« Capitalism and Society -- new electronic journal | Main | What is new and essential in economics? »
The macroeconomics of Superman
Did you know about the new summer Superman film?
Let's say we had an altruistic and incorruptible Superman, how should he allocate his efforts to improve the macroeconomy? He is really strong, he can fly very fast, leap tall buildings at a single bound, has incredible vision, and somehow he is immune from Einstein's theory of relativity and time dilation at near-light speeds (his most impressive achievement, if you ask me).
Yes he should save the world from evil madmen, but fighting ordinary crime hardly appears worth his trouble. Criminals seek pure transfers, and Superman's policing doesn't lower our (inefficient) investments in locks enough to make a difference in the growth rate. It's about as silly as having Superman sub in for FedEx when the skies get crowded over Memphis.
And should his alter ego, Clark Kent, really be a photographer for a daily newspaper? At least that guy is contributing to a reproducible output; he must have read Sherwin Rosen's paper.
Darfur and the like aside, I have a few nominations for what Superman should do:
1. Become a research scientist.
2. Collect data for the Fed.
3. Fly around and tell people -- politely but very pointedly -- when they should accept lower nominal wages.
4. Perform amazing stunts on TV, become a big celebrity, and then preach the virtues of economic literacy; this is Dan Klein's suggestion.
Your thoughts? Your answer suggests much about where you see leveraged returns in today's world. By the way, here is the first edition of the Superman comicbook.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on June 7, 2006 at 05:35 AM in Film | Permalink
Comments
He should spend his non-work hours impregnating women, thereby enhancing earth's human capital stock. Hybrid vigor, itz.
Posted by: Tournament of Champions at Jun 7, 2006 6:58:30 AM
"really be a photographer for a daily newspaper?"
Clark Kent is a reporter. Jimmy Olsen and Peter Parker are photographers. ;-)
Posted by: Nathan T. Freeman at Jun 7, 2006 7:07:20 AM
Something for everyone. Fly to Iraq and defeat the "insurgents" - he'll need his X-ray vision
then build a wall at the Texas-Mexico border for the Texas Republican Party, then use his
vacuum breath to suck most {not all} of the greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, then as he
has done many times in past adventures, fly around the Earth at superspeed reversing time to
2000, go to Florida and there "lean" on Katherine Harris and/or Anthony Scalia to do the
right thing and send George W back to baseball.
Posted by: Drew at Jun 7, 2006 7:12:15 AM
Tyler,
You are basically reproducing the question answered in "The Watchmen". Doc Manhattan is an analog for Superman.
Ideally, we could strap some magnet onto Superman's body, throw him inside a gigantic coil of copper wire and have him produce free electricity for a large portion of the world. At the same time, he could even use his heat vision to heat a large container of water, turn it to steam and produce even more electricity.
Posted by: Xmas at Jun 7, 2006 8:09:50 AM
"He should spend his non-work hours impregnating women, thereby enhancing earth's human capital stock."
There are some difficulties with this. Read "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex":
http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html
Posted by: Jacqueline at Jun 7, 2006 8:21:52 AM
He should bring asteroids to earth for resources, then serve as a low cost launch vehicle to get massive solar power stations into orbit which can beam energy to earth or wire the energy down along one of several space elevators (that he would also help construct). He could also move massive terraforming facilities to Venus and Mars to prepare them for eventual colonization.
Posted by: Mark at Jun 7, 2006 8:32:27 AM
Enforce property rights and the rule of law. If we're ruling out "ordinary crime," this means fighting "evil madmen" like Mugabe, Putin, Kim, Castro, and company.
Posted by: Eli at Jun 7, 2006 8:34:47 AM
It's interesting...Superman landed on Earth in America, and so our reference, and even above in the comments, is what can Superman do for us?
What if Superman had landed in Iraq and been raised by a muslim farmer and his wife? Would we still praise him, or would we fear him and be addressing the Superman problem? Would we even be concerned with what he could do for Economics?
