Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The Ratio: II

  1. 10, 10

    50.0%
  2. 9, 11

    10.0%
  3. 8, 12

    10.0%
  4. 7, 13

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. 6, 14

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  6. 5, 15

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  7. 4, 16

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  8. 3, 17

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  9. 2, 18

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  10. 1, 19

    30.0%
  1. Jul 7, 2005 #1
    The previous "ratio" was a little unclear and vague. Just what is "worth," after all? And Monique's objection about fractional options holds. So here is the new question:

    -------------


    If you have the ability, through distributing money and manpower, to save x lives from terrorists or y lives from other causes, how great does the ratio y:x need to be before you are undecided which group of lives to save?


    --------------

    For example, if you choose y = 15 and x = 5, then that means that if you are given the choice to save 6 lives from terrorism or 14 lives from other causes, you would save the 6 and let the 14 die, and that if you are given the choice to save 4 lives from terrorism or 16 lives from other causes, you would save the 16 and let the 4 die.

    "Other deaths" are deaths to cancer, heart disease, stroke, Alzheimer's, accidents, pneumonia, etc.

    Groups X and Y are equal other than their manners of death and their sizes.

    This is not merely an abstraction. This is the question that must be asked by all those who allocate funds on the national level.
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2005
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 7, 2005 #2

    brewnog

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You forgot to add a "this is completely stupid" option. If you had done so, I would have been interested to see the results.
     
  4. Jul 7, 2005 #3
    That was an abusive post, brewnog.
     
  5. Jul 7, 2005 #4
    you're still on this flame? get over it. i'm surprised your flame has yet to be deleted and you haven't had a reprmand.
     
  6. Jul 7, 2005 #5
    This is hardly a flame--it is a poll. The statements people choose to make in it reflect their own decisions and beliefs.

    Incidentally, why don't you vote in it? Where do you stand on this issue?
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2005
  7. Jul 7, 2005 #6
    This is also an abusive post. Shut the hell up with your stupid polls and comments, we all get your point, stop trying to shove your 'look at me, I'm so subversive and objective' comments down everyone's throat, it's insensitive and pointless and it's pissing a lot of people off.
     
  8. Jul 7, 2005 #7
    Actually, so far as I know only one person besides myself has voted in either of the polls. I think any point the polls are intended to demonstrate is far from made.

    I don't consider it ridiculous that one might choose something other than 10, 10. I can see how you could make a point for 9, 11 or even 8, 12, for example.

    I encourage people to vote. This poll is not a rhetorical question.
     
  9. Jul 7, 2005 #8

    brewnog

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I'm sorry, BicycleTree, for abusing you by calling your question stupid.

    I'm abstaining from this absurd poll in protest at your lack of sensitivity towards the issue, and would not be surprised for others to follow.
     
  10. Jul 7, 2005 #9

    brewnog

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Have you considered that the lack of response is due to peoples' general disgust at your comments, and lack of understanding, sensitivity and sympathy in the other thread?
     
  11. Jul 7, 2005 #10

    Tom Mattson

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Guys,

    The poll doesn't break any rules. Don't lose your cool about it. Just stop responding, and just watch them fall off the first page of GD by the end of the day.

    Better yet, instead of just watching, go and reply to the threads below this one. The faster you do that, the faster this one will sink. :biggrin:
     
  12. Jul 7, 2005 #11
    This poll breaks so many rules of common decency that I can't believe you haven't deleted it, the other one, and banned Bicycle Tree.

    Given what just happened this morning in London, this isn't the time to ask Brewnog or Icvotria to maintain their cool in the face of BT's poking of their wounds.

    -zoobyshoe
     
  13. Jul 7, 2005 #12

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    The thread really doesn't violate the guidelines and BT has already received a warning, which he announced previously.

    I think BT will soon learn that his opinions are not shared among the majority of the population and hopefully will understand why and learn something.

    I agree with Tom, let the thread die.
     
  14. Jul 7, 2005 #13
    i tried to kill it after tom's post, but it didn't work.
     
  15. Jul 7, 2005 #14
    I agree in a sense that the lives lost in the UK bombings are not that big of a deal number wise, as was 9/11. The whole thing is of course that these were most likely innocent people, or people who should not have died yet. Personally if you are obese or smoke, then you should not be surprised if you die at an early age. So I would have to go with a ratio (X:Y) of greater than 1:19+, meaning more than 19 Y for 1 X
     
  16. Jul 8, 2005 #15
    But he still chooses smoke over life.


    EDIT : This post was accidentally edited by me, while I was trying to respond to it. The above is obviously erroneous. The quted words belong to BT (not mattmns) and the response is mine (not BT's).
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 8, 2005
  17. Jul 8, 2005 #16

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    BT, I accidentally edited your post ( meant to reply to it but hit the wrong button, honest). I shall do my best to restore it...give me a minute.
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2005
  18. Jul 8, 2005 #17

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Okay, I've lost it, and can't restore it. I shall ask the admins if something can be done to retrieve it.

    I apologize for the screw up.
     
  19. Jul 8, 2005 #18
  20. Jul 8, 2005 #19
    Yes but it was his decision to smoke and become overweight. When someone smokes they know, or should know, the risk involved. When most people go to work, or to the train station, they usually do not expect to, and don't deserve to, die there.

    Yes there are exceptions to these: People with eating disorders, but they make up an extremely small percentage. Also, people who do work at a high risk job: police/firefighters/etc. However, the percent that these people make up of the total population is nowhere near the large majority of the other side, and people with high risk jobs know it.
     
  21. Jul 8, 2005 #20
    It's completely naive (if not in bad taste given current events) to discuss the negative impact of terrorism purely in terms of body counts.

    What is the impact of exogenous shocks to the economy like:

    1. US political leaders being kidnapped/assassinated?
    2. Ditto for US business leaders and other important figures?
    3. Bridges, tunnels, subways, skyscrapers, and other structures being blown up?
    4. Drinking water supplies being contaminated?
    5. Dirty bombs being set off in major US cities?
    6. A real nuke being set off in a major US city?
    7. Capital markets being roiled?
    8. Consumer confidence going down, creating a recessive impact?
    etc.

    If we were to set the antiterrorism budget at 0, there's a good chance some of the above would happen. What is the optimal value? Who the hell knows. I don't think anyone has a really good handle on the probability of the above events happening, let alone the cost/benefit tradeoff of spending more money. I'm sure they've done some tests though with fake terrorists trying to sneak through the border.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: The Ratio: II
  1. PF ratios (Replies: 6)

  2. The Ratio (Replies: 9)

  3. Oil II (Replies: 0)

  4. Home Improvement Part II (Replies: 22)

Loading...