4 ms·

> Loaning money at 200% interest to vulnerable people is usury and should be illegal Stop with the patronizing. Any transaction between consenting parties (bac

> Loaning money at 200% interest to vulnerable people is usury and should be illegal Stop with the patronizing. Any transaction between consenting parties (backed by bankruptcy protection) should be allowed. We're all grown ups, let people make their own decisions. Setting upper limits on interest rates simply makes it so that high-risk borrowers are unable to access credit. This harms those borrowers more than anyone else, by limiting their opportunities. Regarding the Sacklers, they never prescribed any drugs to anyone. Doctors did. Why aren't we holding them responsible? It is doctors who have a duty of care to their patients, not pharmaceutical companies.

ClumsyPilot 2y ago
> Stop with the patronizing. Any transaction between consenting parties (backed by bankruptcy protection) should be allowed. Any? Can I sell my kidney? You are arguing an extreme minority opinion, consumer protection laws exist because it is not possible for an average consumer to understand all safety implications of vehicle design, house construction or a medical procedure.
- smabie 2y ago
  Unfortunately the people who make the laws don't understand the safety implications either. Letting people make their own choices, on net, probably is better than the alternative (and that included selling their own kidneys)
- thegrimmest 2y ago
  > Can I sell my kidney? I don't see why not. Me saying you can't would imply that I have a stronger claim to your own kidney than you do. This is a pretty hard claim to substantiate. The majority can be, and often is, wrong.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - ClumsyPilot 2y ago
    Interesting if I can sell my organs, Essential for survival, That I’m selling my life logically I should be able to sell my life in other ways. So I should be able to sell myself into slavery. If so, Then your idea of freedom creates more un-freedom. If not, Then you must have a logical reason why selling my liver and dying after that is okay but selling myself and living after that is not okay. And it cannot rely on the fact that it’s been hammered into us from a young age that slavery is bad. It has to be consistent and logical
    - thegrimmest 2y ago
      > So I should be able to sell myself into slavery. No, because that would imply that a person can own another person. Free, morally equal, people cannot own each other. It would also imply that present-you can obligate future-you in a way that fundamentally compromises future-you's freedom. Present-you can however terminate his own existence, since present-you has the strongest claim on it. Interactions must be consensual with the possibility to opt-out backed by bankruptcy protection. If you agree to donate your organs in return for compensation (presumably to your estate), but change your mind on the operating table, you should be perfectly entitled to do so. You may incur a bankruptcy protected obligation if you signed an agreement to that effect Consent should be the fundamental principle guiding all interactions. It also conveniently precludes slavery.
      - ClumsyPilot 2y ago
        > Interactions must be consensual with the possibility to opt-out backed by bankruptcy protection So student loans, as they are not discharge able in bankruptcy, are a form of debt bondage / slavery? Also in UK you have to pay to declare yourself bankrupt, which is also questionable. Also you can’t back-out of an organ sale, you are under Anastasia and then you are dead. The idea that it’s better than still being alive seems morally myopic to me.
        thegrimmest 2y ago
        Student loans are not dischargeable by bankruptcy because an education is not an asset that can be seized and sold during the process. There should be (and are) pretty strict limits on how your wages can be garnished to repay this debt. However I do agree that student loans are a form of debt bondage, and are questionably ethical for that reason. I would much prefer student loans not be given special protection. That would at least help us stop subsidizing educations that do not lead to productive careers. I would not be opposed to licensed professions (eg. doctors, lawyers) adopting policies that would revoke licenses for members defaulting on their student loans via bankruptcy. I don't imagine any intervention would be required for such policies to arise if the special status of student loans were to be reconsidered. > Also you can’t back-out of an organ sale Yes of course you can only back out up until the point you are rendered unconscious. You have to reconsider before then. The idea that "life" and "death" are somehow morally important states is what has been "hammered into us from a young age". Morality is a relationship between (free and equal) moral agents. The important concept is therefore agency and its expression via consent.
- chii 2y ago
  > it is not possible for an average consumer to understand all safety implications of vehicle design and that is why there is and must be independent regulation. The consumer doesn't need to understand vehicle design, they just need to understand safety _ratings_ that must be assessed via third parties (typically, a gov't institution). So why did the FDA fail to assess the drug properly?

