Let's ignore the DS angle for a bit, since I suspect many corporate boardrooms were opposed to Trump for more reasons than just being infiltrated (some may not be infiltrated by DS players at all). I want to bring this up because I feel that Trump and the Patriots exposed these people as well, and I'm probably only touching the tip of the iceberg.
Business Competition - Trump created an environment (by removing regulations) that allowed small / new businesses to grow and thrive without having to have the resources to deal with corrupt government agencies
Labor Market - job growth creates a tight labor market, which gives people options to move around and seek better jobs and opportunities for themselves
Labor Competition - requires companies to pay higher wages and/or better benefits
Control over employees - amazing how covid showed that many people can be productive working offsite, which made life easier for people who had to be onsite (parking, commuting, fuel costs, etc) - but now those same corporations feel their people must be onsite full time to get work done, when it clearly has nothing to do with getting work done.
Political Control - a few large corporations are easier to control from a political standpoint, than many smaller companies. The people running the large corporations benefit from having a symbiotic relationship with politicians, being better prepared (advance warning) for regulations and government manipulation of large markets. I suspect they feel they can strongly influence and exercise some control over the political side, and profit from it.
This is an interesting statement. I've often wondered where the line is that plants begin starving for CO2, but never guessed that 5 times the amount would have such a beneficial effect. I always figured plant growth was a natural feedback mechanism, so it stands to reason that the DS would want to destroy it, if they can.
The level that was decided was "preindustrial" and therefore "good" is 285 ppm.
Plants can't grow efficiently and need more nutrients and water at this level. That's why greenhouses pump co2 in - it drastically increases growth speed and reduces the cost of nutrients.
To starve a plant and kill it with no amount of alternative nutrient plans helping, you need less than about 180 ppm co2 (there is some wobble around this line based on specific plants and sunlight available and etc).
If we assume for a moment that the CO2 theory around global warming is correct, it means that the industrial revolution is the ONLY thing that kept the biosphere from irreversibly collapsing.
I had heard 180 ppm also. Plants use the same pores for breathing in CO2 and evaporating water. With more CO2, they use smaller pores, retain more water, thus need less of it.
Thanks anon! This is good info.