That said, for all of Superman's great knowledge that was imparted to him either on his journey to Earth, or his Archtypical 'hero-developing' phase at the fortress of solitude between his teen years and adulthood, over the years, he has never really done ANYTHING for mankind except fight evil. His father was a judge, and all Superman does is put bad guys behind bars, in a sense carrying on the family profession here on Earth. Maybe we are giving that family a little too much credit. Honestly, isn't Superman just a self-contained justice system? Economics may be beyond his abilities (which makes sense because Superman and his family basically exhibit a guild-system approach to life).
So, appoint him to the Supreme Court or the World Court and have him do what he does best. Of course, he may have fled Earth if he was on the Supreme Court having to hear the Anna Nicole Smith case...and who could blame him?!?
Now, if you'll excuse me...up in the sky, it's a bird, it's a plane, it's....an ice cold martini!
Andy Martini
Flame Proof and Limousine Ready
Posted by: Andy Martini at Jun 7, 2006 8:46:27 AM
He should play for the Dallas Mavericks in the NBA Finals.
Posted by: Matt at Jun 7, 2006 9:19:12 AM
I always thought Superman should open a construction company. He should be building tunnels, damns, bridges and the like. Just have enough people supplying the inputs and Superman can have the projects done in days.
It is very important that Superman understand economics, private property rights, very important that he is rewarded for his efforts. If he ever got upset, or disenchanted with doing good and started using force to get what he wanted, everyone would be in big trouble. He could enslave mankind and confiscate ordestroy all wealth. We'd all be looking to Lex Luthor for help then.
Posted by: scott clark at Jun 7, 2006 9:28:35 AM
He already does #3.
http://www.superdickery.com/dick/11.html
Posted by: k at Jun 7, 2006 9:38:37 AM
It says something about either me or the socio-technological underpinnings of our times, but I can't help but thinking that either Lex Luthor or Brainiac would have a greater impact that Superman, if they could be safely harnessed to the macro-economy.
The space-based uses of Superman are probably the best. There are a lot of good ideas out there blocked on low-cost launch technology. Carbon sequestration might also useful as an stopgap: grab up a few hundred thousand tons of surplus rainforest, fly it to a very cold, very deep chunk of ocean (ideally a subduction zone) , dump it, wash, rinse, repeat a few hundred thousand times. On the energy generation side, having him build core taps for generally-available geothermal energy is probably more efficient than either the solar satellite or "strap a big magnet to him" solutions.
Posted by: Dave at Jun 7, 2006 9:43:27 AM
He could stop the ocean levels from rising and help out droughts in other areas at the same time. The levees in New Orleans would have never broken either.
His comparative advantage is to prevent wealth destruction. To be most effective he needs a super villain who is mostly harmless but still scary enough to curb moral hazard.
Posted by: Macneil at Jun 7, 2006 10:17:06 AM
Clearly he should offer his services to the highest bidder. He could then not only exploit his comparative advantage (and using the efficiency of the price mechanism in his favour allows him not to have to figure this out; impresive computational skills not being one of his super powers as far as I know).
His earnings form the auctioning of his services he could then donate to some charity (through to ensure efficient alocation the charitiy should not be anounced beforehand).
Posted by: econgeek at Jun 7, 2006 10:20:22 AM
He might be able to enforce genuinely federal enclaves in which people could sort themselves by economic social preference (a la Nozick). A libertarian/no regs state one place; a crunchy, soft socialist in another; a voluntaristic uber Victorian moralistic state over there, etc. and guarantee that no outside government could interfere by threatening military action. How much the states screw themselves up would be left to the participants subject to the no torture/no genocide constraint.
Need I add that he could build appropriately high walls/barriers for states that want to limit all immigration? But he could also ensure that anyone who wanted to leave (no North Koreas) was free to do so.
Posted by: jn at Jun 7, 2006 10:49:16 AM
Strictly in economic terms (i.e. setting aside the non-economic moral issues) wouldn't he be doing pretty well to simply guarantee geopolitical stability?
