> We might lose a few hundred million in the next few decades
> And we'll be fine.
Maybe we should then consider how to prevent hundreds of millions of deaths in the meantime? Like, the holocaust didn't lead to the extinction of humans as a whole, but there's a good amount of literature around what should've been done differently to prevent it in the first place, and that's an order of magnitude fewer deaths than what you're forecasting.
The left has no issue with building more supply. The issue they tend to have is when housing is commodified - the new units being built are for maximizing private profit, not number of people housed. (The former tends to lead to the breakup of established communities as they get priced out of their longtime homes). Lefties I know are incredibly excited about the prospect of massive construction projects to build more public and social housing.
I'm not denying that this is a type of voting system that biases towards certain outcomes. I'm saying that the bias it attempts to accomplish is not desirable as it gives more political power to people with weak opinions than people with strong opinions. I think a good voting system would allow people to express the strength of their feelings on the options, but the system shouldn't reward weak opinions over strong opinions and vice versa. Most traditional cardinal systems accomplish this just fine.
But tokens aren't votes. A person whose ideology aligns with 100 options has 10x the ability to influence the outcome of the election towards their preferred outcomes than someone whose ideology aligns with only one option.
What if we took this idea, applied it to wealth instead of votes, and called it something like "progressive marginal tax rates"? Seems like it would be a more effective way to fight zealotry than to attack the democratic principle of all people getting the same amount of votes.
It would be amazing if the US had an equivalent of the CBO for determining the impact of legislation on the annual total of labor-hours. Are there any estimates how many less labor-hours would be necessary if the US handled tax returns more efficiently (eg. sent out prefilled forms)?
That's fair, but still by virtue of being successful (in this particular context of success) you have a lot more money which offers you a lot more freedom to express yourself. Musk is practically free to do most anything he wants to do, but he chooses to stay in a position where he exposes himself to risk by not tempering himself.
I would blame the person, because the best case scenario of shooting an allegedly harmless gun into a crowd is equivalent in effect to the worst case scenario of doing nothing in the first place.
If you're unfamiliar with "absolute pitch" I suggest you look it up. Some people claim to have AP by way of sound->color synesthesia, but for most people with AP, synesthesia isn't required. AP definitely gives some edge over others in certain aspects of musical abilities.
> And we'll be fine.
Maybe we should then consider how to prevent hundreds of millions of deaths in the meantime? Like, the holocaust didn't lead to the extinction of humans as a whole, but there's a good amount of literature around what should've been done differently to prevent it in the first place, and that's an order of magnitude fewer deaths than what you're forecasting.