ClumsyPilot 2y ago

> Stop with the patronizing. Any transaction between consenting parties (backed by bankruptcy protection) should be allowed. Any? Can I sell my kidney? You are arguing an extreme minority opinion, consumer protection laws exist because it is not possible for an average consumer to understand all safety implications of vehicle design, house construction or a medical procedure.

smabie 2y ago
Unfortunately the people who make the laws don't understand the safety implications either. Letting people make their own choices, on net, probably is better than the alternative (and that included selling their own kidneys)
thegrimmest 2y ago
> Can I sell my kidney? I don't see why not. Me saying you can't would imply that I have a stronger claim to your own kidney than you do. This is a pretty hard claim to substantiate. The majority can be, and often is, wrong.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ClumsyPilot 2y ago
  Interesting if I can sell my organs, Essential for survival, That I’m selling my life logically I should be able to sell my life in other ways. So I should be able to sell myself into slavery. If so, Then your idea of freedom creates more un-freedom. If not, Then you must have a logical reason why selling my liver and dying after that is okay but selling myself and living after that is not okay. And it cannot rely on the fact that it’s been hammered into us from a young age that slavery is bad. It has to be consistent and logical
  - thegrimmest 2y ago
    > So I should be able to sell myself into slavery. No, because that would imply that a person can own another person. Free, morally equal, people cannot own each other. It would also imply that present-you can obligate future-you in a way that fundamentally compromises future-you's freedom. Present-you can however terminate his own existence, since present-you has the strongest claim on it. Interactions must be consensual with the possibility to opt-out backed by bankruptcy protection. If you agree to donate your organs in return for compensation (presumably to your estate), but change your mind on the operating table, you should be perfectly entitled to do so. You may incur a bankruptcy protected obligation if you signed an agreement to that effect Consent should be the fundamental principle guiding all interactions. It also conveniently precludes slavery.
    - ClumsyPilot 2y ago
      > Interactions must be consensual with the possibility to opt-out backed by bankruptcy protection So student loans, as they are not discharge able in bankruptcy, are a form of debt bondage / slavery? Also in UK you have to pay to declare yourself bankrupt, which is also questionable. Also you can’t back-out of an organ sale, you are under Anastasia and then you are dead. The idea that it’s better than still being alive seems morally myopic to me.
      - thegrimmest 2y ago
        Student loans are not dischargeable by bankruptcy because an education is not an asset that can be seized and sold during the process. There should be (and are) pretty strict limits on how your wages can be garnished to repay this debt. However I do agree that student loans are a form of debt bondage, and are questionably ethical for that reason. I would much prefer student loans not be given special protection. That would at least help us stop subsidizing educations that do not lead to productive careers. I would not be opposed to licensed professions (eg. doctors, lawyers) adopting policies that would revoke licenses for members defaulting on their student loans via bankruptcy. I don't imagine any intervention would be required for such policies to arise if the special status of student loans were to be reconsidered. > Also you can’t back-out of an organ sale Yes of course you can only back out up until the point you are rendered unconscious. You have to reconsider before then. The idea that "life" and "death" are somehow morally important states is what has been "hammered into us from a young age". Morality is a relationship between (free and equal) moral agents. The important concept is therefore agency and its expression via consent.
chii 2y ago
> it is not possible for an average consumer to understand all safety implications of vehicle design and that is why there is and must be independent regulation. The consumer doesn't need to understand vehicle design, they just need to understand safety _ratings_ that must be assessed via third parties (typically, a gov't institution). So why did the FDA fail to assess the drug properly?