Superman seems like he could, alone, be the deciding factor in any military conflict. So what if he said he would intervene in any military conflict against the attacker? It would be a strong enough deterrent that he would dramatically reduce the incidence of inter-state conflict, and so essentially remove all the conflict-based discounts applied in the global capital markets.
Posted by: Andrew Edwards at Jun 7, 2006 11:11:22 AM
I'm surprised no one has figured out the correct answer.
He should work with teams of scientists analyzing his own biology. The aim would be to develop super biotechnology so we can all be immune to injury and disease and fly to work every morning.
Posted by: Jason at Jun 7, 2006 11:25:47 AM
I think that the focus is being put on the wrong area. Superman could probably do the most good in terms of improving the overall macro economy not by the use of his powers but by gradually releasing some of his advanced Kryptonian technology. A few years ago (before Lex Luthor became president), Brainiac (or some version of it) was retconned as being Kryptonian rather than Coluulian and it struck a deal with Luthor to revitalize Metropolis by sharing his advanced technology. Think of the economic benefits of even faster computers, abundant sources of clean and practical energy, advanced medicine that not only cures maladies but improves the quality of life, etc.
Posted by: Thorley Winston at Jun 7, 2006 11:34:32 AM
Obey the law and offer his services on the open market.
Posted by: Michael Couvillion at Jun 7, 2006 11:50:35 AM
Strictly in economic terms (i.e. setting aside the non-economic moral issues) wouldn't he be doing pretty well to simply guarantee geopolitical stability?
"Superman of Westphalia". This ignores the costs of having rogue despotisms that don't have to fear external invasion. Under this scenario those costs are all contained to the populations of those despotic lands, but they don't disappear. Of course, preventing outward invasion may increase the risk to despots of internal resistance, so it might be a wash.
Posted by: Dave at Jun 7, 2006 12:06:06 PM
I've always loved Niven's "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" article.
Posted by: Brian Moore at Jun 7, 2006 12:47:00 PM
I also thought of Dr Manhattan in the Watchmen comics. There's no reason to think Superman is especially intelligent (as opposed to Dr Manhattan), so becoming a research scientist may not be all that useful an option. Perhaps he could become a very expensive and powerful bit of occasionally-available lab equipment? (This is similar to the proposals to have him become a bit of occasionally-available construction or space launch equipment.)
But we should also factor in what Superman enjoys doing. He's a reporter for the Daily Planet so he can hang out with the woman he loves, at least as much as for any other reason. He fights crime around where he lives because that's where he really wants to fight crime, right?
One interesting question is how, if you're so powerful nobody can check you, you decide what the right thing to do is. If you're human, you've got to realize that plenty of powerful people have done horrifying things in the name of some good principle or idea, and never realized that they were doing evil. How do you avoid that? It's not enough to just follow the rules of your tribe, right? Sometimes you end up doing ethnic cleansing, recapturing escaped slaves, or destroying whole cities controlled by rival tribes following that path.
Posted by: albatross at Jun 7, 2006 1:43:18 PM
Superman's very presence prevents nuclear missles from hitting anything that superman doesn't want them to hit. Simultaneously superman can do more damage than a nuclear weapon. Thus superman can prevent the danger of large scale nuclear war just by being around. Superman can take down any conventional army by himself.
Superman thus institutes a monoploy on military level initiation of force. This would allow every country to stop all military spending. It still makes sense to have a police force, and counter terrorism forces but a large military is useless.
Beyond that space exploration, and energy creation seem the biggest deals.
Posted by: Michal F at Jun 7, 2006 2:18:32 PM
A cycical view of Superman is in Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns in which Ronald Reagan gets him to blow up communist planes and get rid of Superman's buddy, Batman, who is causing a bunch of problems in Gotham. One of the more enduring storylines over the last thirty years has had to do with Superman's godlike powers and how easily manipulated he is because of his altruism. Batman derides him by calling him the boyscout, as he thinks Superman is naive and dangerous for trusting mankind so much that he can be manipulated by dictators (like Miller's caricatured Reagan character). Even when he's told as retreating from government, like he does in the Justice League Unlimited series, he still can't win, because then the US government perceives him and his team as a threat, which leads to several skirmishes. So, it depends on his loyalties. If his loyalties are to America, then you get Miller's vision of him, which is probably not as bad as Miller makes it out to be - basically he becomes national security, like Captain America and his team in the current Ultimates series. Or, if his loyalties are to mankind in general, then you get the Justice League Unlimited view, which creates problems with the US.
