we need something new: less regulationhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUrPF46BpnI …
-
-
-
i smell ancap :P
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
We will always need something new :)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
We need to not throw babies out with bathwater...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
We need less regulation, Less barriers to competition & free trade, Shorter patents for a world that is drastically speeding up, Universal basic income ( funded by cutting less inefficient gov't programs) and a land-value tax w/ steep taxes for ecological-services destruction.
-
We have to optimize the economy more for the long-term than we are now. The interests of future people >> the interests of today's people, especially those no longer producing economic value (the elderly).
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We do know some things that create positive utility. It's not a complete mystery. People are happier when they aren't affected by natural disasters. Carbon taxes hurt current people economically in the short term, and will mostly help future people.
-
A certain good by no means outweighs an uncertain good. It's all a matter of expected utility. It's not a complete mystery what will satisfy future peoples' preferences. First, they will want to exist, so we should sacrifice some social programs for the sake of x-risk reduction
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
They don't right now, but there is a Bayesian probability that they will, and we should consider them as morally relevant in proportion to that probability. For example, if you think 15 billion people have an 80% chance of existing in 2100, then they have the moral weight of
-
15 billion * .8 or 12 billion people.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
