thisisbad

I'm not a teen (22yo) and I've deleted all my social media presence years ago. Now, I only use text to schedule in person meetings. I am less stressed, more productive and healthier.

Is the photo below the future? Zuckerberg zombies living in a virtual Plato's Cave.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/02/22/16/3173A83C0000057...

Psychopaths are very useful. Surgeons, butchers, salespeople etc. are more likely to be psychopaths.

You don't want a surgeon to have empathy when he's cutting your leg off.

You don't want a butcher to have empathy for animals.

You don't want a salesperson to care about rejections.

You don't want a CEO to be reluctant about laying people off.

There's a good explanation on reddit [1] about this.

https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/4u2jd4/china_wil...

That's false, since money is a recent invention. It's like saying "Cats need Whiskas to live".

Even if it were true, so what? If someone needs money to live, how does that imply that money should be taken from those who have it and be given to those who don't?

You might need positive attention to feel good about yourself (since you're ugly). Does that mean that the attention beautiful people receive should be directed towards ugly people (by mutilating beautiful people)?

  There's no need to make the Harrison Bergeron argument

If there is no need, then why are you writing about inheritance (paying someone who made you happy) in a negative way? Why are you focusing on money, but not on beauty, fame, intelligence etc. ?

  It all comes down to: > Why would wealthy people have an obligation to help poor people?

It doesn't.

It also comes down to:

> Why would beautiful people have an obligation to help ugly people?

Nobody is making the argument that beautiful people should mutilate themselves to make ugly people look better in comparison, right? But, why not? Beauty, wealth, fame, intelligence etc. are all examples of privilege. So, why focus on money? Why does it all come down to money?

  Well, this is a whole question of what a "society" is and the nature of mutual obligation towards both other members of our society and other humans in general.

What is your answer to that and why should I accept it? It seems that society is different things to different people. If you're envious and bitter, then society is about helping losers. If you're healthy and wealthy, then society is about stability.

  If one day I should find you collapsed in the street, remind me that we don't have any obligations towards each other.

Of course we don't. You might help someone because it makes you feel good or your social status will increase (which in turn makes you feel good). Not because of some vague, abstract concept like obligation/duty that you have towards members of homo sapiens species.

  There's a difference between leaving a modest family house/farm to your kids versus someone inheriting a business empire worth millions.

What difference? Inheritance = payment for providing happiness and support in life. The amount can be whatever you want - millions, billions or nothing at all.

If someone has a business worth millions and decides to leave it to his wife or children, then that would be a financial compensation for making his life better. It's up to them to decide what to do with the money they've made.

  It's not so much the giving that's objected to as the receiving.

Who is objecting to other people receiving money from someone who wants to give it to them voluntarily? It's crazy what envy does to people.

Beautiful people receive more positive attention and get compliments all the time. Should they mutilate themselves, so they don't receive attention anymore?

  Especially when there are other children suffering the effects of poverty in childhood that will give them lifelong disadvantages.

So what? Why would wealthy people have an obligation to help poor people? There are ugly people, which doesn't mean beautiful people should mutilate themselves and make previously ugly people look better in comparison.

Good looking, tall people have literally won the genetic lottery without trying.

Look at inheritance as a payment for providing happiness and support. If a wealthy man has a wife that makes him happy and supports him, then why would it be a problem if he leaves her 50% of his wealth?

Children, especially your own, are a great source of happiness and motivation. Some people work mainly to leave wealth to their children and other family members - it's their main motivation.

I don't understand people who have problems with other people giving their money to those they love (children, spouse, relatives, friends etc.).

It's kinda funny - people who are for forced redistribution at a gunpoint, want to give people money just for existing. But, if someone wants to give their own children money for existing and making them happy, then it's a problem.

It is not in their national interest to have activities of Chinese citizens controlled by foreign companies. They can create their own services, which will serve a huge domestic market, keep the wealth in the country and support domestic economy.

It's a bad decision. It's similar to companies deciding to outsource their communication to other parties (e.g. Slack) that can be hacked [1] and you can be banned at any moment.

Don't outsource your infrastructure to 3rd parties (especially competitors) just to save few dollars in the short term. Have control of your assets.

  [1] https://techcrunch.com/2015/03/27/slack-got-hacked/

  Except that Musk currently only has two...

Batista had one EBX Group and the ones mentioned were subsidiaries.

  ...both are doing quite well and delivering on their promises

They are not profitable, which means they are not doing well.

  ...he's landing rockets on ships and selling tens of thousands of enormously expensive cars per year.

Batista's companies were drilling for oil, doing construction, shipping and many other things.

Corporate income taxes should be eliminated. Instead of focusing on building a company and good products, companies have to dedicate resources to figure out how to escape the taxation.

Taxation should be done when profit is distributed to shareholders (similar to Estonia). There is also unfair double taxation - paying taxes after company pays them.