in my own amateur philosopher can't get to sleep what should i think about sort of thinking, i "solved" this by stating that when considering global outcomes yo

in my own amateur philosopher can't get to sleep what should i think about sort of thinking, i "solved" this by stating that when considering global outcomes you must use statistics, and that not just the sum of the distribution but also its means, variance, and (in particular) lower quartile also matters. So for me the repugnant conclusion fails because there's some point where it's unfair to the person least well off on the planet to add an additional person, as they will as a result fall below some bar for quality of life. i'm not a philosopher but i can't see the holes in this argument. it also applies to "eating meat allows cows to live so is good" -- well, no, because you have to dig into the details of what the distribution of welfare looks like for those cows.