Posted by: Jason Voorhees at Jun 7, 2006 2:29:07 PM
I suppose you could have him go back in time to the creation of the stock market. Invest a dollar. Come back and use the proceeds to pay off the national debt.
Taking the question seriously, it all depends on where the bottleneck occurs in our economy. It's certainly not cheap labor. I really don't think it's innovation anymore. Judging from the amount of time that people are willing to wait in traffic jams, I'm guessing that it's either land or access to land.
If Superman could increase the amount of quality land, that would be nice, but I'm not sure how to go about it. Improving access would be the next best bet. Looking at Phoenix and Las Vegas you have to believe that connectivity is the only thing that matters. He could build parabolic tunnels for capsule-trains connecting the major cities and from the exurbs to center city.
Posted by: jj mollo at Jun 7, 2006 3:04:28 PM
If we're assuming the existence of a superhero, I think we ought to assume the existence of supervillains as well. And in that case, fighting crime might really be the best use of Superman's talents, because supervillains don't seek just transfers -- they seek mass destruction, world domination, etc.
Posted by: Glen at Jun 7, 2006 3:32:06 PM
"Fly around and tell people -- politely but very pointedly -- when they should accept lower nominal wages."
Hopefully he will start with CEOs and baseball players.
Posted by: Half Sigma at Jun 7, 2006 3:52:09 PM
I don't think fedex needs any help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRcDvJE5HZ8&search=memphis%20fedex%20thunderstorm%20radar
Posted by: KevinM at Jun 7, 2006 4:55:42 PM
Did everyone forget to read Adam Smith?
[E]very individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.
Superman's greatest contribution to society is whatever he wants to do.
- Josh
Posted by: Wild Pegasus at Jun 7, 2006 4:57:58 PM
What if Superman had landed in Iraq and been raised by a muslim farmer and his wife? Would we still praise him, or would we fear him and be addressing the Superman problem? Would we even be concerned with what he could do for Economics?
Kim Newman (I think is the author's name, I'm a bit fuzzy) wrote a short story called Ubermensch! a while back which basically runs with that theme: Superman was originally conceived as having been raised in 1930's Kansas, and was instilled with good ole American values because of it. But what if the Earth had done an extra half turn and he was raised in Germany in the 1930's?
I'm not sure where you can find it but it's worth looking up if you're curious.
Posted by: Eric at Jun 7, 2006 5:16:49 PM
What if Superman made a one-time only, completely unexpected wealth redistribution that left everyone with exactly the same amount of wealth? In theory, incentives to work and produce shouldn't change going forward, but the need for government programs drops drastically and we can finally become a true meritocracy.
Posted by: robby at Jun 7, 2006 5:37:37 PM
"but the need for government programs drops drastically"
Shortly the economic distribution would return to something similar to what it is presently, save only that we'd all be worse off on average, because the productive people who'd been robbed would be demotivated by the fear of being robbed again, and the unproductive people who'd gotten the windfall would be demotivated by the expectation that they'd get ANOTHER windfall.
Jason's got it: Superman voluteers his time as a subject of research, so that we can all become superhuman. Solving his little "kleenex" problem as a bonus...
Posted by: Brett Bellmore at Jun 7, 2006 5:58:45 PM
1) Use his super vision to find UBL, or Hoffa's Body
2) Support macro-engineering projects (aka lower their costs) like Underground Nuclear Power Network, Bearing Sea Bridge, America Africa Tunnel, etc.
Posted by: purpleslog at Jun 7, 2006 11:34:05 PM
Superman is an aberration.
He should die, and thus restore equilibrium to the universe (and price distortions that result from his actions).
