Daniel Marques

Biomedical Scientist
London Uk, United Kingdom

Someone is shy

Daniel hasn't completed a profile. Should we look for some other people?

Comments & conversations

122834
Daniel Marques
Posted about 3 years ago
Should/Could a maximum wage be introduced; A limit to how high the highest earners can make?
But that athlete is not jumping 500 feet higher. And that athletes jumping is not taking risks, for example, that will result in the government having to use tax money to bail them out of trouble. In any case the main argument i was trying to get across is that these extreme rates of pay are at such a high that no amount of work in a day, week, month etc merits the individual getting it. In certain circumstances, such as an innovator who has helped millions of people, I can understand them receiving millions. But so many are just coming out of education, joining a bank, and because they make a few lucky decisions, make the bank money and recieve extravagant bonuses or a very high rate of pay anyway. That extra money made for the bank could go to the state and help the people, fund research etc. Instead that money goes to the top bosses, who proceed to spend the millions on boats, houses and cars. Just doesn't seem right. Shouldn't a line be drawn somewhere?
122834
Daniel Marques
Posted about 3 years ago
Should/Could a maximum wage be introduced; A limit to how high the highest earners can make?
I am mainly referring to the conversation between those talking about CEO's 'earning' their pay. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates have been mentioned as fantastically skilled entrepreneurs who apparently did earn every penny. This is the crux of my argument. Doctors will save perhaps thousands of lives throughout their career. A soldier will put his/her life on the line for their country. A teacher may devote their entire life to educating generation after generation, some of whom will go on to achieve fantastic feats of achievement. Scientists and engineers will continue to push the boundaries of human capabilities mentally and physically. These are just some of the philanthropic activities that are truly deserving. And yet not one of these people will receive anything close to what gates or jobs have received through their ventures of selling products. These two in particular have changed tech in our time significantly for the better (in my opinion) yet i can't see how one individual has been seen to be deserving of so much! we only accept it because we have been born into this society. Jobs, Gates or anyone else could not have got to this point without the hundreds of supporting staff carrying out their dreams. My feelings are that even though it does happen, I think we should be seeing the value of an individuals work in the context of what they have physically done. Yes great ideas deserve incentive and encouragement, but the incentive has become so unregulated that the gap between lowest and highest incomes are through the roof...so to speak. Why do you think so much money is deserved?
122834
Daniel Marques
Posted about 3 years ago
What kind of future sate (after capitalism or next 200-500 years) would you like to see happen?
In addition to earlier, I also want to show that by a cleaner society, I was referring to our pollution of the planet such as that which is contributing to the global warming we are starting to see today. By focusing more of our international effort in cleaner sources of energy (e.g. more efficient solar power), the states of the future could focus on expanding our race beyond this planet rather than cleaning up our mess. I really would like to see more interest in our space programmes. With the innovations from space travel, life on Earth has and will continue to benefit from the improvements in cleaner technology. Not to mention the potential additional resources we could harvest from other planets, moons and our sun.
122834
Daniel Marques
Posted about 3 years ago
What kind of future sate (after capitalism or next 200-500 years) would you like to see happen?
Hehe, Easy there, I think you took what I said I bit far. I think this is just one of those things where other people will simply not be able to comprehend something like low poverty levels. Greed is a behaviour that is part of the human condition, yes. But It is not necessarily the one big barrier stopping us from helping others. And also the whole exterminating people to do away with problems? I think there are a few things we could do instead of turning into monsters. Disabilities, even those from birth, will one day be able to be treated before or after birth, be it surgery, genetic modification or prosthetics etc. I'm not sure what you were implying and it may just be the way that it reads, but homosexuality is not a disease or something to be treated. It is simply yet another way that our genetic make-up has produced diversity. Homophobia is backward and I would hope in a 'future society' will disappear along with racism + other prejudices. With the constant advances made in science, engineering and technology (faster now than ever in history), we should not be so pessimistic of the future by looking at how we struggle with concepts today. Looking at what the most prolific innovators and entrepreneurs (useful ones not the wasteful greedy types) are doing to change the world must give people some insight as to what human kind could accomplish one day. Humans in 500 years time will look back (as we do now) and be shocked at what our world was like. There is a large number of pessimistic, myopic people today. Instead of saying how impossible these great achievements are, we should be examining why they are such problems and thereby finding solutions using the technology that we may not have yet, but one day will. Epigenetic s is still quite a new field with intense research going into gene expression especially. No doubt with new revelations will come new ways of helping or treating the bodies where this process malfunctions.
122834
Daniel Marques
Posted about 3 years ago
Do we 'evolve' during our lifetime ? or do we only evolve as a species by passing on physiological 'lessons learnt' through reproduction ?
