which we can do our real work. Set up foodbanks to receive irregular produce (most of the food waste is correlated with growers throwing away fruit or vegetables that are unattractive, but still fully edible), as well as food that would otherwise be wasted by restaurants and supermarkets, and that does even more. After that, we can begin talking about rehab, therapy and full recovery. First step, though, is getting them into a stable housing situation and it always has been.

The problem is that for the substance abusers and mentally ill, which again make up the vast majority of the long-term homeless, giving them a stable housing situation doesn't solve the underlying issues that led to their homelessness in the first place. Without actual treatment it's worthless. And in most cases, you need to force people into those treatment programs, otherwise they'll just exploit the aid offered to them without making any beneficial changes to their life.

Most irregular produce is used in industrial food production where the consumer will never see the produce in its original form, food loss and waste in developed countries is biased towards the retail and consumer level (it's biased towards processing and transportation in developing countries). Supermarkets are often perfectly willing to donate food since it's a tax write-off and good PR, but food donations in any area are constrained by legal ambiguity (lawsuit risks primarily) and the ability for foodbanks to actually accept food. Most foodbanks don't have the setup to handle fresh produce or anything that requires refrigeration, and from a service efficiency perspective fresh produce is significantly subpar compared to canned food and other non-perishables. Food waste from restaurants is a completely different beast due to the highly perishable nature and safe handling requirements of prepared foods. The most ideal and efficient way to go about this would essentially be a form of institutionalization which would never fly from either a social or political standpoint, so instead we're stuck with trying to cobble together a variety of different programs, organizations, and providers into a functioning and efficient system.

All valid points, and another thing to amend to your larger point about getting food to the people that need it is a lot of municipal measures and other legislation that complicates the whole matter. A lot of areas have somehow passed actual legislation preventing people from feeding the homeless, which blows my mind, but then again, last time I was in LA, any and all areas where a human being could conceivably lay down was covered in spikes and shit, so...

But yeah, like I said, getting people off the street is the FIRST step. This is where we get into idealization (getting the homeless into homes is very possible, and Salt Lake City has a great pilot program doing just that, and has saved the city tens of millions of dollars so far), but IDEALLY, you would have medicare for all to take care of the physical and mental health issues attendant with homelessness. This may seem like it would be expensive, and it would be at first, but the overall cost would go down steeply due to the lower rate of ER admissions. I would also like to see taxes levied on controlled substances after full decriminalization and legalization, with that revenue going to rehab clinics available and paid for in full by those taxes. Then you can make the housing contingent on recovery, with real, measurable and attainable goals. We just have to make a commitment to actually helping people, instead of just half-assing it like everything else in this country.

Regulations against feeding the homeless are targeted towards people directly giving food to panhandlers, not food banks or charitable organizations; though some poorly worded laws have caused issues. As for the spikes and shit, it seems draconian but homeless will pretty much camp and stake out territory and while one or two homeless people sleeping on benches might be fine, very soon you'll have homeless on every bench. A lot of times it is difficult to grasp just how dense the homeless population can be in urban areas.

>we need people working to make goods and provide services
>if you can comfortably live on welfare, most people would do it
>the remaining hard-working people must provide for others via taxes, leaving even fewer intensives to work

How would we solve this problems without labor camps (hint - it does not work either)?

Attached: 338.jpg (400x587, 65K)

In most experiments with UBI, recipients continued to work; they just worked less. There was also a shift towards getting more education/training and an uptick in people switching to more personally satisfying but lower paying work. Even with UBI most people seem to want to have some form of occupation since it means a greater share of disposable income, maintaining or improving standard of living or, if nothing else, to stave off boredom. The main issue is that they also saw an influx of population, even though they didn't qualify for UBI, to take advantage of the disruption in the labor market. Basically, if you want UBI, you've got to build that wall otherwise you're going to look at some pretty nasty economic distortions in the future.

I kind of wish I could be a Captain Planet super villain. You know, pollute for fun, be evil for no reason, have a cool lair where I and my minions destroy nature and make animals suffer out of pure glorious sadism. That would be so damn cool.

Well, murrlogic, how do you expect to avoid the authorities? Or is that part of the whole "I wish" aspect?

