How many will die in the coming great depression?

Author: Singularity

Posts

Total: 91
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Singularity
[oromagi] doesn't like how a russian researcher arrived at his data
Because the method is manifestly, comically unscientific.  If Borisov's methodology were sound (apply previous decade's overall growth rate to target decade and assume all reductions in growth represent deaths by starvation) then we'd be forced to conclude that 9.6 million Americans died by starvation in first decade of the 21st century.

US growth rate from 1990-2000 = 13.15% [+32,712,033]
US growth rate from 2000-2010=    9.71% [+27,323,632]

Borisov assumes that US 2010 population should reflect at least 13.15% [+37,006,981] and any reduction in growth is attributable to starvation

37,006,981-
27,323,632
-------------
9,683,349

Of course, we know that's not true.  The US had a lower birthrate and few immigrants, so the growth rate dipped a bit.  Borisov's conclusion is an obvious and silly lie unworthy of the names "research" or "data."

but offered no alternative for how to test the number of deaths caused by people having no access to food because of having no jobs and also where FDR literally ordered the burning of crops because lower food prices would have saved poor people and FDR couldn't have that?
Food in the US during the Great Depression was more abundant than food in the 1920's or the 1940's because demand was down and cheaper than in any other decade in US history.  In the cities, food was available free to anyone.  Fewer Americans starved to death in the 1930's than in the 1920's or the 1940's.  Death by starvation or malnutrition was not even one of the top 50 leading causes of death.  Demand for food was so low that the government was forced to destroy crops to keep the prices up.


"For most age groups, mortality tended to peak during years of strong economic expansion (such as 1923, 1926, 1929, and 1936–1937). In contrast, the recessions of 1921, 1930–1933, and 1938 coincided with declines in mortality and gains in life expectancy."

Death rates increased during economic boom years.  Death rates decreased during economic contraction years.  Singularity asserts that there were "people having no access to food because of having no jobs," and while we can be certain some individual cases can be found the FACT is that starvation was quite low.  For example, death from Flu dropped dramatically as productivity decreased from 30 deaths per 100,000 Americans in 1929 to 11 deaths per 100,000 Americans in 1930.  The millions of lives saved by the Great Depression far outweighed the scant few deaths by starvation.

Singularity's version of history is entirely fake and can be dismissed with confidence as mere Russian propoganda.

oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Singularity

Let's note that Singluarity's source has zero information about diet or mortality during the Great Depression.

Overall, we rate The Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) Right-Center biased based on left leaning views regarding social issues and far right views pertaining to economics. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting
Let's note that Singularity's source for economic information is a Baptist preacher writing in 1994 (Nash died in 2006) who argues that all government intervention (including income tax) is unchristian socialism. Nash's main point in the article is that Capitalism is not to blame for the Great Depression but I fail to see the relevance to our present  discussion regarding wrong conclusions drawn from fake premises.

Assuming that Singularity would have offered a health expert opinion or economic expert opinion supporting his position if one could be found, this outdated religious opinion re-inforces the notion that doctors and economists entirely disagree with Singularity's fake premise.

Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@oromagi
Yeah my biography is most certainly fictional. People don't experience poverty in the united States honestly keep being a piece of shit. I also understand why you are okay if a bunch of niggers die because we have another great depression.  As long as some 90 year old boomers can squeeze a few more years out of their life who cares how many niggers die. Go fuck yourself racist. 

Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I believe it is true if memory serves correct 
Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@oromagi
The citation was used about the burning crops fact not about other things. There were people malnourished and cheaper food would have helped then but FDR wanted to increase prices which hurt poor people. What type of society burns food when there are starving children? At the very least he could have shipped that food to areas of the world with low food security. 

Also all the evidence that economic interventionism is bad can be seen in the economic freedom index. The most capitalistic countries at the top like Singapore and America have high standards of living while the countries at the bottom like North Korea and Venezuela have low standards of living allowing us to easily conclude the more economic freedom a country has the better it does, sorry to burst your bubble. I'm sure it would feel nice to decrease freedom because more blacks would die, but I am personally a proponent of a free market and am not a racist who wants more poor people to die just because many of them are minorities 

Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Singularity
I believe it is true if memory serves correct

Now I must ask my next question, though it might not be my last.

Do you think taking the difference in population growth between two consecutive decades and using no other factors is an accurate method for determining whether a mass famime occurred in a country or do you think that is an innaccurate method to use?
Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I think it is hard to come up with good numbers. Urban areas are less affected, and we would have to round up numbers from a bunch of rural areas since those are the areas without as much assistance as urban locations. 

