3 ms·
in response to your latest comment, since i cant respond to it directly- even if it costs the same per day to live to 85 as it does to 25, you could decide that
by the_cat_kittles 13y ago
in response to your latest comment, since i cant respond to it directly- even if it costs the same per day to live to 85 as it does to 25, you could decide that instead of living those last 10 years, you spend that money during your first 75
- sliverstorm 13y agoYes. I understand. It is not a complicated argument you are trying to make. The thing is your parent was attempting to establish an INARGUABLE BASELINE below which you CANNOT GO. Not "should not". Not "oh you'll have worse quality of life if you go below" and "oh but wouldn't you be happier if you went above". CANNOT GO BELOW. The purpose of this baseline being, to establish that there is SOME AMOUNT OF RESOURCES that MUST be consumed to sustain life. And, as we know, SOME EFFORT must be expended to secure these resources thus NON-ZERO EFFORT is required to sustain EACH human life. That was the point. So I fail to see what your quality of life discussion has to do with anything.