Student Driver

@GhostofEk @Ludlowfnl I'm not missing the point at all. What I'm saying is that without these differences, the persuasive effect is hampered severely.

What’s your point? Do you know how to engage with the relevant parts of the hypothetical? You don’t know what the cause of death is in the other one either. Maybe it’s by tearing your limbs off. Are you trying to say what button you would press depends on HOW you would die? That’s an interesting take that literally no one is asking because it’s not important to the thought experiment. I said, pretend that rabies is as painful or not as whatever the other one is. You’re trying to be smart here but completely missing the point.

You are a bad person if you press red. There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. If you press red, you are condemning infants, toddlers, children/disabled people/ elderly people/etc. who didn’t read or comprehend it, to death. You think you’ve “aha’d” all the blue pressers, but ultimately you are selfish, just like your choice of the red button

@GhostofEk @Ludlowfnl It also doesn't account for the unpleasantness of having rabies symptoms in the interim.

You’re wondering about irrelevant details. Picture the same room as the buttons. One is “skip rabies” one is “get rabies”. Assume getting rabies is completely painless, it’s simultaneous, etc. make it as close or exact to the game as you’d like. None of that matters for the point of the experiment.

@Justin_L_Smith_ @bonchieredstate An exercise of tremendous bravery and courage does not make the opposite inaction an act of cowardice necessarily.

@bonchieredstate A Principal's job is to run a school & yet in the same month he tackled a gunman.

They’re unarmed TSA agents that were brought in to run the magnetometers.

@GhostofEk @Ludlowfnl In other words, all of this is very relevant to our inquiry as it pertains to the money-where-your-mouth-is provision towards the end. The persuasive effect of this argument crumbles when aligned with the red/blue button scenario.

@StudentDriver6 @Ludlowfnl What? Assume it’s the same as the blue button. You enter a private booth at the same time as everyone else, “injecting” is as painless as the button. Not really relevant anyways.

@GhostofEk @Ludlowfnl I will explain how it is structurally different: not everyone on earth is given a choice that they must select at the same/around the same time. This is to make no mention of the interference that pressing the "blue button" in this case would have in people's lives.

@Ludlowfnl Here is the same situation, but real life, and steelmanned for you (babies already included). Put your money where your mouth is. No yelling “that’s a different situation” without explaining how it’s structurally different…

@RightWingCope Medical malpractice cases do not contribute significantly to prices of insurance nor care. This is a myth.

The issue with many upper income people is that they feel entitled to everything but responsible for nothing. They bitch when things are expensive when the government doesn't pay for it, they bitch when their taxes are higher to pay for government services, they expect to be able to sue providers for relatively frivolous malpractice claims, but then get mad when the cost of care goes up due to the increased price of premiums which pay the settlements. sorry, medicine will always be kinda expensive if you're high income. you can argue that it could be cheaper if we offer free college for doctors, although if you're high income you're still going to be paying for their education via taxes. In many european countries things are easier because you just pay via higher taxes, and you sometimes can't sue your doctor for one bajillion dollars because your back hurts after a surgery that was risky.

Trump's healthcare plan is just two weeks away, don't stress yourself out Chaya!

@rd_whitley @StallionCornell You can convince a grand jury to indict basically anything. The standard is low and there's no opposing party to argue against what the prosecutor will present. Not sure too much about this case, but the fact that grand jury indicted doesn't mean much.

@StallionCornell Well, the Grand Jury must have some evidence and we are not privy to it

It is not illegal to want the President to die. It is not even illegal to publicly say you want the President to die. What is illegal is speaking in a way that credibly poses a threat to the President's safety. Posting 8647 is not that.

@TexanJacobite @elementgermani3 But then there is no performative altruism. If you know for near certainty that people will press the blue button, pressing blue is still legitimately altruistic because you are taking action to try to insulate those people. Without this premise, your argument fails.

@elementgermani3 Everyone should. If they don’t, it’s their own mistake. I cannot control the actions of others.

Performative altruism is a huge problem. The correct answer to this poll is red. If you answer red, you live. Everyone should thus answer red, and everyone lives. There is zero reason for a single person to press blue, if every person is saved by pressing red, and a blue vote is a toss up if you get killed or not. But people who want to feel morally superior about themselves are choosing the answer they see as altruistic, even though it is objectively incorrect and will get them and others killed. Translate this to the real world and things like criminal justice. Morons allow the axe murderer free, because they want to feel merciful. “Look at me, aren’t I just so magnanimous!”

@P425376249 @ChasenStratus @IterIntellectus But with knowledge that many people will not select red, red becomes wrong if your goal is the general well-being of people and society.

@ChasenStratus @IterIntellectus No. If eveybody presses red, then nobody dies. Red is the only correct answer

why would anyone even press blue?!?

@shawood1969 @shebringsjoy I suspect probably outweigh or close-to-outweigh any loss from the initial transaction. More time means more time to work or do other activities that one may sacrifice work for. Multiple meals means less purchases from people who may lack the skill to prep such otherwise.

@shawood1969 @shebringsjoy There are benefits more than just the single number here though. If it is more expensive (and it frequently is not), then it still frees up prep time to make the meal. It can also easily produce several days of meals. Time and multiple meals create efficiencies that 1/2

I’m not on SNAP, but I will tell you: This is an ignorant take. I don’t buy rotisserie chickens, but I do know they’re less expansive than a whole chicken. I also know that time is money, and most families on SNAP are probably working families. Cheap ready made food, that’s real food, gives poor parents time to help children with homework, or to play with them, or get caught up on housekeeping, etc. We have to find a balance between making people accountable and encouraging healthy relationships, and I think this area is one where we can definitely allow a little wiggle room.

@CoolyCooliCoole @shebringsjoy It also frees up important time for things like family which everyone, not just those of means, deserve to have.

@CoolyCooliCoole @shebringsjoy You can even use the bones to make stock. It can be stretched out across several meals making it a viable low-cost option that makes sense for people on SNAP. In addition to being ready to eat, a number of slow-cooked meals are easy with rot. chicken too. Frees up time 2 work.

@Happywife151 @IllegalBlood092 @pikarts03 @XanderhalTV Posting this abstract doesn't help you really. This is the minority position. What I have said is correct. Nearly every major institution studying this does not agree with this alternative framework.

@StudentDriver6 @IllegalBlood092 @pikarts03 @XanderhalTV pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC89… Incorrect

Brother, no there's not.

@Happywife151 @pikarts03 @XanderhalTV Sure, but the debate is currently slanted very heavily against the position you are taking. Treating your minority position as near certain while clipping the abstract of an article as the proof is the thing I am criticizing here.

@StudentDriver6 @pikarts03 @XanderhalTV There are debates on a lot of things, that doesn’t mean the premise isn’t correct

@Happywife151 @pikarts03 @XanderhalTV "Most certainly" is a bit strong as to the first trimester. There's debate on this subject. Most disagree with this position and instead believe that capacity for pain forms much later at something like 24ish weeks at the earliest.

@pikarts03 @XanderhalTV No, it was created by Bernard Nathanson, an abortion provider. Meanwhile, pain on the first trimester is most certainly felt during an abortion. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC89…

@IllegalBlood092 @pikarts03 @Happywife151 @XanderhalTV Does the baby seal have the necessary structures formed to feel pain? If so, I'm going to be skeptical. On the other hand, at 12 weeks, nearly all of the major institutions dedicated to this study are in agreement that the necessary systems don't form until at least 2x later.

@pikarts03 @Happywife151 @XanderhalTV If I produce a video of me clubbing a baby seal to death, would you believe me if I said the seal felt no pain? Im a doctor so I must be correct.

@TheStr1ker @NoFilterSkin Treating them like tiny humans means sometimes getting yelled at for dumb shit. Everyone needs to be yelled at for something once in a while.

@NoFilterSkin So dumb. Yelling does nothing. Talk to and treat them like the human beings they are. Yelling at anyone is unacceptable and they will remember it for life. So you make your bed be prepared to lay in it later in life

I stopped yelling at my kids for a week. ​Here’s what I noticed: ​we were late to school every single day ​they didn’t clean up a single thing ​they didn’t shower ​they didn’t do their homework ​they looked homeless ​ I tried gentle parenting. ​They responded like tiny union workers on strike. ​Turns out my “yelling” was really just the family notification system.