The people starving would not be on records after that and have a cause of death listed as starving. Malnutrition would mean increased susceptibility to pneumonia for example, but with less people working a lower risk of bacterial diseases would also occur. Oro thinks the depression was a good thing I think, and I disagree with it. I don't think we should cause another depression just because it doesn't affect whites too much. Given the expected increase in births as a result if a depression and bad record keeping of more rural areas, changes in population is fair. Quite frankly the way I suggested to determine deaths should be accepted without a counter plan from oro. 

Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
The problem is records in urban areas were better kept than perhaps poor areas like the Appalachians
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Singularity
I believe it is true if memory serves correct 

This is an improvement to the extent you are no longer asserting a fake as fact.  We can assume you originally believed it was true because you did not check the reliability of the information or you were fine with Pravda as a source of reliable information.  The question is why do you continue to believe it is true after being shown that the data is false? Are you permitted to believe otherwise?

The problem is records in urban areas were better kept than perhaps poor areas like the Appalachians
Perhaps.  I think it is fine to distrust the Govt. record to some extent.  But people from the 1930s are still with us.  I know pretty well the stories of friends and relatives who lived then.   I've read Steinbeck and John Dos Passos, Faulkner and Wright and Buck.  The witnesses I've read and talked to say nothing of this mass starvation which you choose to believe without evidence and won't say why.  I understand why that false belief is valuable to Russian propagandists but I don't think it serves any value to Americans when trying to assess when best to go back to work.  Let's ask American economists and American health professionals for their honest assessments and set the Russian lies aside.

Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@oromagi
The question is why do you continue to believe it is true after being shown that the data is false? Are you permitted to believe otherwise?
Why do you think I believe anything I say? 

I'm distrustful of the government.  I was taken from my mildly abusive parents and put into extremely abusive foster homes. I was with other kids who were wrongfully removed or removed too late after a sibling had died. I have seen the failure of government first hand. 

We can see the results of the me too movement and Epstein as well as weinstein to know people in positions of power are evil pieces of shits. False convictions happen in local courts so even small amounts of power is taken by pieces of shits. 


I want people to hate and fear people in power so hopefully they will stop giving it away. They will keep more from themselves, instead of saying "well here is a manufactured pandemic let's give up our rights". Just like what happened after 9/11. Kinda convenient every disaster results in less rights. Kind of beneficial to people in power.  


Besides this internal hatred of people I  power I am forced to hold in, especially when I am forced to interact with politicians or the wealthy, I have a few other issues that I think it is more important to push an agenda instead of facts. 

1. A depression can push back a technological singularity which will result in a virtual utopia.

2. The philosophy of negative rights is correct and anything that comes up against negative rights is a threat to equitable freedom. 

I also have another problem, that I think you guys are beneath understanding my philosophy. To actually argue my philosophy as opposed to pushing an agenda where I argue for what I think is beneficial to pushing those ideologies forward. 

Also sometimes I just argue the opposite of what I believe so some schlub will do my research for me and I can copy and paste their responses and citations for use in a future argument. 




Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@oromagi
I haven't heard economists speak on this situation. No economist has guaranteed it won't result in a depression which worries me. What if there are irreversible mistakes being made here. I would prefer to see those mistakes avoided. Some projections show a very very low death toll and the virus getting weaker with time. So there is a chance this lockdown will result in no significant differences in outcome. If that is the case the government went too far. I also have questions like, even if this is legit,if the government has the authority to do this,what if some evil hitler person becomes ruler of america and uses the power for bad, so we definitely want to handcuff as much as possible the power of the state
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Singularity
I think you guys are beneath understanding my philosophy

hey no- thank u for thinking of us at all

sometimes I just argue the opposite of what I believe

yeah- how could u do otherwise?

Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@oromagi
So what makes you blindly trust authority anyway and say "hey go ahead and use these hitler like tactics at worst it causes a depression that only hurts blacks". I assure you that anything that hurts minorities will also hurt you as well
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Singularity
No economist has guaranteed it won't result in a depression which worries me

In fact, the economists expect the worst hit since the Great Depression, at least.


Going back to work tomorrow is not going to fix that.  One in four hotels in New York are expected to fold.  Economists predict 60% of small brewpubs to bankrupt by June.  Right now, we are only just overtaxing our healthcare capacity, if we start popping up those numbers the death increase will likely be exponential as healthcare systems are effectively jammed with people taking forty days to die leaving little capacity for broken bones or burst appendixes or mental health crises.  Businesses don't like it when the hospitals don't work.  Wuhan is back open and people are going to work and the store but they aren't really going out to dinner or a movie anymore  Unless we can greatly increase the confidence of the general populace in the safety of outside, the economy is going to go through a massive shift to digital work, digital provision.  That means short and long-term uncertainty and that means downturn.

