If you had to choose one section of the USA to save which would you save? Please tell me which and why. No belongings can be transferred, and they will be transported to a new planet without you. They will be unaware you saved them, and you and everyone else in the USA will die will die after saving them.
Pretend you are in the USA in this case if you are not there now.
+The Minorities (Colored)
+The Majorities (White)
+The Rich
+The Poor
I honestly would choose the Poor, since they are used to living in tough conditions and have had a less than favorable lot.
This is a kinda ridiculous question, but I'll give it some response...
My first reaction is the poor, simply because they have the worst standard of living and it's not like they are a separate entity from minorities or majorities... so you probably "save" the most people that way.
However being poor, depending on how we are defining it, means they are statistically more likely to be involved in crime and have lower educations, and is that what you want the new world to be based on? People who don't have the knowledge to maintain a civilization? Life will probably be a living hell for hundreds upon hundreds of years as the criminals take over running things, there will be mass starvation because the technology levels will not meet the food requirement levels, and everything will fall apart.
Because of that, I think "the poor" are probably the worst choice pragmatically and you would end up doing far more harm, even if it is idealistically nice sounding.
Minorities would probably be my first choice, just because that gives you a very good range of skilled labour, educated scientists and businessmen, and intellectuals... but it will be a little more "bottom heavy" (poorer, less educated) than "majority" would be and thus have more skilled labour for rebuilding society.
The rich is actually, pragmatically, maybe the best choice simply because they are the smallest number, generally educated and if their lives depended on it would learn quickly how to take care of themselves.
I'd say i'm gonna go with E, myself, because I matter most.
If the method of destruction is Godzilla, I will gladly pick the poor just so I can watch our upper class shit their pants before I get stomped.
I would save the poor, because they are more likely capable of dealing with adverse situations.
The most populous group, whichever that is. 1,000,000 survivors > 1,000 survivors
Quote from: Hydra009 on February 11, 2015, 10:55:08 PM
The most populous group, whichever that is. 1,000,000 survivors > 1,000 survivors
Exactly my thinking. Whichever group is biggest.
By the way, the term "colored" fell out of favor around 40 years ago.
Quote from: Atheon on February 11, 2015, 11:11:41 PM
Exactly my thinking. Whichever group is biggest.
*high-fives*
Utilitarianism ftw. Because triage workers don't let triage workers apply deontological ethics. :P
The coloreds can go (only context I could ever utter that phrase without a wearing a Klan robe). Most of my social circle is white and if I'm going to die they can come with me. The thought of my friends getting to live on another planet while I'm stuck here facing death is nauseating. Fuck them, we all get to die.
I'd go with the poor for the reasons that it would save the most people and they would (hopefully) start the world over again with better and less corrupt values than the rich people that are in control right now. But even if the second part fails, which it probably will and might even turn out more corrupt with people fighting for the power that they never had and has wronged them so much, at least it would still save the most people by saving that demographic.
I am still not sold that saving the most people = the best outcome.
Is saving (small numbers for convenience) 1,000 people who will go through 9/10 on the pain scale (as will generation after generation) a better choice than saving 750 people who will go through a 6/10 on the pain scale and likely reduce the suffering of future generations much more quickly? I'm not entirely sure it will.
Quote from: Shiranu on February 12, 2015, 12:00:16 AMIs saving (small numbers for convenience) 1,000 people who will go through 9/10 on the pain scale (as will generation after generation) a better choice than saving 750 people who will go through a 6/10 on the pain scale and likely reduce the suffering of future generations much more quickly? I'm not entirely sure it will.
That's also a utilitarian choice, just with more variables than a simple headcount.
It's also not a ratio like 1000 poor people to 750 of whatever other group you are talking about.
Poor people include such a vast amount of people that no matter how you slice it, it is going to be a huge difference in numbers. not just off by a 1000:750 ratio. Much more like a 1000000:750 ratio... or steeper.
I didn't want to take this thread seriously, but if I must...
QuoteIn 2012, 46.5 million people were living in poverty in the United States
QuoteAs a whole, the non-white population increased by 1.9 percent, up to 116 million, or 37%, of the American population
By saving minorities, you save over double the people you do that are poor (if we define poor as poverty level), however there is a huge over-lap there so the difference isn't as great. You were right about my equation being wrong, but I screwed up in the opposite direction; the minorities should actually be greater than rather than lower.
Of course, without knowing what situation they will be teleported to, it is impossible to say which is the better choice. If everything is provided for them, then minorities win by default. If they have to rebuild civilization, then again it becomes a much more complex question than just, "save the most people" based on all sorts of factors that OP did not expand on. Hence again why I said it's a bit of a ridiculous question because we are not given nearly enough information on the variables to solve for it.
