I understand, and I believe this is unfair. I believe we should strive for equality. If nature doesn't treat us equally, we should compensate with laws, so that it doesn't matter for a child to be born a boy or a girl.
I understand, and I believe this is unfair. I believe we should strive for equality. If nature doesn't treat us equally, we should compensate with laws, so that it doesn't matter for a child to be born a boy or a girl.
I value competence. I just think the most competent man should not earn more than the most competent woman. And that goes both ways, of course. Please refrain from attacking me as a person but try to convince me with arguments. We're looking for the truth, right, not simply winning online arguments?
Females can't beat males at sports, so they are incompetent.
Look, I like female sports as ways to teach teamwork and drive to children and teenagers. I don't pretend they are objectively entertaining to anyone but parents.
My point is that it should not matter there's a difference in competence for some things for the different genders, we as a society should compensate for it. Just like you should listen to your boss/teacher/parents even if you're stronger than them.
Free individuals freely compensate people for things they want. That's what got us where we are. The Soviets subsidized sports teams for national glory and they couldn't keep their grocery stores stocked.
So, let's assume for the sake of argument, soon there will be AI's that are better than humans in everything. Should we compensate the humans, or just let them all die?
Even if we decided to have an AI provided UBI for everyone, it still wouldn't mean we should force people to spend their UBI on tickets to women's sports.
I understand, and I believe this is unfair. I believe we should strive for equality. If nature doesn't treat us equally, we should compensate with laws, so that it doesn't matter for a child to be born a boy or a girl.
The market isn't fair its an efficient arbiter of human preferences.
Such unfairness gave us modernity.
I value competence. I just think the most competent man should not earn more than the most competent woman. And that goes both ways, of course. Please refrain from attacking me as a person but try to convince me with arguments. We're looking for the truth, right, not simply winning online arguments?
Females can't beat males at sports, so they are incompetent.
Look, I like female sports as ways to teach teamwork and drive to children and teenagers. I don't pretend they are objectively entertaining to anyone but parents.
My point is that it should not matter there's a difference in competence for some things for the different genders, we as a society should compensate for it. Just like you should listen to your boss/teacher/parents even if you're stronger than them.
"we as a society should compensate for it"
No way comrade!
Free individuals freely compensate people for things they want. That's what got us where we are. The Soviets subsidized sports teams for national glory and they couldn't keep their grocery stores stocked.
I was hoping for a more rational discussion instead of name calling... Even if we don't agree.
Forcing people to pay for things they don't want because it gives you good feels is not rational.
So, let's assume for the sake of argument, soon there will be AI's that are better than humans in everything. Should we compensate the humans, or just let them all die?
Even if we decided to have an AI provided UBI for everyone, it still wouldn't mean we should force people to spend their UBI on tickets to women's sports.
So you agree with UBI for humans, even though they would be incompetent compared to the AI? Do you see what this implies?