Linking to a half-dozen separate arguments, and presenting no original conclusion or summarizing thought on what you took from those works isn't an argument. In fact it's very much not an argument - it's you presuming that I haven't read those, because otherwise how could I disagree?
My question was quite specific: what do you think we should do in the next 5 to 10 years? Apparently you've read widely on this topic! So widely that when asked this question, the only thing you did was throw book titles and author names around and talk about how great they are. Rather then anything about what they say.
I mean presumably all these distinguished luminaries drew some actionable conclusions right? Because you are calling for actionable things to happen - such as?
I gave multiple specific authors who have proposed plans. Yes, it's a number of titles; I assure you that's only the thinnest scraping of the broader literature. Or to put it plainly: there are many people who've had "answers they want to elaborate on" ... and you're now complaining that there are too many of them?
Tough to please.
I've asked you now three times who it is you're claiming has no answers.
I'm not exactly still waiting. But if you'd care to provide a response to that question I'd appreciate it.
I'm not asking for a thesis. Just a listing of who or what references you're pointing at.
Seems to be a considerable challenge for you to do so, just sayin'.