You're forgetting that the U.S. does not mean the whole world. What about China? India? The entire continent of Africa? There are WAY more poor people than any other demographic. Do your research and your math again if you are telling us that the poor does not make up the steep majority.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 12, 2015, 01:41:30 AM
You're forgetting that the U.S. does not mean the whole world. What about China? India? The entire continent of Africa? There are WAY more poor people than any other demographic. Do your research and your math again if you are telling us that the poor does not make up the steep majority.
QuoteIf you had to choose one section of the USA to save which would you save?
Also; those countries/continents are also all "minority" by OP's definition.
Quote from: Shiranu on February 12, 2015, 01:45:59 AM
Also; those countries/continents are also all "minority" by OP's definition.
Oh. Missed that. Never mind lol
Sent from your mom.
Thank you for doing my homework for me. :winkle:
Seriously though, I'm going to add a new element of this hypothetical planet of ours; Would your response change if everything was indeed provided (Food, water, etc.) but had to live under an alien control to live as slaves? The aliens live by a dictatorship with advanced military technology, but little understanding of health and humans.
Again, the poorest of society in the USA should go since they are the ones who often struggle with necessities in the first place.
BTW, other countries get to live for some reason (This would get much more complex for homework than I would want it). The USA is a monopoly capital anyway.
Edit: I don't really have homework to get done, so after a bit more on the USA I'll go international :grin:
The poor, because in terms of numbers, theres a reason why the rich are called the 1%, and losing that few people compared to the many, many poor would be catastrophic
QuoteSeriously though, I'm going to add a new element of this hypothetical planet of ours; Would your response change if everything was indeed provided (Food, water, etc.) but had to live under an alien control to live as slaves? The aliens live by a dictatorship with advanced military technology, but little understanding of health and humans.
Sounds potentially worse than death.
Is there a progressive element to these aliens, an "abolitionist" faction if you will or are they homogeneous on their ideals? What type of slave labour are we talking about; farming and servants, or hard labour like construction, mining, slave soldiers, etc. (high risk jobs)? How dedicated to keeping us enslaved are they?
If they don't understand (or don't care) about our concept of health of other aspects of being human (particularly psychological), will humanity have the means to treat even the most basic of diseases? Will humans be allowed to interact with one another, or because of their strictness will humans be fully isolated to only communicating job-related messages to one another?
Will there be underground societies where people can express their humanity without the aliens knowing about it? How is the rest of the world responding to this; are they helping to smuggle survivours out... and why are the aliens ignoring them in the first place? Does life just "go on as normal" for the rest of the world, minus the US?
Quote from: Shiranu on February 12, 2015, 11:30:22 PM
Sounds potentially worse than death.
Is there a progressive element to these aliens, an "abolitionist" faction if you will or are they homogeneous on their ideals? What type of slave labour are we talking about; farming and servants, or hard labour like construction, mining, slave soldiers, etc. (high risk jobs)? How dedicated to keeping us enslaved are they?
If they don't understand (or don't care) about our concept of health of other aspects of being human (particularly psychological), will humanity have the means to treat even the most basic of diseases? Will humans be allowed to interact with one another, or because of their strictness will humans be fully isolated to only communicating job-related messages to one another?
Will there be underground societies where people can express their humanity without the aliens knowing about it? How is the rest of the world responding to this; are they helping to smuggle survivours out... and why are the aliens ignoring them in the first place? Does life just "go on as normal" for the rest of the world, minus the US?
They are varied in ideas, not just a hive mentality. (Did that make sense?)
They will work in various jobs, from servants in houses to construction. However, there is no nuclear plants to maintain, so that job's out the window.
The aliens are a lazy race that sleep most of the time, but each person is forced into areas where they are assigned. When tasks are not complete when the alien awakes, the aliens "Dispose" them.
"During work you may develop new medicines. Our herbs have varied effects, so try them out."
When the aliens are awake, they will send them into one out of several big bunkers. There they can talk and rest.
The rest of the world is rejoicing that the USA is dead. The aliens recognize that the USA is enslaving most of the world as a superpower of the world. The rest of the world prospers because of this....Just go with it, it's an amusing idea. I live in the USA so... yeah.
I guess the only problem with having the 1% wiped out is we wouldn't get anymore decent movies or games, it would just be cheaply made independent games and movies.
Saved from what? Sickness and death, or pain and suffering? Life itself, that perpetuates the former? I wouldn't save anyone, simple calculus of non existence, where there is no suffering or pain. Solitary