Hi Chris, I'll have a go; a) The safest age to have children is below the age of 35 give or take a few years. This is a loose reference range; as you know everyone is different biologically. The main reason is that genetic mutations accumulate throughout our life but accumulate faster in older age. This of course also depends on lifestyle choices that affect health. The females fertility will deteriorate faster because of the limited number of eggs produced (menopause can start from late forties). Males will produce sperm throughout their lives but the quality (motility, concentration and morphology) or the sperm cells will also deteriorate later in life, though at a slower rate. It will not be 'better evolved' later in life as it is far to small an amount of time (say one child at 25, another at 35) for any beneficial mutation to have an advantage over the previous child. b) Evolution (though recent research is giving new insights all the time) through natural selection uses the recombined genetic material of parents being passed on to create the child. The eggs/sperm (gametes) will not evolve in the ovaries/testes though when they combine to create the zygote (pre-embryo) they will create a different mix every time, which is why the resulting child cannot be predicted (at the moment any way, Sci-Fi films show an interesting future!). c) As far as I'm aware, men may be fertile all their lives. Sperm quality deteriorates as early as 30's. But as for a cut-off for safety sake, If a sperm cell is of low quality, say low motility or morphological abnormalities (bent tail, abnormal shaped head etc), then it simply won't be able to penetrate the egg. The spermatozoa needs to be a fast healthy cell in order to make the arduous journey through the female genital tract. So its not necessarily dangerous (though it may be for older females (child and mother)), just less likely, though it isn't recommended to leave it too long. ...i think
122834
Daniel Marques
Posted about 3 years ago
What kind of future sate (after capitalism or next 200-500 years) would you like to see happen?
Cool your an anarchist? So how would these hypothetical future 'states' or societies work without governing. Would they be small local communities co-operating perhaps. And could they really pool enough resources together to be able to progress enough technologically to say travel the solar system or explore beyond? Ventures such as the space elevator and off-world colonies would be difficult without international governments coming together. Wouldn't it be more difficult without a government to organise each nation?
122834
Daniel Marques
Posted about 3 years ago
What kind of future sate (after capitalism or next 200-500 years) would you like to see happen?
Those wind turbines would have to be solar wind turbines but no i agree that's probably not an option. But SBSP is. And we need as much support for it as possible as governments just aren't paying enough attention. Also, I'm not a blind idealist that honestly believes everyone will be looked after. But if we just give up on constantly trying to improve conditions and just accept that life is not fair, why try at all. Aim for the highest (ultimate) goal and, even if it is unachievable, we could reach a situation that is far better than the current one. What's wrong with a bit of enthusiasm for our future. Leaving healthcare to the people is one thing, but without help from a government, those born into poverty don't choose to be poor. It's bad luck. wouldn't it be a happier nation if you could be sure you new you'd be provided for in desperate times? So you believe our next future state should be libertarian? Is that one in which the market would be completely free or partly regulated, and if so, more or less regulated than today?
122834
Daniel Marques
Posted about 3 years ago
What kind of future sate (after capitalism or next 200-500 years) would you like to see happen?
I agree. It looks like some states are already going more towards that direction. What sort of ideas could work? How could corruption be tackled in other countries? If this future state was an improvement on today's, would it be able to be adopted in other countries? I hope that the worlds most leading countries today (US, china, UK etc.) could be brought together to help all others. The removal of developing countries debt could for instance help them concentrate on actually developing their country. Think of all the great potential minds that could, if properly nurtured, lead to great breakthroughs in technology and science. If a minimum decent standard of living through a more socialistic approach (bringing them out of poverty) could be achieved, they could then have a better chance to compete in the world to drive ahead to succeed in helping the human race advance even further or simply to enjoy life. Isn't happiness the thing all humans strive towards in life.
122834
Daniel Marques
Posted about 3 years ago
What kind of future sate (after capitalism or next 200-500 years) would you like to see happen?
OK, so what about the people. How would it be ensured that all citizens are looked after and kept healthy and kept from poverty? Other countries who are less well off, If they adopted a similar system, would perhaps not be looked after if the state didn't provide certain necessities. Not everyone can fend for themselves due to a myriad of reasons. What kind of power supply do you think we should be concentrating on developing?
122834
Daniel Marques
Posted about 3 years ago
What kind of future sate (after capitalism or next 200-500 years) would you like to see happen?
OK, Thanks again Krisztian. I was being loose in my terminology. Just trying to get across my point that i'm not starting another debate of what capitalism is or should be etc. But come on. You yourself have admitted that the world needs changing. Putting aside any limitations of how practical it would be if applied to today's societies, what would your image of a good society be in 200+ years time. What would you like to see happen? I'm just trying to get an accumulation of ideas that are most important to people. I know there is no such thing as an 'ideal' state, but could you describe what you would like to see in the future as an improvement? What do you think will/should come next?