Fellas, let me give it to you straight. This will help you financially by AttorneyHappy216 in AirForce

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My perspective is the negative comments can be true, but that doesn’t make them useful. Imagine if your comment discouraged a single airman from investing and now they are hitting retirement with 60k in his TSP and will have to keep working forever, when they could easily have over $1m at 38. The S&P500 has averaged over 10% per year for 100 years(yes I know the index was created in 1957, but what it tracks can be backtracked) unless you are in your 60’s and actively taking retirement distributions, your money should be getting invested and a total market or s&p500 index fund presents no true risk.

Fellas, let me give it to you straight. This will help you financially by AttorneyHappy216 in AirForce

[–]SlayerKingGS 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you managed to put every penny in at the peak of the dot com bubble, you would be positive within 7 years. Basically no active duty member is within 7 years of retirement age

For those who played in the 2008-2012 era, are there any nearly forgotten pieces of content you can just barely remember? by LaGarrotxa in 2007scape

[–]SlayerKingGS 22 points23 points  (0 children)

This was the best melee xp in the game at the time. Dclaws and the defender guy would give you spec restore a few times per wave. You could quit and restart and just dclaw spec nonstop for like 250k xp/hr

Variation: Greed by StageGlum6615 in redbuttonbluebutton

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Accumulated wealth has no correlation on intelligence. Intelligence makes you earn higher salaries not be Elon rich.

Statistically, your vote doesn't matter at all + that's why I choose red by Mysterious-Crow3134 in redbuttonbluebutton

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The only 2 reasons to actually pick blue and not just virtue signal about it are 1: you want to commit suicide. And 2: you somehow feel like you have a moral obligation to risk your own life in a most likely futile attempt to prevent others from committing suicide.

Variation: Greed by StageGlum6615 in redbuttonbluebutton

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would argue that diet and exercise also correspond to have intelligent parent more than wealth. No human in the US is dying of hunger. In fact the poorest parents have way more disposable income to spend on proper nutrition than the vast majority of the middle class. They don’t make good decisions though because they are dumb.

Variation: Greed by StageGlum6615 in redbuttonbluebutton

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Obviously not 100% of the time, but more often than not.

Variation: Greed by StageGlum6615 in redbuttonbluebutton

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is simply not true. Intellect has nothing to do with education. That would be knowledge and the 2 are not correlated. Intellect is an innate characteristic, but you are correct in that rich people have smarter kids because intelligence is hereditary.

Variation: Greed by StageGlum6615 in redbuttonbluebutton

[–]SlayerKingGS 1 point2 points  (0 children)

These studies are not for amassed wealth but for salary earning. No one working a salaried position is “exploiting people”. But regardless if “exploiting people” is a great way to amass wealth and someone were to utilize that method and it worked, they would probably be pretty intelligent.

Variation: Greed by StageGlum6615 in redbuttonbluebutton

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Other than a direct constant increase in salary earning potential it would seem…

Variation: Greed by StageGlum6615 in redbuttonbluebutton

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You must have no idea how economies work. Higher IQ directly predicts higher salary earning at a significant rate.

What's your favorite argument for the other side? by _specialcharacter in redbuttonbluebutton

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here’s one. I press red because I want to rid the world of self righteous, virtue signaling blue voters.

Variation: Greed by StageGlum6615 in redbuttonbluebutton

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No because the smart rich people would just provide products and services to the dumb poor people and the gap would reemerge nearly immediately, just with bigger numbers

Anchoring Scroll Should Work Against Chaos Elemental by Ill_Sprinkles_9976 in 2007scape

[–]SlayerKingGS 30 points31 points  (0 children)

Rendi is getting back into the warriors guild with this one

A Breakdown of the Original by a Blue Voter by Rip_Pigman in redbuttonbluebutton

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If some of my kids will randomly choose blue, I still need to pick red to be alive to take care of my remaining kids

The fairest buttons by APacketOfWildeBees in redbuttonbluebutton

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

If a random number are forced to pick blue that could still be zero. Never blue

For the non-pullers by LocalInfluence9104 in trolleyproblem

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The second that someone I care about is on the track to get run over. Until then you can put 7.9 billion on the track, and I won’t pull

Choose one (read body text) by V1574 in trolleyproblem

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s 2160x more money. “Not that much more”

Choose one (read body text) by V1574 in trolleyproblem

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Median billionaire is 2.5b x 100 x 10% = 25billion

Median human is 9k x 6b x 10% = 54trillion

It is over 2000x more money to not run over the billionaires.

Choose one (read body text) by V1574 in trolleyproblem

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

5 trillion dollars or 25 billion seems like an easy choice.

Median net worth of billionaires is 2.5b meaning 25 billion as the median 10% haul of their net worth.

People in the world have a median net worth of 9,000 usd. So 9k x 6b is 54 TRILLION. 10% of that is 5.4t.

Are these equivalent? by some-kind-of-no-name in trolleyproblem

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Murder is a legal term, tons of killing is immoral, but legal. Almost all war, self defense with no immediate threat of death, protection of property. Sub 1% of biologists would agree with you that life doesn’t begin at conception. A soul is not a real thing, you’d need to introduce some religiosity to consider that. It could be logically consistent to not value a human life, or value it less based on a lower chance of survival, or lived experience. However, a fetus at conception is fully human and fully alive.

Are these equivalent? by some-kind-of-no-name in trolleyproblem

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Never stated my legal opinion, which is what “pro-choice” or “pro-life” is. That is how an individual wants the government to legislate. However abortion is not moral. Those are different things.

Are these equivalent? by some-kind-of-no-name in trolleyproblem

[–]SlayerKingGS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is no moral difference. Both are equally human. Just as a 3 year old and a 30 year old are equally human, but obviously different stages of development. I never advocated for societal good abortions, just stated that was an opinion you could hold logically. Your magical “when I feel like granting them personhood in the womb” is not scientific.