undefined | Better HN

0 pointstitzer2y ago0 comments

What part of birthing billions of children into poverty was ethical again?

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

jacquesm2y ago· 2 in thread

That's the problem right there: by asking the question like that you are essentially saying 'children are for the wealthy'. And that's also not how it should be. This is a super hard problem to resolve in a fair way that works in an international setting because you need everybody on board otherwise it will not work. It's the tragedy of the commons endgame.

titzerOP2y ago

This is a problem; with the inertia the system is carrying where there are no "ethical" choices left. That's of course no excuse to pick a horribly fascist and evil one. Yet that seems to be the inference in any conversation where you point out that fact that we're basically fucked. "Oh yeah, well obviously you are a genocidal monster. That must mean we're not fucked."

Uh, no. I'm watching this garbage truck smash into the wall, same as you. We're all in the same boat.

jacquesm2y ago

I don't care about what people call me, I'm just pointing out there are too many of us. Historically when there were too many people we ended up with wars or famine. I don't think this time around it will be an exception to that rule, but it's the first time this is happening at this scale. In that sense all bets are off, it is also possible that given such stakes humanity can find it in itself to pull the cart as one but I'm not too hopeful about that.

We could easily be in 'adapt or die' territory somewhere in the next century.

1 more reply

ahtihn2y ago

Struggling for survival is the natural condition of living beings on this planet. What's unethical about birthing children in poverty exactly?

Rich people consume orders of magnitude more resources than poor people so if anything it's unethical for rich people to have children.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse