Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is Everything Securities Fraud?

papers.ssrn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 115 posts

Re: Is Everything Securities Fraud?

#81

Post by Dylan16807 »

renewiltord wrote: post #79
Dylan16807 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Very gracious of you to be willing to help but only if all of society signs up to do it with you. Or in other words: being willing to help if it will make a significant difference. Negotiated collective action is a good tool.

Ah, since $1000 will save a life, and you believe that giving $1000 will not make a significant difference, then one must logically conclude that it is untrue that saving a life is making a significant difference. From there, it does not take very much to conclude that human lives are not significant to you either.

Or you could opt not to be super pedantic just to score points against me.

When it comes to ridding the world of severe poverty, donating enough to help one person is not _________. If you object to the term "significant", then go ahead and pick a better term.

Re: Is Everything Securities Fraud?

#82

Post by astrange »

nmfisher wrote: post #64
QuesnayJr wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am an economist, and I have no idea what you're talking about.

I think parent is saying there's no economic incentive to save starving kids in Africa.

Note that Nigerian-Americans are one of the highest earning and most successful immigrant groups in America, and I'm sure some more countries will follow. So there probably is one if you're selfish, because their kids can be your doctor in a few decades.

Re: Is Everything Securities Fraud?

#83

Post by renewiltord »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #81
renewiltord wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, since $1000 will save a life, and you believe that giving $1000 will not make a significant difference, then one must logically conclude that it is untrue that saving a life is making a significant difference. From there, it does not take very much to conclude that human lives are not significant to you either.

Or you could opt not to be super pedantic just to score points against me. When it comes to ridding the world of severe poverty, donating enough to help one person is not _________. If you object to the term "significant", then go ahead and pick a better term.

I don't object to the term. I think any thing that fills in the gap that implies value will lead to the same conclusion. I don't think that's surprising since the evidence is really strong in favour of that conclusion: arbitrary human life has very little value. It is certainly true that almost all individuals behave in a manner consistent with this being true, at least.

I personally believe it is nearer zero, but it is clearly less valuable than whatever value most individuals ascribe to ten hundred dollar bills.

Re: Is Everything Securities Fraud?

#84

Post by astrange »

labster wrote: post #41

I was just thinking, maybe we should privatize the police force. And then when the police kill or maim another unarmed black man, we can sue them for securities fraud, for not providing the promised level safety of law enforcement. It sounds like a lot more justice than we're getting now.

Cities can already be sued to the point of having to close their police departments because they can't afford to pay for the lawsuits.

https://www.npr.org/2019/04/12/712606977/how-the-insurance-i...

Re: Is Everything Securities Fraud?

#85

Post by Dylan16807 »

renewiltord wrote: post #83
Dylan16807 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could opt not to be super pedantic just to score points against me. When it comes to ridding the world of severe poverty, donating enough to help one person is not _________. If you object to the term "significant", then go ahead and pick a better term.

I don't object to the term. I think any thing that fills in the gap that implies value will lead to the same conclusion. I don't think that's surprising since the evidence is really strong in favour of that conclusion: arbitrary human life has very little value. It is certainly true that almost all individuals behave in a manner consistent with this being true, at least. I personally believe it is nearer zero, but it…

The value depends on context. The punishment for hurting someone is much higher than the amount it takes to help someone. And spending a thousand dollars to help an anonymous person, who is in a sea of people not getting help, and will fall back into that sea soon enough, feels like tossing it into a black hole when the donation is all by itself. But if there's enough donations together, they feel more meaningful.

You're measuring value in just about the weakest possible context.

People want to make a difference that's visible when looking at the entire problem.

Re: Is Everything Securities Fraud?

#86

Post by renewiltord »

astrange wrote: post #80
renewiltord wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that they do raise money but not as much as they would if people adhered to these ideals indicates to me that the utility function is different. i.e. that it isn't just the life that is being paid for. And that's fine. I think people should spend their money as they see fit. It's the bit where people make arguments from fictional moral authority that needs some push back. It's just nonsensical outrage - the…

It does seem to me that the rationalist/effective altruist position here reduces your ability to help in the future, not to mention your political power. For instance, if you're the town treasurer and you donate all the town's funds to buy mosquito nets in Africa, the townspeople might have you killed, which would prevent you from buying more mosquito nets in the future.

