2 ms·
It's not that simple. You have to look at net cost and benefit. There are plenty of stimulant free paths in life that also cause cardiovascular damage, lack of
by htss2013 3y ago
It's not that simple. You have to look at net cost and benefit. There are plenty of stimulant free paths in life that also cause cardiovascular damage, lack of sleep and 50 other problems.
The issue with living in a society where money so closely correlates with health is that anything bad for your money tends to also be bad for health.
- operatingthetan 3y ago>There are plenty of stimulant free paths in life that also cause cardiovascular damage, lack of sleep and 50 other problems. You're pretty close to whataboutism here... I suppose we could all shrug and go "everything does everything" and get lost in over-generalization, but that doesn't lead to any sort of productive conversational outcome.
- htss2013 3y agoIt's not whataboutism to point out that in the USA, the default mode of life is bad for your health. I dont mean that in the "everything causes cancer" big unknown sense. I mean that in quantifiable sense that allows you to weigh net benefits. Eg, prolonged stress is bad for your cardiovascular system and lowers life expectancy by quantifiable amounts. Lack of money causes prolonged stress. So if a stimulant is what allows you to be productive enough to have ample money, you're arguably better off, because of that and the multitude of other health benefits from having money.