I'm not Murrlogic, I don't jerk off to the idea, I just think it'd be fun as fuck. And yes, that is the whole "I wish" part, obviously if someone actually did try to be a supervillain IRL they'd be thrown in the crazy house or prison really damn fast.

Just become a politician, then you get to be responsible for massively destroying the earth's environments without any accountability.

People say this about every single character ever written. I’m beginning to think people are inherently bloodthirsty, and not in the vampire way

Why do you hate job creators

How would we reboot captain planet?

Maybe

>Be self aware at how goofy this show can get
>Have the villainous side actually have a villain on the opposite spectrum, one that wants to protect the planet by wiping out humanity.
>The villains have to use Fake names (not obvious ones) because no one wants to do business with names like "Sly Sludge, Looten Plunder, Dr. Blight" etc. Otherwise their only deals are already with the criminal underground
>Make the show aware that the villains plans are completely idiotic.
>A joke about some bailing on Dr Blight after overhearing her saying "I've tried this on over 30 people and didn't change the formula, why does this hair dye keep killing everyone?" They comment "this is litterally the textbook definition of insanity", and bolt
>Duke Nukem running gag being "no not THAT one" or him changing his name because not even the eco-villains want to deal with copyright infringement.
>A twist on the over population episode being, a kid who adores the Planeteers over hear them saying "you shouldn't have more than 2 kids",
this kid is the 3rd child in their family and thus feels like they should've never been born, and what they say ends up spreading to the rest of the country, causing large amounts of kids to run away from home, and the Planeteers have to fix this miss
>For the love of everything good, make Wheeler a little smarter and not have to be wrong every single time. Let him have far more good points often.
>Allow them some kind of power when Captain Planet is out, maybe their rings are weaker?
>Some kind of 6th Planeteer like Light or Darkness

Okay, but what are the homeless supposed to do when there's no place for them to safely sleep. It's not like, if you suddenly lose your car or something and you're forced onto the street in the middle of LA with no money that you would be able to get out. And all of the city's shelters fill up very quickly, and a lot of them...people would rather sleep on the street. Like, I'm not so concerned about the city's aesthetics or the experiences of the comfortable, just so long as everyone's able to find safety and shelter in some way. I remember driving through Long Beach last year, early in the morning, and just seeing cop car after cop car trashing tents, throwing away tents, detaining homeless people...It's like everyone just wants to push the problem off for someone else to deal with, rather than recognize that these are all people, and they deserve dignity.

I dunno. The world breaks my heart.

I mean, if you read the news, you see plenty of examples of business people, lobbyists and politicians all allowing pollution, rather than accept responsibility for their business.

Take Koch Industries, for example. These guys would intentionally defy regulations, and spend hundreds of millions, if not billions over the existence of the business, on lobbying efforts, even though doing all of that would cost them, again, hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars. Koch Industries and the Koch Bros. could easily be Captain Planet villains. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's what they'll do when they eventually make a Captain Planet movie, because fucking everything is being mined for their low-cost IPs nowadays.

Have Duke Nukem find religion and change his name. He's still an evil radioactive fuck head, but he thinks he's changed his ways and is trying to live more humbly as Citizen Nukem.

The solution would be to build more shelters, actual purpose-built shelters capable of safely housing people. If the homeless don't want to sleep in the shelters then it is on them.

I mean there's Ixis Naugus, but

>if you can comfortably live on welfare, most people would do it
Funny how bootlickers like to just push this assumption like they can prove it, and when you question it they try and pass their opinions about normative economics off as facts about positive economics.

It's cheaper to give them housing, as has been seen in Salt Lake City.
Right? I dated a woman that got her knee busted in a work related accident, and you would not believe the hoops she had to jump through to collect disability. It's a full time job to do even THAT, to say nothing of how much bureaucracy, and pure bullshit you would have to get through. It would be equivalent to around a sixty to eighty hour work week in terms of how much you would have to do on a daily basis to live completely off of the social safety net in America.

You want Garfield assassinated? I knew you Felix the Cat people wanted him out of your way so you could be the king cat of tv, but this is extreme even for you

Fucking laughing oh sweet jesus!!!!!