Going back to work tomorrow is short sited.  Let's get a good test widely distributed now, in the next few weeks, test ourselves, get an accurate assessment of the extent of infection.  Then we start going to work slowly.  If we can get kids back to school in the fall, normality and slow recovery will likely follow.  If we crash the hospitals and the morgues, kids aren't going back to school.  Colleges and schools aren't going to take back kids when access to healthcare is uncertain.  Pushing too fast for normal is very likely to end with the end of normal and the beginning of something new.

oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Singularity
you blindly trust authority

you blindly trust authority more.  I just showed you your stat is foreign government propaganda and I'll bet you still quote that 7 million stat tomorrow and not give af.
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Singularity
Given the expected increase in births as a result if a depression and bad record keeping of more rural areas, changes in population is fair. Quite frankly the way I suggested to determine deaths should be accepted without a counter plan from oro.

If you think the methodology described in post 36 is reliable that's fine, you may think that if you wish. I won't argue against it. In fact would you like to know how many people died in the great famine of 2010-2020 as calculated using that methodology?
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
‘Cartels are scrambling’: Virus snarls global drug trade
By JIM MUSTIAN and JAKE BLEIBERG
April 19, 2020 GMT

NEW YORK (AP) — Coronavirus is dealing a gut punch to the illegal drug trade, paralyzing economies, closing borders and severing supply chains in China that traffickers rely on for the chemicals to make such profitable drugs as methamphetamine and fentanyl.
One of the main suppliers that shut down is in Wuhan, the epicenter of the global outbreak.
Associated Press interviews with nearly two dozen law enforcement officials and trafficking experts found Mexican and Colombian cartels are still plying their trade as evidenced by recent drug seizures but the lockdowns that have turned cities into ghost towns are disrupting everything from production to transport to sales.

Along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border through which the vast majority of illegal drugs cross, the normally bustling vehicle traffic that smugglers use for cover has slowed to a trickle. Bars, nightclubs and motels across the country that are ordinarily fertile marketplaces for drug dealers have shuttered. And prices for drugs in short supply have soared to gouging levels.
“They are facing a supply problem and a demand problem,” said Alejandro Hope, a security analyst and former official with CISEN, the Mexican intelligence agency. “Once you get them to the market, who are you going to sell to?”
Virtually every illicit drug has been impacted, with supply chain disruptions at both the wholesale and retail level. Traffickers are stockpiling narcotics and cash along the border, and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration even reports a decrease in money laundering and online drug sales on the so-called dark web.

“The godfathers of the cartels are scrambling,” said Phil Jordan, a former director of the DEA’s El Paso Intelligence Center.
Cocaine prices are up 20 percent or more in some cities. Heroin has become harder to find in Denver and Chicago, while supplies of fentanyl are falling in Houston and Philadelphia. In Los Angeles, the price of methamphetamine has more than doubled in recent weeks to $1,800 per pound.
“You have shortages but also some greedy bastards who see an opportunity to make more money,” said Jack Riley, the former deputy administrator of the DEA. “The bad guys frequently use situations that affect the national conscience to raise prices.”
Synthetic drugs such as methamphetamine and fentanyl have been among the most affected, in large part because they rely on precursor chemicals that Mexican cartels import from China, cook into drugs on an industrial scale and then ship to the U.S.
“This is something we would use as a lesson learned for us,” the head of the DEA, Uttam Dhillon, told AP. “If the disruption is that significant, we need to continue to work with our global partners to ensure that, once we come out of the pandemic, those precursor chemicals are not available to these drug-trafficking organizations.”

Cartels are increasingly shifting away from drugs that require planting and growing seasons, like heroin and marijuana, in favor of synthetic opioids such as fentanyl, which can be cooked 24/7 throughout the year, are up to 50 times more powerful than heroin and produce a greater profit margin.
Though some clandestine labs that make fentanyl from scratch have popped up sporadically in Mexico, cartels are still very much reliant upon Chinese companies to get the precursor drugs.
Huge amounts of these mail-order components can be traced to a single, state-subsidized company in Wuhan that shut down after the outbreak earlier this year, said Louise Shelley, director of the Terrorism, Transnational Crime and Corruption Center at George Mason University, which monitors Chinese websites selling fentanyl.