Posted by: James Na at Jun 8, 2006 12:47:23 AM
Brett,
That's why I said that it was a one-time only redistribution. If it only happens once, and cannot be predicted in advance, there should be no change in incentives. And since he is Superman, he shouldn't have any problem convincing everyone that he won't be doing it again.
Posted by: robby at Jun 8, 2006 1:31:34 AM
I suppose that if one were a fundamentalist capitalist one would have to answer that Superman can best help the macro-economy by earning (honestly) as much as he can.
Given that space launch costs are something like $10,000 a pound that would be a good place to start, along with select celebrity endorsements.
Posted by: David Young at Jun 8, 2006 1:43:19 AM
he shouldn't have any problem convincing everyone that he won't be doing it again
Magically changing everyone's mind is not one of Superman's powers...
Posted by: bbartlog at Jun 8, 2006 9:14:24 AM
Have you not also read Leviathan? If Superman were to go around preventing war and crime, he must either receive instruction from some agency to whom he proffers loyalty, or he must be independent and make his own decisions about which values to enforce (will he turn marijuana users over to the authorities? stop bigamists in their tracks? prohibit meat-eaters?). If he operates under his own values, then he IS the all-powerful king of whom Hobbes spoke, and we should bow before him.
//// Pacific PanDeist
Posted by: Pacific PanDeist at Jun 8, 2006 9:36:29 AM
If Superman gets involve in geo-politics, he will create incentives for governments and other entities he opposes, or who fear he might oppose him in the future, to research kryptonite-based weaponry. This may be the reason he has prudently avoiding taking on the most resourceful evil-doers.
Posted by: David Tomlin at Jun 8, 2006 11:33:59 AM
Many of these comments assume, or else fail to address, what happens in the event that Superman is not at least functionally immortal. For example, the comment that the very existence of Superman would create a monopoly of military force on his part. (Aside: how rigorously are we defining his powers? Many of the comments seem to assume powers far greater either in nature or scope than Superman appears to possess. Frankly, as his powers change or alter in the various iterations of Superman over the years, there probably isn't an answer to the question. Thus, we are all assuming that Supes is virtually omnipotent.)
Here's the problem. Let's use the example of military monopoly in the hands of Superman. Let us further assume that everyone indeed stops all investment in conventional and nuclear weapons development and spending because Superman just as quickly destroys any such stockpiles. What happens if it should turn out Superman lives a normal lifespan or else any span shorter than a few hundred years?
The answer is chaos on a grand scale once Superman is occupying the eternal fortress of solitude. Everyone rushes madly to bring weapons production back online, and there is the real potential that anyone who could do it the fastest in significant amounts ends by ruling the world. While not all of the comments would have such consequences, it seems clear that the advantages we could derive from Superman's abilities are in large part mostly temporary in nature, or else would amount to fundamental destabilizations of the large scale political system or economy with potentially disastrous consequences if Superman were to even temporarily become unavailable. Maybe it is truly best if Supes just fights Lex Luthor, foils the occasional bank robbery, saves a few kittens, and waltzes in midair with Lois.
Posted by: Michael Linder at Jun 8, 2006 11:48:46 AM
Maximize his income by holding the population hostage to a genocide. This or that nominal wages stuff.
Posted by: Oskar Shapley at Jun 8, 2006 1:37:03 PM
Michael:
What if Superman passed on his monopoly of military force to a very carefully constructed world government before he died? Perhaps he would establish something like the EU constitution on a global scale, or some of the more plausible utopian ideas that lack only the ability to avoid the incentives of the armed to reach fruition. Global constitutional democracy.
Posted by: Paul Gowder at Jun 8, 2006 4:42:32 PM
Having Superman procreate and start a race of hybrid Superhumans would probably be catastrophic to the human race. Remember, absolute power corrupts absolutly, so a race of superhumans would undoubtedly subjugate regular humans to their rule. And why shouldn't they? We would be no more useful than slave workers, since they can't get sick (no doctors, researchers, pharmacists), they can't be intimidated by our armies, they need no money for food and shelter (I'm sure they enjoy it but Superman gets his power from the Sun. So basically we got nothing on them.
