Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Grey___Goo_MH t1_j4aqxku wrote

Please no let the billionaires die off naturally


saiyaniam t1_j4b5bir wrote

One way to think of it, is the general public would have a lot less worry about their family getting old and dying, the freedom of mind that would give can not be overstated.

And most people get more knowledgeable with age, that can only help our current situation.

The billionaires or "elite" won't go away even without no death. It's always been this way, and nothing has changed in 100's of thousands of years. It's always been like this. We're apes we have hierarchy.


Living longer could change society for the better. A massive ammount of our issues stem from our short lives where you only get a small chance to get things right.


HeavensCriedBlood t1_j4b8b13 wrote

That’s assuming the general public would get access to this, which I’m not at all convinced that will be the case.


yowzees t1_j4bi4ff wrote

Companies want to make money, making this accessible to everyone will make them more of it


whiskers256 t1_j4ca6jk wrote

And not having their workforce be constantly sick would make Delta and Southwest a bunch of money, you don't see them lobbying AGAINST the plague, tho


[deleted] t1_j4ci7n7 wrote



AriChow t1_j4dawm9 wrote

with an analysis like that, your username certainly checks out


hunterseeker1 t1_j4d6tj5 wrote

Excellent point. Testosterone therapy can cost thousands a month and that’s just one super basic example. We can’t even price insulin in a way that makes it accessible to everyone, why on earth would anyone think a youth drug would cost lest than a few hundred thousand dollars per treatment?


BoxEngine t1_j4bs948 wrote

Also the potential to cause exponential population growth 😬


saiyaniam t1_j4bu4hy wrote

Yeah. Thats an issue.

I do think it's an issue that could be worked out before it becomes a problem tho.

Most of the population problem is resource management rather than space or waste. I think we're on the edge of sorting out a lot of the waste issues with renewable energy development and waste processing.


WaxMyButt t1_j4dhcsw wrote

Before it becomes a problem? The population is already a problem at current numbers.


Commotion t1_j4e3no4 wrote

It really isn’t. We have enough resources to sustain the population. They just aren’t distributed equitably.


Grey___Goo_MH t1_j4b85uf wrote

Ah yes all the better to get to 10 billion humans just too eat everything and pollute the world that much faster

Human immortality sounds peachy as the world burns

What a joke


saiyaniam t1_j4bbki6 wrote

And the other option is we carry on as normal making the same mistakes generation after generation. The only way we are getting out of our current ditch is with some radical change.

One of the main reasons governments pollute is because the population lets them. Old people often vote more. Unfortunately they are ofcourse old, so they vote like old people, rather than healthy people with a 100 years or more life experience


Grey___Goo_MH t1_j4bcn72 wrote

What a joke


saiyaniam t1_j4bd0bv wrote

It's not a joke, old people literally vote more than younger people. Thats why Young people often get fucked. Young people are too busy living in their youth to vote for their future.

This is not my opinion, it's what actually happens.

You get older people who are physically Young, then you shift the voting power.


Grey___Goo_MH t1_j4be364 wrote

So immortal old people will sway the vote too stop pollution

What a joke

Your high


saiyaniam t1_j4bfk0o wrote

Yes, because it's now in their lifetime, it's now in their best interests.

The reason old people vote conservative or mostly for their own security is because they are weak and frail. They vote in their best interests.

If they were 20 physically again they would vote for ideas and concepts that align with their physicality. They would no longer vote like a scared old frail person.

That brings the voting numbers more inline with people who are active in life, and actually have a future even if they were 100.


Grey___Goo_MH t1_j4bg6rq wrote

You believe some truly stupid hopium

Conservatives care about their wealth

In your vision of society no one dies and all these old people consume forever what absolute nonsense thinking they would realize the error of their ways and vote for a sustainable future… immortal old people is not sustainable

No they will vote in favor of money as all conservatives do pulling the ladder up on newer generations

Again what a massive joke


saiyaniam t1_j4bhbab wrote

They care about wealth because they have little health.


Rosieforthewin t1_j4c794k wrote

People don't accumulate massive weather holdings just to save up for later medical expenses or act responsibly. Not every single elderly person is frail. Look at the makeup of our own government, most of them are over 80. Humans hoard wealth because it is a lifelong obsession rooted in our basest instincts.


saiyaniam t1_j4ca9gq wrote

They acually do.

