Hacker News Reader

Comment by eggpy | Hacker News Reader

Let's start here: > In 2013, 138.3 million taxpayers reported earning $9.03 trillion in adjusted gross income and paid $1.23 trillion in income taxes. [0]

Assuming the taxes collected this year are even remotely similar, and assuming this grant came 100% from income tax, and assuming you pay an equal amount in taxes as everyone else, this grant cost you (960000/1.23 trillion)=1/1281250 of the taxes you paid. I know that's a lot of assumptions, but even if that calculation is off by several orders of magnitude, the tax burden is pretty darn small. If you earned $100,000 last year you paid roughly 8 cents for this. It could open up doors to a lot of interesting research. Maybe nothing will come of it. I'd pay 8 cents to find out though.

Also, who says this is "the elite" wanting to live forever and us schlubs footing the bill?

[0] https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-...

View on HN

> Also, who says this is "the elite" wanting to live forever and us schlubs footing the bill?

I think it's reasonable to think that's someone that is ready to put aside $10,000 in the eventually of an accident leading to coma for the small odds that future people will be able and willing to give him a new body is probably part of the elite.

True, but the research involved could be applicable to a lot more situations that aren't specifically this. Peering deeper into the brain than currently possible sounds pretty useful.

> Also, who says this is "the elite" wanting to live forever and us schlubs footing the bill?

...because it will be the rich who can afford such an exclusive treatment.

Additionally, it's just straight up irrational--quantity of life does not improve quality. It is a better decision to spend your money on your quality of life. Why even waste 8 cents on this? Peter Thiel can pay for all the young blood he wants, so long as it ain't my tax payer money.

I get your hesitation, but for me the real value is in this sentence:

> It has also won a $960,000 federal grant from the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health for “whole-brain nanoscale preservation and imaging,” the text of which foresees a “commercial opportunity in offering brain preservation” for purposes including drug research.

The rich can do what they want, invest in the businesses they want, and no I don't necessarily want my tax money used for those purposes. But this research sounds like it has potential to be really valuable to humanity as a whole, commercial applications notwithstanding. And that's how science in this country works. Either it's funded by a company like Pfizer where it's locked behind gilded doors or it's funded by taxes and carried out at a university where it's open for all to look at, and given those options I know my preference.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com