Yes sir.
Would You Shoot An Innocent Person For A Billion Dollars?
" @rflx: Pretty sure you underestimate greed. We're talking a billion dollars here. I think most saying no and taking the high road would do it given the chance. Look at the world around you. Dog eat dog. People shit on other people all the time for less than a billion dollars. And if you're not looking out for yourself you'll probably get walked all over. So I certainly would. I'm not a religious guy, I don't believe I'm going to be judged for my actions in another life and I'm not a beliver of Karma and all that nonsense either. I think i have one life and then that's it so make the most of it. I also think if the tables where turned the guy would shoot me. So yes I'll shoot him and I'll take the money. "One thing is to sit here and contemplate the situation and try to apply reason to the action. It is a whole other thing to actually be in such a situation. That's my point. And I stand by my guesstimate that most of the people who think they would do it if they were in that situation, wouldn't be able to do it.
" @crusader8463 said:And why is that? Everyone does bad things at some point in their life. The only difference is how bad what they did was.That is a pretty retarded point of view. "" Beside the fact that no one is truly innocent,
I'm not sure. I voted yes, because well...a billion dollars. I would never have money problems again and I could do a lot of good with that money.
Would I actually do it though? It depends. If it's a family member then no, if I knew the person then probably not, is the person going to live if I say no? If so then I might say no.
If the person is someone I have never met then I'd want to make sure I got the money. This kind of deal seems very much like "Hahaha, you killed him! Now I will kill YOU!" or "You killed him! Money? What money?". Then I have to know whether or not the person will be blind-folded. I'm not sure I could kill someone if they were staring me straight in the eyes.
If I didn't know them, I was guaranteed the money, and they were blind-folded then I would probably kill them. I would replay that moment over and over again for the rest of my days...but a billion? I'd probably do it.
Um, no." @mutha3 said:
And why is that? Everyone does bad things at some point in their life. The only difference is how bad what they did was." @crusader8463 said:
That is a pretty retarded point of view. "" Beside the fact that no one is truly innocent,
Unless you consider something as banal as bragging to your friends about a fish you caught or lying to be''bad things'' . Which by itself is pretty retarded.
Good point." As we all know from the Twilight Zone, you would end up being the innocent person. "
Going with the assumption that this is not the case, however...
...yes. Sorry, but a billion dollars can be used to save quite a few other lives. One person's life for many others? Sure.
What? I never said I'd be using the billion dollars for myself.
No. That's horrible. I'd rather burn the money and save a life than shoot and kill a person to get it. It's terrible that more people than less here would do it. Most people lead a very sad life -shakes head-. Nowww, you said just shoot. I'll shoot em' sure, if I don't kill them. Thanks for not elaborating on what you really meant.
Seeing all the weak willed humanists trying to the moral high ground in this thread is embarrassing.
I don't need a billion dollars, I am Dick_Viper.
Being Dick_Viper is like being a billionaire, as I posse such great powers and have this legacy of being a internet legend.
Don't mess with the Viper.
lol this is an interesting poll, i wonder if this high percentage is only here because this is a gaming forum, like would another kind have different results?
" No. That's horrible. I'd rather burn the money and save a life than shoot and kill a person to get it. It's terrible that more people than less here would do it. Most people lead a very sad life -shakes head-. Nowww, you said just shoot. I'll shoot em' sure, if I don't kill them. Thanks for not elaborating on what you really meant. "This is exactly my opinion.
For no money in the world would I actually kill somebody.
" @rflx: Pretty sure you underestimate greed. We're talking a billion dollars here. I think most saying no and taking the high road would do it given the chance. Look at the world around you. Dog eat dog. People shit on other people all the time for less than a billion dollars. And if you're not looking out for yourself you'll probably get walked all over. So I certainly would. I'm not a religious guy, I don't believe I'm going to be judged for my actions in another life and I'm not a beliver of Karma and all that nonsense either. I think i have one life and then that's it so make the most of it. I also think if the tables where turned the guy would shoot me. So yes I'll shoot him and I'll take the money. "If everybody thought like you the world would be a crappy place.
" @HandsomeDead said:It really isn't." Seeing all the weak willed humanists trying to the moral high ground in this thread is embarrassing. "Better than being a greed-fueled sociopath. "
Just to put things into a little bit of perspective, the GDP of Madagascar is 9.46 Billion and consists of a population of over 19 million.
By killing this person and supplementing it evenly into this country, you could improve the standard of living by more than 10%. How many lives do you think that would save, when people couldn't afford food or medicine or proper housing. If you posted fliers in an impoverished country with the man's face that needed to be killed, the man who came back with his head and a billion dollars for his country would be heralded as a hero, not a murderer.
