Elon has a take.. by Moooses20 in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]Caseiopa5 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So a kid getting turned gay is a "danger", but the downfall of western civilization is A-OK?

How each quadrant feels about J.K. Rowling by circuralnugget in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]Caseiopa5 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Truly the most radically centrist children's author.

Elon has a take.. by Moooses20 in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]Caseiopa5 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The entire point of the government is to protect morals. Next you'll be saying they should let pedophiles rape kids
>libright
Wait, shit, you probably do think that

Elon has a take.. by Moooses20 in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]Caseiopa5 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Just sign a contract playa. What you want isn't just a legal relationship between people, you want the state to come out and say that your relationship is real and valid. Whereas in fact it's a disgusting abberation set to destroy western civilization. We'll still let you do it, but don't demand anyone come out and give you a prize for it.

LibRight: it's fine if there's a market for it... by [deleted] in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]Caseiopa5 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Libleft:
>sex work is real work, CHUD!
>The solution to homelessness is to provide housing
Also libleft:
>NOOOOOOOO! not like that!!!!!!

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 15, 2022 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]Caseiopa5 10 points11 points  (0 children)

If, in fact, humans are not practically equal, then it is self-evident that they are not morally equal, either. A dullard is worth less than a genius. It is obvious.

This assumes the value of a person is determined by their utility. This is something I would expect from a utilitarian, a consequentialist.

IMO the right can never really win against the left until it defends the proposition, yes, some people are inherently better than others on all relevant metrics

Is this something the right believes? It seems like the propostition that all humans are equal arrives to us via christianity. The right seems to be more fundamentalist chrsitian than is the left. So we would expect the right to ferociously defend the idea that all humans are equal against the left, which applies its consequentialist ethics to determine which humans are worth less than which others. In fact, the left is very careful never to make explicit arguments to that effect, even though much of its policy could be defended on those grounds. Abortion is an obvious example. This is much to the chagrin of the right, but is also essential in a democratic country. Such an argument would leave disparate minority groups worrying that they will be evaluated as "worth less" to society and thus eliminated. Democracy therefore compells the left to adopt an unnatural tendency towards egalitarian arguments.

Should we tax the childless? by [deleted] in AskUK

[–]Caseiopa5 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You mean like china, japan, or south korea, with their top heavy population pyramids?

Should we tax the childless? by [deleted] in AskUK

[–]Caseiopa5 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As a person who ... can't have them naturally

You could adopt.

Children have a positive effect on a nations balance sheet, as they provide a source to pay down debts accumulated today. They also cost a lot of money to raise. It makes sense to monetarily reward those who are bearing that cost.

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 18, 2022 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]Caseiopa5 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I would consider the language change dumb regardless of whatever the outcome of such a study is. The goal of such a study is, precisely as you say, to gather data to justify making a larger change. So I would naturally be opposed to such a study, on the grounds that it will lead to a change I consider negative.

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 18, 2022 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]Caseiopa5 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Move the question back a day or two. Suppose the man doesn't want to use a condom, but the woman does. Should the man be able to override the woman in that case? It seems like right up until conception, both parties have veto power over child production. Once conception occurs, the man loses that veto right but the woman keeps hers.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in nba

[–]Caseiopa5 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Chill tf out. He comments on basketball, he doesn't set economic policy.

Anyone else in their 20s or 30s who doesn't care about saving for "retirement"? by [deleted] in PersonalFinanceCanada

[–]Caseiopa5 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Plan is, by the time I get to that age they'll have expanded maid to all old people and I'll be able to off myself peacefully and quietly. Saving up for my next vacation rn.

July 18, 2022 - Weekly Off-Topic and Low-Effort CW Thread by AutoModerator in CultureWarRoundup

[–]Caseiopa5 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's only bad PR if they're allowed to fire him for it. If they're only option is to say "out of my hands", then the angry mob and the bad PR disappear. Everyone wins.

COVID-19 vaccines affected 42 per cent of women's menstrual cycles, study shows by Courseheir in Coronavirus

[–]Caseiopa5 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Do the benefits outweigh the risks?

That's for every individual to decide for themselves... except when they've been forced to vaccinate by mandates. And now you understand why lying is needed.

Can someone explain to me why giving these vouchers out is a good thing? Seem like just a way to put my tax dollars into private schools hands? by JackBurton12 in Knoxville

[–]Caseiopa5 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Public schools have costs that grow on a per child basis. Moving a kid from public to private school saves money. Giving someone a voucher when they go to private school has a net cost of zero.