But as to the question of how Superman could best improve the macroeconomy (globally anyways), my answer is he should reverse the spin of the Earth, making time go back (like in the movie), and prevent the Agricultural Revolution (circa 10,000 bc) from ocurring. That way there would be no permanent human settlements, no class based civilizations, the Industrial Revolution does not occur, World Wars I & II do not happen, global oil supply does not disappear in 2100 (estimate), and humans, as a species live blissful lives, ignorant of their own tendecy to self-destruct. The best thing for the macroeconomy is to not have one.
Posted by: Miguel at Jun 8, 2006 5:21:13 PM
He could stop the Yankees from winning the ALCS.
Which has nothing to do with economics or the construction of a utopian society, but I'd appreciate it.
Posted by: racerx at Jun 8, 2006 5:36:46 PM
Paul:
Theoretically, that could work. However, I think only if in addition to the creation and constitution of the world government (we'll assume that said government operates in a basically fair, lawful, and democratic manner), he also either provides it with or at least allows it to maintain a sort of 'reserve' monopoly of force. In other words, weapons stockpiles, a standing army, and the like are banned to everyone except the forces of the Super World Government. The SWG is then ready to step in in the event of Supes' incapacity or death.
One notable problem, however, would be the fact that you will be maintaining a purely redundant standing army that, by its nature, will have to be able and willing (in the absence of Superman) to control or pacify a significant portion of the globe. Beyond the expense inherent in doing that, I wonder if such a force would ever truly be 'effective' in the absence of any experience, since Supes would be doing all their work for them.
Of course, Superman could delegate some responsbility to the SWG military forces early on, on the theory that it will at least keep them in fighting trim and not sitting around doing nothing. What increasingly scares me about this line of discussion is that we are also essentially handing our entire existence, security, and way of life over to one being...and an illegal alien at that! Sounds much more on the lines of something General Zod would do...;-)
Posted by: Michael Linder at Jun 8, 2006 6:05:08 PM
Jason, It's been a while, but as I recall, in The Dark Knight Returns the back story was that the government, responding to "the endless envy of those less blessed" had been cracking down on the lesser superheros. Omnipresence is not one of Superman's powers, so he couldn't intervene directly in a nation-wide crackdown, so he made a deal: His loyalty in exchange for the government leaving the rest of the superheros alone.
That also explains why Superman can't use his powers to stop all wars: He can't be everywhere to intervene directly, and he can't set up a credible deterrent by threatening to kill aggressors after the fact.
As for Superman's day job, I think his best hourly rate will come from providing spacelift capacity, especially large and fragile non-aerodynamic structures, which he can lift slowly in to space and gently insert into orbit.
Posted by: Windypundit at Jun 8, 2006 8:56:52 PM
Too much really depends on the powers that one is assigning to Superman. At his most extreme (but still without using alien technology) he can probably solve transportation problems by bringing massive quantities of metallic hydrogen to Earth from Jupiter's core and laying it down in a global network of subterranean escavated and elevated mag-lev train lines, which he can power in one of the ways listed above. Radically improved global transportation changes an awful lot.
If his strength is actually limitless he can use more of Jupiter to build a Dyson Sphere.
On the other hand, back in the 1940s Superman fought in
WWII, implying that he was far from capable of winning it single-handedly. For such a limited Superman, one "Faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locamotive, and able to leap over (not even fly over) tall buildings in a single bound", radically transforming the world is much more easily said than done. His comparitive advantage is still probably not in fighting crime, but it might be in such comic-book-ish staples as athletics, military special forces/anti-terror/SWAT, rescue work, or concievably even construction or demolition (especially rapid replacement of key infrastructure when it was damaged). Super speed might also be useful in surgery even without X-ray vision. (the high end Superman could probably treat blood clots with proper application of heat and x-ray vision). I wonder if it would be practical to mass-produce windmills in factories in China and have Superman transport them to places with stable fast wind, such as parts of Antarctica, then stick them into the ground and have him run wires to Australia for Aluminum smelting and other energy intensive activities. A nearly invulnerable but highly limited Superman could do good field science, exploring hostile climates such as subduction zones. Obviously, even a low power Superman would have tremendous value as a subject of research.
