141–150 of 202 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Have you ever been around kids? They're really a pain in the ass, especially if they're boys. Suck it up. What, do you want having kids to be as seamless as an Uber Eats order? It's not. It's hard work. I'm sure your parents gave up on a lot to have you, too. That's part of being an adult.
>That's part of being an adult. As countless adults these days have proven, no, it's not. You can just opt out of the whole thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give an example of why this is bad? What more do we really need in terms of technology, to survive as nations and be happy? Could this point in our achievement be enough? Maybe a drought of elevator specialists decreases the amount of elevators we can have. We have to walk up stairs more often. Not ideal. But maybe more people spend less time having and raising kids and more time working on themselves. Mental…
>What more do we really need in terms of technology, to survive as nations and be happy? What timeline are we talking about. > Could this point in our achievement be enough? To ensure eventual extinction, yes. Modern technology is wholly dependant on a great number of unstable and unsustainable systems. Fossil fuels are the best example of a great technological boost that is destroying our atmosphere. Renewables, whi…
I don't believe space travel is worth it if we get there through war, interpersonal alienation and violence required by the only current system poised to do it. Sometimes we have to entertain the idea of letting go of preventing every possible bad outcome and focus on what is needed in the current moment. Regrettably I'm not the most persuasive philosopher; Gil Scott-Heron has a song called "Whitey on the Moon" if one wants to think more poetically about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> it is true that groups with higher birth rates in spite of having middle class lifestyle tend to be religious. I doubt that very much, that has not been my experience, my colleagues, or my relatives. In fact, I wouldn't even agree with the point that religious people tend to have bigger families.
> I wouldn't even agree with the point that religious people tend to have bigger families. That would be pretty silly then. Most successful religions have two things, both of them based on growth. One is a means to capture people not in their religion by conversion. The other is by codifying good parenting and breeding habits. The biblical old testament is rife with teachings like this for example. Population fade wi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An inverted age pyramid can be just fine if automation picks up the slack and causes productivity per capita to soar. The great thing about automation is that it’s always improving, never going back (except when old equipment gets retired). Once Tesla improves feature X it’s rolled out to all cars at once, for instance.
> if automation picks up the slack and causes productivity per capita This is only true if the income disparity is not out of control. Current trends show us that income disparity is increasing where the super rich gain everything, and the poor are screwed without some kind of income redistribution (high wealth taxes for example).
UBI
Automation
Open Source Software
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or climate change? (Ducks) PS: I realize now that people downvote not based on the content of the post or the argument but based on whether they don’t think the argument should be made because they dont like the conclusion .
I downed this because you posted 4 words with no thought or reasoning behind it. The lack of thought and self awareness that this is a discussion forum, not Reddit, is why this is downvoted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have we ever seen this happen to a drastic degree in recent times? If so, what happened? Who says that governments couldn't address a crisis, when they often involve themselves heavily in crises the economy, bailing out banks and so on. If a modern government can force every young person to to join the army for the ostensible "defense of the nation" (e.g. Israel) , why not force them to take care of old people?
>If a modern government can force every young person to to join the army. "Joining the army" and "Fighting a battle every day" are two different things. Most of the time armies are not doing anything. And when they are, it is a significant threat to ones continued existence, something humans are highly optimized to fight for. Keeping the old people alive has a few problems. First, if you take grandma to the roof and…
The opportunity to help and care for other people is a great gift. Killing or culling individuals, populations... directly affects everyone's spiritual and mental existence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who do you plan on taking care of you when you get older? You’re going to pay nurses, and maybe live in a retirement home?
Alzheimers patients need 24/7 care. This isn't something that small families with 3-4 siblings can do by reasonable means next to having a job, raising the next generation, and living in the neighbouring town or even further than that. In the old days, poor people just died young because of exhaustion and rich people well they have the means for proper care per definition.
Not sure what your point about poor people is...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From a purely economic standpoint, treating kids like a retirement investment seems absurdly risky compared to the alternative. According to this link [1] the average cost of raising a middle class child to age 18 is $233,610. Plus the average cost of a 4 year out of state university [2] $36,420 equals $270,030. That’s $12,274 a year for 22 years. Let’s say instead you put that into a pre tax IRA earning 6%. At the e…
This model may work when you don't have a kid but most people do (ie the size of the workforce is stable). It does not account for situations where workforce drops by large % and there are much more retirees than workers.
Now may be the best time to stop having kids and instead invest what you’d otherwise spend. Chances are there will be few remaining un-automated jobs by the time they need employment. I say this as someone who has a kid—I fear for her future honestly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Inflation will eat most of your savings What? This is why investment advice for retirement generally revolves around allocation into stocks and bonds while leaving only an emergency fund plus regular expenses in more liquid assets like savings accounts. Inflation will only eat your savings if you fail to invest. If you want to talk about risk, well, inflation is why a total failure to accept risk is extremely risky…
I think that he is talking about average person and you have rich classes in mind. Most people dont have money to invest in bonds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My understanding is that Spandrell considers himself a "race realist." Please don't bring right-wing racist thought into HN.
I didn't see anything right wing or racist in the original quote, did you? It was an interesting observation regardless of who made it.