Certainly that is true if all spend improved one's ability to help in the future. But I think if we all honestly looked within our monthly spending statements we would find ourselves hard-pressed to make that claim.

Even accounting for second-order effects I do not believe people act in a manner consistent with arbitrary human lives being valued above some small number (less than $1000).

But there's no reason for me to convince you. You may act according to a different model of mankind and I shall act according to this model and whichever one predicts behaviour better is better.

Re: Is Everything Securities Fraud?

#87

Post by astrange »

renewiltord wrote: post #86
astrange wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem to me that the rationalist/effective altruist position here reduces your ability to help in the future, not to mention your political power. For instance, if you're the town treasurer and you donate all the town's funds to buy mosquito nets in Africa, the townspeople might have you killed, which would prevent you from buying more mosquito nets in the future.

Certainly that is true if all spend improved one's ability to help in the future. But I think if we all honestly looked within our monthly spending statements we would find ourselves hard-pressed to make that claim. Even accounting for second-order effects I do not believe people act in a manner consistent with arbitrary human lives being valued above some small number (less than $1000). But there's no reason for me…

Donating/tithing 10% of your income seems to have a lot of historical support. Well, if you want to spend it on mosquito nets depends on if you think saving a life from malaria is the best thing anyone could do.

Re: Is Everything Securities Fraud?

#88

Post by renewiltord »

astrange wrote: post #87
renewiltord wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly that is true if all spend improved one's ability to help in the future. But I think if we all honestly looked within our monthly spending statements we would find ourselves hard-pressed to make that claim. Even accounting for second-order effects I do not believe people act in a manner consistent with arbitrary human lives being valued above some small number (less than $1000). But there's no reason for me…

Donating/tithing 10% of your income seems to have a lot of historical support. Well, if you want to spend it on mosquito nets depends on if you think saving a life from malaria is the best thing anyone could do.

I think that's a good mechanism - your community will apply significant disincentives to your not contributing, pushing up the value of contribution.

Re: Is Everything Securities Fraud?

#89

Post by imtringued »

renewiltord wrote: post #45
jjoonathan wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Economists like to talk about "utility" and the common good with their theories, but they tend to only measure money Yeah, that's the problem. The economic notion of value weights according to wealth while the moral notion of value does not. It's absolutely scandalous that we let economists conflate the two. Feed a starving kid in Africa? Zero economic value. The kid doesn't have money. Figure out how to merge toge…

This is nonsense. It's not The Market™ or The System™. It turns out starving kids in Africa are of no value to anyone except to their parents, who have no means to provide commensurate to the child's value to them. The blunt truth is that arbitrary lives are probably nearly valueless and certainly worth less than $1000. I have tested this hypothesis by describing GiveWell's mathematics to people at varying stages bef…

>The blunt truth is that arbitrary lives are probably nearly valueless and certainly worth less than $1000. I have tested this hypothesis by describing GiveWell's mathematics to people at varying stages before they would spend money similar to that: in every case, people choose to spend the money rather than save arbitrary life.

Yeah it is pretty obvious that the value doesn't lie in the person but rather the relationships. In that context a job is just a beneficial relationship between an employee and employer. Parents and children form a strong relationship. Same with friends.

The idea that you value your own life and thus it gains inherent worth doesn't work out because how are you going to pay for that value if not from a currently ongoing or previous relationship? Are billionaires really a million times more productive than the average worker? Did they really do everything themselves?

Re: Is Everything Securities Fraud?

#90

Post by chordalkeyboard »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #85
renewiltord wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't object to the term. I think any thing that fills in the gap that implies value will lead to the same conclusion. I don't think that's surprising since the evidence is really strong in favour of that conclusion: arbitrary human life has very little value. It is certainly true that almost all individuals behave in a manner consistent with this being true, at least. I personally believe it is nearer zero, but it…

The value depends on context. The punishment for hurting someone is much higher than the amount it takes to help someone. And spending a thousand dollars to help an anonymous person, who is in a sea of people not getting help, and will fall back into that sea soon enough, feels like tossing it into a black hole when the donation is all by itself. But if there's enough donations together, they feel more meaningful. Yo…

> People want to make a difference that's visible when looking at the entire problem.

This sounds a lot like saying its not worth it to help one person.

Post reply on HN