Ironically, other than his value as a test subject, such a minimal Superman's largest contribution might well be as a role-model, provided he promoted positive values. He would be certain of being the most famous person on the planet, and would have the option of being very influential. The other side of this is the risk that his very existance would afflict billions with destructive superstitions or the existential angst of recognizing their world as a comic book story.
Posted by: michael vassar at Jun 9, 2006 1:53:15 AM
Incidentally, the Superman-as-mortal hypothesis solves the problems previously identified with Robby's one-time-distribution idea. After all, there'd be no reason to think he'd do it again if he did it once right before he died.
Posted by: Paul Gowder at Jun 9, 2006 8:31:53 AM
Superman would go insane. Faced with the reality that he and he alone could actually solve all of mankind's problems, he would be faced with the impossible task of deciding which ill to end first. And, in the middle of fixing one ill, suddenly his hypersonic hearing detects a plane crashing in Idaho, a Ferry going down in India, a child dying of leukemia because he was busy curing AIDS, a drought in Zimbabwe brought on by the moisture he re-directed to Chinese rice paddies, and so on and so on. Ultimately, in order to preserve his sanity - he'd just leave.
Posted by: Gary-O at Jun 9, 2006 9:34:35 AM
harig gif ^^^ warmer jong ^^^ donne mature sex ^^^ ragazze inculate a letto ^^^ plus froid agreable vestale ^^^ sequence inter race ^^^ mari vingt cinq ^^^ fils britannique ^^^ mousey ragazze doppio penetrazione ^^^ assurdo infermiera figa fotti ^^^ konstig lesbisk suga av den ^^^ vaghalsig tonaring dubbel penetrering ^^^ nicer agente di polizia schizzate di figa ^^^ divertente bionde merda ^^^ cuissardes masturbating ^^^ amateure chattes brulantes ^^^ naida titbondage ematin ^^^ alusvaatteet huora siitin ^^^ hetere gal ^^^ kjolig uvanlig pornostjerne ^^^ intens gammel ^^^ pa rommet bimbo ^^^ to pio kafto nosokoma ^^^ koritsia kolos sto spiti ^^^ junior trente six ^^^ froid climat ^^^ tolmiros kologlipsimo ^^^ tolmiros piso kathisma ^^^
Posted by: levan at Sep 8, 2006 5:38:57 AM
Jupiter does not contain enough material to build a Dyson sphere.... the entire Solar System doesn't!
Posted by: Pacific PanDeist at May 5, 2007 8:09:28 PM
For those who wonder about Superman raised in a different country, there's always the comic book story Superman: Red Son, about what would happen if he were raised in Soviet Russia.
Posted by: such.ire at May 19, 2007 4:18:54 PM
Superman, eh?
I think he should work toward populating space, such that we can get water and materials from space and thrive without plundering Earth's resources. If he wants to find a way to really, honestly help humanity, getting us to thrive in space does a few things.
- Now we don't need to pollute the Earth (the "source" of life) to sustain the population. Environmental concerns are a thing of the past.
- No more population issues. We have the known universe to expand into, now.
- Access to unbounded space and resources means fewer wars, and likely less crime.
Posted by: malignor at May 22, 2007 4:04:24 PM
you all take far to narrow a view of the possibilities. "the best possible result for the group occurs when the individual does what is best for himself, AND THE GROUp." - first, have superman go back in time & prove whether or not Jesus Christ is a man, a myth, a mushroom, or our messiah. answer other age old religious questions regarding the meanings & nature of our existence. then go about spreading as much functionable leverageable truth as possible to the masses in part by crushing the media, which suppresses truth by imposing lies & propoganda - brainwashing & enslaving the masses & fomenting unbounded ignorance & apathy. etc. etc. etc.
Posted by: superpowersman at Jun 18, 2008 11:58:33 PM