The drive to gain financial wealth for the majority is to compensate for age.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but we're not talking about individuals, we're talking about a mass of people.


conscsness t1_j4dlpc3 wrote

Please do your self a favour and read. Claiming that it has been like that and nothing has changed in 100’s of thousands of years is a very wrong claim.

Not all hunter gatherers expressed their social structure through hierarchy. Anarchy existed and was possible for thousands of years.


sperris t1_j4ebw8j wrote

How much slower would social change happen? If we still had much of the population from the 1800s. We’d possibly still have segregated schools. There would still be laws against miscegenation. Women voting? Not so sure.

Older people may be knowledgeable. But they bring an awful lot of baggage with them.


Snibes1 t1_j4efio0 wrote

This is something I hadn’t thought of. I was still trying to internalize the terror I felt when I thought of rich, powerful people getting early access to this stuff far before anyone else can afford to get it.


psychotronic_mess t1_j4em0ai wrote

It was a lot easier to “respect your elders” when they used to do the respectable thing and die at the age of 50.


BigZaddyZ3 t1_j4auh3q wrote

The money would just go to their heirs wouldn’t it?


[deleted] t1_j4cioya wrote



BigZaddyZ3 t1_j4ckoue wrote

Maybe, but this doesn’t seem to really matter much in practice tho. I think most people would agree on that neither Musk nor Trump have the business acumen of their father. But when you’re born that rich, you tend to fall upwards I guess.


ContinuousZ t1_j4dr421 wrote

>Musk nor Trump have the business acumen of their father.

you think the richest man alive has worst business acumen than his father who went broke in the 90s?

>But when you’re born that rich, you tend to fall upwards I guess.

Elon was born in a wealthy family but not even close to ultra rich that he can fall upwards like trump.

"In 1995, Musk, his brother Kimbal, and Greg Kouri founded Zip2.[49][50] Errol Musk provided them with $28,000 in funding. Compaq acquired Zip2 for $307 million in cash in February 1999,[56][57] and Musk received $22 million for his 7-percent share."

28,000 is not that much, can easily find an investor to fill that. I know parents who buy their highschool kids $50,000 cars and that's not even an investment it's depreciating asset. If Elon musk's dad was ultra rich, Elon would have way more than 7 percent share. You only give up shares for investors or to compensate employees when you lack funding/cash which his dad couldn't provide because he wasn't ultra rich.


an-invisible-hand t1_j4ioa3k wrote

Tbh it depends on how little the father started with. 28k isn’t much but compared to starting from 0 it’s practically an infinity apart.


Helasri t1_j4b2gbx wrote

And tax I guess ( not all countries of course )


milkman1218 t1_j4bpc5d wrote

Gates kids won't receive anything but I'm sure other rich people aren't like Bill


Coolhandhansen t1_j4eyoh9 wrote

Can always count on at least one snarky redditor to vent their frustrations about money and politics through 'low-key' comments like this lol.


Badtrainwreck t1_j4bct4c wrote

Trickle down economics, as everyone knows, is the perfect economic system 👀, but if billionaires never die the trickling will end.


Grey___Goo_MH t1_j4bdx0o wrote


What a joke response

What trickle? It aint raining no money


nicknameSerialNumber t1_j4bzdr4 wrote

Wishing death on rich people, reddit's favourite pastime!


esran7 t1_j4cj35e wrote

I'd usually agree with you, but people aging slower would definitely mess with processes that we rely on currently. Even just take a company structure. How do you employ new people, get fresh ideas, promote people if people suddenly don't retire as much.


Grey___Goo_MH t1_j4c06ga wrote

Death is a natural process

So yeah they should die eventually of natural causes just like everyone else


octorine t1_j4ciemi wrote

Dying of polio is also a natural process. I'm glad we didn't just let that run its course.


nicknameSerialNumber t1_j4c6gsi wrote

No one "should" die, tho people should have an option tho. IMO inaction and action are morally equivalent, witholding treatment is still basically killing people. Loads of natural things are bad, including deah


[deleted] t1_j4bedmt wrote



yowzees t1_j4biiue wrote

Almost like it's a big fucking problem that people care about


GhostofDownvotes t1_j4bj0o9 wrote

Only stupid people though. 😘


yowzees t1_j4bl53x wrote

Na man, the only stupid people are the ones with their head in the sand pretending that the growing inequality in the world isn't a huge fucking problem.