“The quarantine of Wuhan and all the chaos there definitely affected the fentanyl trade, particularly between China and Mexico,” said Ben Westhoff, author of “Fentanyl, Inc.”
“The main reason China has been the main supplier is the main reason China is the supplier of everything — it does it so cheaply,” Westhoff said. “There was really no cost incentive for the cartels to develop this themselves.”
But costs have been rising and, as in many legitimate industries, the coronavirus is bringing about changes.
Advertised prices across China for precursors of fentanyl, methamphetamine and cutting agents have risen between 25% and 400% since late February, said Logan Pauley, an analyst at the Center for Advanced Defense Studies, a Washington-based security research nonprofit. So even as drug precursor plants in China are slowly reopening after the worst of the coronavirus crisis there, some cartels have been taking steps to decrease their reliance on overseas suppliers by enlisting scientists to make their own precursor chemicals.
“Because of the coronavirus they’re starting to do it in house,” added Westhoff.

Some Chinese companies that once pushed precursors are now advertising drugs like hydroxychloroquine, which President Donald Trump has promoted as potential treatment for COVID-19, as well as personal protective gear such as face masks and hand sanitizers.
Meanwhile, the gummed up situation on the U.S.-Mexico border resembles a stalled chess match where nobody, especially the traffickers, wants to make a wrong move, said Kyle Williamson, special agent in charge of the DEA’s El Paso field division.
“They’re in a pause right now,” Williamson said. “They don’t want to get sloppy and take a lot of risks.”
Some Mexican drug cartels are even holding back existing methamphetamine supplies to manipulate the market, recognizing that “no good crisis should be wasted,” said Joseph Brown, the U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Texas.
“Some cartels have given direct orders to members of their organization that anyone caught selling methamphetamine during this time will be killed,” said Brown, whose sprawling jurisdiction stretches from the suburbs of Dallas to Beaumont.
To be sure, narcotics are still making their way into the U.S., as evidenced by a bust last month in which nearly $30 million worth of street drugs were seized in a new smuggling tunnel connecting a warehouse in Tijuana to southern San Diego. Shelley said that bust was notable in that only about 2 pounds of fentanyl was recovered, “much lower than usual shipments.”

Trump announced earlier this month that Navy ships were being moved toward Venezuela as part of a bid to beef up counter-narcotics operations in the Caribbean following a U.S. drug indictment against Nicolás Maduro.
But the pandemic also has limited law enforcement’s effectiveness, as departments cope with drug investigators working remotely, falling ill and navigating a new landscape in which their own activities have become more conspicuous. In Los Angeles County, half of the narcotics detectives have been put on patrol duty, potentially imperiling long-term investigations.
Nonetheless, Capt. Chris Sandoval, who oversees special investigations for the Houston-based Harris County Sheriff’s Office, said there’s a new saying among his detectives: “Not even the dope dealers can hide from the coronavirus.”
___
Bleiberg reported from Dallas. AP writers Erika Kinetz in Rieti, Italy, Mark Stevenson in Mexico City and Stefanie Dazio in Los Angeles contributed to this report.


Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@oromagi
So we are destined for another great depression because of this? Which will definitely hold back technological progress pushing back a technological singularity that may provide some sort of method to achieve radical life extension. 100s of millions die globally every year. If this shut down pushes back the singularity by just 2 years that is 200 million unnecessary deaths. I don't think saving 100,000 boomers or even 1 million boomers is worth letting 200 million people die

Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I don't think there was a great famine and birth rates after an eco comic downturn theoretically should go up because people are at home to fuck more often. Not to mention the declining birthrates that naturally occur in industrialized nations. The richer a nation the less reproduction, the poorer a nation the more reproduction. So when the economy does well we should see less births and when it does bad we should see more. If the more that are supposed to occur don't occur than we can assume something prevented that
Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@oromagi
Is that a pro war on drug stance. Is every political side you take just one that coincidentally harms the black community disproportionately. One hell of a coincidence. What is your user name on stormfront?

Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Singularity
I understand that you say the birth rate went up in the 30s because people are more likely to want to have expensive children during an economic depression. That is fine, you are allowed to think that... Do you have any statistics to back it up though?


By the way I calculated the number of deaths in the great famine of 2010-2020 as about 8.6 million.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Singularity
So we are destined for another great depression because of this?

At least, nearly as bad in the short term.  Food lines are already bigger per capita than Great Depression.  2008 was nearly as bad as the Great Depression and we came out of that fairly quickly.  We need to make smart decisions now.