You might say it's naive that I would kill for a billion dollars and am under the impression that the money would justify the death, but maybe that's because you have food on your table and a roof over your head.
" @HandsomeDead: So having a conscience is considered weak now? Deciding against ending a person's life is "weak?" I think you need to reconsider your definition of weak. "If conscience is putting the life of someone you know nothing about ahead of making your own life better, then yeah, it's weak because you're taking the easy way out.
" Just to put things into a little bit of perspective, the GDP of Madagascar is 9.46 Billion and consists of a population of over 19 million. By killing this person and supplementing it evenly into this country, you could improve the standard of living by more than 10%. How many lives do you think that would save, when people couldn't afford food or medicine or proper housing. If you posted fliers in an impoverished country with the man's face that needed to be killed, the man who came back with his head and a billion dollars for his country would be heralded as a hero, not a murderer. You might say it's naive that I would kill for a billion dollars and am under the impression that the money would justify the death, but maybe that's because you have food on your table and a roof over your head. "All that would do is temporarily inflate their purchasing power, only to have it slip back. If the billion dollars are not actually met by any increase in productivity, then there is no net gain, just more paper to go around.
" @Rockdalf said:But my point still stands (which was not addressed) that a billion dollars could be used to save hundreds of thousands of lives. Just not by throwing it in the streets out of the back of a golf cart." Just to put things into a little bit of perspective, the GDP of Madagascar is 9.46 Billion and consists of a population of over 19 million. By killing this person and supplementing it evenly into this country, you could improve the standard of living by more than 10%. How many lives do you think that would save, when people couldn't afford food or medicine or proper housing. If you posted fliers in an impoverished country with the man's face that needed to be killed, the man who came back with his head and a billion dollars for his country would be heralded as a hero, not a murderer. You might say it's naive that I would kill for a billion dollars and am under the impression that the money would justify the death, but maybe that's because you have food on your table and a roof over your head. "All that would do is temporarily inflate their purchasing power, only to have it slip back. If the billion dollars are not actually met by any increase in productivity, then there is no net gain, just more paper to go around. "
" @HandsomeDead: You aren't by any chance Andrew Ryan are you? In all seriousness, there is absolutely no justification for saying yes. Money doesn't last forever, but the memory of what you have done does. I wont break out any religious explanations either because the general internet population are proud atheists, but I think ANYONE who would actually do it deserves the worst most torturous eternal damnation possible. "By not taking this money and using it you are damning the lives of people you could've saved. The homeless man you saw on the street froze to death because you didn't have the money to help him.
Actually, it was addressed. A temporary lift in purchasing power of (foreign) goods will not save hundreds of thousands of lives in Madagascar. Ultimately a dollar is nothing other than a promissory note to pay taxes, it does not convey any value unless backed by a commensurate increase in productivity. Giving a country more paper to circulate will not necessarily increase anyone's productivity, at least not in the endeavours that will save imperiled human life. Don't believe me? Look at your country's employment numbers as cheap credit becomes more and more widely available with each passing day." @Suicrat said:
" @Rockdalf said:But my point still stands (which was not addressed) that a billion dollars could be used to save hundreds of thousands of lives. Just not by throwing it in the streets out of the back of a golf cart. "" Just to put things into a little bit of perspective, the GDP of Madagascar is 9.46 Billion and consists of a population of over 19 million. By killing this person and supplementing it evenly into this country, you could improve the standard of living by more than 10%. How many lives do you think that would save, when people couldn't afford food or medicine or proper housing. If you posted fliers in an impoverished country with the man's face that needed to be killed, the man who came back with his head and a billion dollars for his country would be heralded as a hero, not a murderer. You might say it's naive that I would kill for a billion dollars and am under the impression that the money would justify the death, but maybe that's because you have food on your table and a roof over your head. "All that would do is temporarily inflate their purchasing power, only to have it slip back. If the billion dollars are not actually met by any increase in productivity, then there is no net gain, just more paper to go around. "
The people who answer yes and are arguing 'for the greater good' are doing nothing more than committing the broken window fallacy.
And hundreds of years later, the other tribe that honours the other guy who was killed for the other billion dollars decides to wage holy war on your tribe for martyring the wrong man for the wrong billion dollars." Kill one life to save hundreds or maybe thousands? I'd be wrecked to make such a difficult choice, but obviously I'd do what's best for the majority of people. Besides, the fallen one could be seen as a savior to people. "
I want someone to show how taking a billion paper dollars (which would have been circulated into the economy some other way, regardless. Even if the 'rightful' owner of it was robbed) would actually make the world a better place than keeping this innocent person alive to produce, trade, and share the wealth he'd be capable of producing. Remember folks, we're not talking about koku or some other food-based currency; we're talking about fiat currency which is only backed by the use of force, and not any valuable commodity or finished product.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment