MperorM (u/MperorM) - Readit News

MperorM commented on The Dangerous Ideas of “Longtermism” and “Existential Risk” currentaffairs.org/2021/0... · Posted by u/phreeza

mrow84 · 5 years ago

You mentioned that Bjørn Lomborg's work has "likely helped guide governments to make decisions which have done immeasurable good for the poor and sick" - I am interested to know, because it isn't something I am familiar with, what of his work are you referring to?

MperorM · 5 years ago

He is the leader of the Copenhagen Consensus Center https://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/

Which does research into the most cost-effective ways to fight global poverty. Absolutely marvellous work.

MperorM commented on Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank medrxiv.org/content/10.11... · Posted by u/luu

ajross · 5 years ago

Look, nitpick. Claim I'm making a straw man argument, anything you want. All that is fine, and totally on brand for this web site.

Do. Not. Liken. Covid. To. The. Flu.

If you didn't, good! Don't.

MperorM · 5 years ago

Why not? They have many things in common. For example make they both make you sick, often with similar symptoms.

If you're arguing that you shouldn't dismiss the danger of covid because of its flu like nature, then be my guest but asking not to make comparisons between things doesn't strike me as a very smart thing to do.

Covid can be dangerous and similar to the flu at the same time.

MperorM commented on EU unveils sweeping climate change plan bbc.co.uk/news/world-euro... · Posted by u/mhandley

adrianN · 5 years ago

The proposal in this thread is also taking into account the carbon cost of shipping when doing border adjustments. That's different than limiting shipping. It's internalizing an externalized cost. Exactly want you want to do if you want the market to find the most cost effective spots where carbon emissions can be reduced.

MperorM · 5 years ago

I completely agree, I merely meant to point out that making decisions based on the absolute pollution of something will lead you horribly astray.

That said a carbon tax certainly does limit shipping, as some of it will no longer be profitable. Fortunately when doing it with a carbon tax, it just so happens to be the shipping that we shouldn't have been doing in the first place!

MperorM commented on EU unveils sweeping climate change plan bbc.co.uk/news/world-euro... · Posted by u/mhandley

actually_a_dog · 5 years ago

I don't care how efficient per product it is to ship stuff. What I care is that the global shipping industry contributes 1 billion tons of greenhouse gasses per year to the problem, and, that if it were its own country, it would be the 5th largest polluter in the world. [0]

In other words, it's not marginal numbers that matter, it's absolute numbers, and something absolutely has to be done about those numbers.

--

[0]: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/shipping-industry-car...

MperorM · 5 years ago

no, it is absolutely the marginal numbers that matter. All else equal, starting anywhere but the place with the most pollution per $ produced is a sub-optimal place to start.

In a world that has climate change under control, there's for sure going to be a reduction in pollution produced by global shipping, but in the world we live in there's much better places to start than by limiting global shipping.

MperorM commented on MPs: Octopuses feel pain and need legal protection bbc.com/news/newsbeat-575... · Posted by u/vanilla-almond

EvilEy3 · 5 years ago

There are 700 million people below extreme poverty level(less than 1.90$ a day. Tell them how concerned you are about pigs.

MperorM · 5 years ago

We should be concerned about both.

That said, whether to spend your energy on global poverty or abolishing factory farming really comes down to how you highly you rank animal suffering.

Is a thousand chickens tortured from birth to slaughter, worse than someone dying from malaria? What about ten thousand?

It's not at all obvious to me how animal sentience compares to human sentience, but it's clear to me that we should at least give it some consideration.

Even when I give animals only a fraction of the concern I have for humans, it's clear to me that factory farming is an incredible source of unnecessary suffering.

I hope we can learn to be considerate of not only humans different from us but other species too.

MperorM commented on Europe is now a corporate also-ran. Can it recover its footing? economist.com/briefing/20... · Posted by u/N1H1L

tasubotadas · 5 years ago

>If the great minds of the bay collectively moved to Europe

Why they don't move?

MperorM · 5 years ago

coordination problem. Europe provides no competitive advantage to any first mover.

MperorM commented on Europe is now a corporate also-ran. Can it recover its footing? economist.com/briefing/20... · Posted by u/N1H1L

MperorM · 5 years ago

If you remove the bay from the equation, the US starts looking much more like the rest of the world. I now live in Copenhagen Denmark but still maintain a decent network in the bay. The difference of culture is astounding.

More than anything else the bay created a culture of innovation and excellence that cannot be found anywhere in Europe. That it happened to be the bay area that became this hub and not eg. Copenhagen, while not a coincidence, is still somewhat arbitrary.

If the great minds of the bay collectively moved to Europe, I feel very certain they would be just as innovative in Copenhagen as they were in silicon valley. EU's most innovative and bright minds move elsewhere to be part of a culture where they feel at home. Until they decide to stay and help cultivate such a culture in Europe, there will be little innovation.

MperorM commented on Don't take on China alone, says ex-Australia PM Kevin Rudd bbc.com/news/world-austra... · Posted by u/deepmistry

dalbasal · 5 years ago

The agreement was never a symmetric "free trade" agreement. Everyone knew China wasn't going to be as open to imports as the US was. Chinese consumers, in the late 70s, were so poor that it didn't matter anyway. Mcdonalds and Coke were symbolic outliers, but all the negotiators knew these things.

US negotiators did get what they actually wanted, US "FDI" investments in China protected by western style corporate laws.

Foxcon-Apple stuff is exactly what both parties had in mind. Foxconn (Taiwan is pax americana) invest in building the factory, funded by Western/US banks. Apple own the IP and gain most of the equity. China gets jobs, a trade surplus, and builds foreign currency reserves.

The game has been played for a while, and all parties got a lot of what they wanted. Foxconn really does generate a ton of equity for Apple. China really has built up a ton of foreign currency reserves. Etc.

I'm not saying this is good. China should stop being so surplus oriented and let salaries rise. The US should give some attention to domestic labour, etc.... That's my opinion though. It was not the opinion of negotiators in the 70s and 80s.

MperorM · 5 years ago

Trade agreements don't need to be symmetric to be beneficial for both parties. Even if China didn't buy a single American good, it is beneficial for US to sell to china.

Export is what you pay for import. If China sells goods to US they will get dollars in return. These dollars are worthless except for buying American goods.

Even if China can't buy American goods, they can buy some other country's goods using their newly acquired dollars. Eventually someone somewhere will use those dollars to buy American goods.