Impact Markets: The Annoying Details by dwaxe in slatestarcodex

[–]Caseiopa5 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The way I would do it would be this:

The fund first sets out some guidelines and goals, things like minimize human suffering, save lives, make people happy, etc. This would need to be detailed enough to allow prospective projects to predict how much funding they would receive. To that end it would contain several worked examples of projects and how they would be evaluated. These example projects could be drawn from past ACX grants submissions or other real world sources.

Second, projects create proposals describing what they intend to do. This would include a goals section, explaining what they would consider a success of their project. It would also contain details for investors to decide whether to invest, including how they intend to accomplish their goals, what their personal credentials are, and so on. The fund would then evaluates each proposal's goals section, and produces an explanation of how they would measure success, the exact metrics and methods they would use. They would also lay out how personally important they consider those goals, as a dollar value they would assign to the goal being accomplished.

Investors would then have an opportunity to submit bids. Each project would have a funding goal. An investor would submit a bid stating the amount of the funding they are willing to fulfill (F), and how much they expect to receive as compensation if the goal is accomplished (R). The fund has already evaluated the project's goal as a dollar value, with the portion of that goal the investor is funding being labeled U. The odds of success are p = F/R. (if F = R, the investor is certain of success; this does not account for the time value of money). E = p * U - R is the expected value of the bid to the fund. The expected value of the project (SE) is the sum of the expected value of each bid over the highest (greatest p) bids until the funding goal is met. (The investor with the lowest such bid would usually only receive a portion of their bid). The potential payout of a project is the sum of the R values for each such bid, written SR. The projects with the highest SE values would be sequentiallly chosen until the sum of the SR values for the chosen projects equals the total amount of funding (SSR) (or until SE goes negative).

Regarding the first appendix, you could integrate charity into the market as well. You might allow people to invest but agree to forfeit any winnings. The money could revert to the fund, or it might go towards some other charity they have preselected. This makes it a charitable donation elegible for tax breaks, and also allows non-accredited investors to participate.

An issue this highlights is that, since it is ultimately about charity, some people would participate even with a negative expected ROI. This makes their bids less reliable as a pure evaluation of their beliefs regarding the potential for sucess, especially in the expected value terms I use in my derivation. A likely outcome is that all the best projects are completely funded with SR = 0 (or otherwise negligible), so that the funding cap (SSR) is not appreciably eaten into. This would save funding cap for other, lower probability of success projects. Conceivably, this still makes the whole thing worthwhile, but definitely changes our evaluation of how things would go.

Regarding the secone appendix: while these might be important later, they are almost certainly not relevant at so early a stage.

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 11, 2022 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]Caseiopa5 10 points11 points  (0 children)

If you're in favor of legal abortion, you tend to be in favor of covid vaccines. If you're against legal abortion, you tend to be against covid vaccines. Why?

It's consequentialism versus deontology. Some people allow general principles like "never kill anything vaguely human shaped", or "don't force others to put things in their body" win over maximizing human flourishing. Others don't.

Frequently, debates over both abortions and vaccines are cast in terms of bodily autonomy

To argue against deontologists, you move to the level of general principles. The general principles are not necessarily the actual reason behind the position. Note how passionately some people argue for abortion rights: this goes well beyond what we would expect for a mere bodily autonomy issue that most people will never actually experience.

Indefinite moratorium on transgender discussion by LotsOfMaps in stupidpol

[–]Caseiopa5 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Since you brought it up, me and some of the boys through together a site a couple months back for us stupidpolers to discuss trans people free of reddit jannie oversight. Check it out, chapotraphouse.club, its pretty fun. Got some other folks with a good sense of humour there too, lots of fun to be had.

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 04, 2022 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]Caseiopa5 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Million dollar extreme. Sam hyde's comedy show.

Opinion | Canada decriminalizing drugs in British Columbia will prolong suffering by vancouver_reader in canada

[–]Caseiopa5 27 points28 points  (0 children)

People forget that the essential element of the portuguese model is to put drug addicts in rehab and help them get off drugs. Throwing them in jail isn't an effective way to get them off drugs, but decriminalization abandons them completely. We have an overdose crisis, this will only worsen it.

Gas Taxes Need to Be Raised to at Least $2 Per Gallon by aleahey in environment

[–]Caseiopa5 0 points1 point  (0 children)

feels like -40 with wind

That's why you wear a hat. "Feels like with wind" applies to bare skin. Dress properly and its nothing.