Which will definitely hold back technological progress
Again why?  The 1930s was an incredible decade for American inventions:

  • Scotch tape
  • Frozen food
  • neoprene.
  • analog computers
  •  jet engines
  • electron microscope
  • zoom lens
  • poloroids
  • parking meters
  • radio telescope
  • FM Radio
  • Stereo records
  • Drive in Movies
  • tape recorders
  • reflectors
  • Monopoly
  • nylons
  • canned beer
  • radar
  • photo copier
  • ballpoint pen
  • LSD
  • Teflon
  • Freeze dried coffee
  • Helicopters
Isn't necessity the mother of invention?  Perhaps we could use a little more necessity.

pushing back a technological singularity that may provide some sort of method to achieve radical life extension. 100s of millions die globally every year.
Trading Russians in for Basilisks in not a credibility upgrade, in my book

If this shut down pushes back the singularity by just 2 years that is 200 million unnecessary deaths.
but now your argument has replaced a rusky seven million with a sci-fi 200 millioon.  How does replacing one fake statistic with a different fake statistic help your argument?

I don't think saving 100,000 boomers or even 1 million boomers is worth letting 200 million people die
In fact, one or two million will probably die in the near term.  Nobody can offer saving them because we don't have a vaccine. Which means most of us will get at some point and some small percentage, maybe half of 1% will die.  That's million of Americans.  The trick is how do we process a million deaths without shutting down hospitals and morgues.  How do we pretend to go back to normal while everybody has somebody dying.  How do people resume normality when everybody knows somebody who had died from a bug that's everywhere and has no cure?
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
How many millions of starvations are attributable to Trump by Borisov's method, I wonder?
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@oromagi
Population in 2010 - 309.3mil
Population in 2015 - 320.7mil
Population in 2020 - 331 mil

Growth reduction - about .4%

Deaths by famine between 2015 and 2020 - about 1.3mil
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@oromagi
The same method that gives us 8.6 million deaths between 2010 and 2020 also says there were 3.18 million deaths from 2010 to 2015 and 1.32 million from 2015 to 2020.

I see no flaws in this whatsoever.
Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Yes poor people reproduce more. You can co.pare the birth rate of poor nations to wealthy ones. In the event of a depression. There will be more births. https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/total-fertility-rate/

Surprised I have to show you stats that are well knowm



Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
That is not true birth rates decline as the standard of living gets higher. You can't compare. However look at my post above . You can expect a higher birth rate when people are struggling more economically. 
Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@oromagi
Trading Russians in for Basilisks in not a credibility upgrade, in my book

 This is a fallacy. "Appeal to authority" as a replacement for actual premises. We know that birthrates in recessions go up. We should expect population increases if nobody is dying. That was shown above. Applying his methods to a time where birth rates are declining due to better economic activity is silly, because we expect populations to decrease at those times if there is not an influx of immigration.

I'm also not sure why you are fine pissing away the future to save the present. If anything we should completely sacrifice the present to save the future. In fact I would not make a single policy decision without judging the impact 100 years from now. If the impact is positive 100 years from now do it. If it is negative, scrap it. This way we are leaving the Earth better than we found it. 

You are okay killing 200 million people to save 1 million, because your theory is that technology will never increase. Would you like to debate if technology is at it's peak and will never improve? 


The fact you think a depression will not stifle technological progress is laughable.  Progress will happen, but it won't be as fast. Every year we push back progress or slow it, that many people die of yet to be cured diseases. Hell if we made the right calls 2000 years ago then we could have launched a space shuttle in 1492. Our ancestors fucked us over though. Let's not fuck over our descendants.  

Don't scoff at the 200 million deaths. One of those could be your child, your mother, your sister, yourself. All because we sacrificed some technological progress. 
I know, you think that just because a depression mostly hurts black people it is fine, but it really isn't.  We may lose the next einstein, because they struggled to put food on the table, instead of living in a world without a fucked up economy so their family made enough to send them off to college. When I say it effects us all, I'm not joking. Sure you may think depressing the economy leaves whites untouched, but think about people like Neil Degrasse Tyson. Black people are nor inferior to us. Depressing the economy deprives us of many contributions that poor black people could not have the privilege of making. 



Singularity
Singularity's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,013
2
3
8
Singularity's avatar
Singularity
2
3
8
-->
@oromagi
This is an american chart that shows income and fertility are related. So it is pretty compelling evidence the birth rate will increase in a depression.  Meaning a population drop can be attributed to deaths https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Singularity
Okay I already showed you a link in post 51 demonstrating that United States birth rates in the 30s dropped about 25% from what they were in the 20s (which are obviously the actual relevant decades) so the fact that you are still speculating "well idk what the birth rates between the 20s and 30s were but maaaybe they went up because... something about other countries birth rates or something hurr dee hurr hurr durr" indicates that you are 100% guaranteed to be trolling at this point and there is no need for this conversation to continue.