Hacker News Reader

And a computer could be set and programmed to accept factors from youth, health, sexual fertility, intelligence, and a cross section of necessary skills. Of course it would be absolutely vital that our top government and military men be included to foster and impart the required principles of leadership and tradition. Naturally, they would breed prodigiously, eh? There would be much time, and little to do. But ah with the proper breeding techniques and a ratio of say, ten females to each male, I would guess that they could then work their way back to the present gross national product within say, twenty years.

>sexual fertility

You think our government respects people taking time to rear offspring? Of course not! They're not contributing their labour to our economy while being parents so we've structured the incentives to start families in such a way that they're driven back to work ASAP. Strictly speaking: having children is bad for our labour force and should be avoided.

This is the paradox of the child in modern society.

In terms of across the board consumption, there is nothing as productive as a modern child. Clothes, consumable goods, travel sports, recreations, hobbies, and diversions all lead straight to the consumption that is so vital to our economy.

And yet, with sicknesses, evening activities, and other problems, there is nothing that disrupts an individual worker's productivity as a child.

I'm not sure I am smart enough to come up with an equation, but, it's in there somewhere to tell us whether a child is a net positive or negative influence on our Economy than the other.

That's only true under the orthodox economics misconception that consumption (destruction) equals value ("broken windows" theory of value).

The best economics can only tell you how to convert value into different units. It can't tell you what value is.

> there is nothing that disrupts an individual worker's productivity as a child.

I have two kids and it isn't that bad at all. Very small loss of productivity for me except when I took parental leave for 3 months. I have grandparents that live nearby and they can help with sickness and other babysitting though.

I have a feeling a lot of people don’t have that kind of support network. I certainly don’t. If someone’s taking care of my kids, it’s me (or I’m paying them).

Just so happened that my family had to move for work, health, etc. I love raising my kids so it’s fine. It has been the equivalent of drop kicking my career against a brick wall occasionally, if I’m being honest.

My country quite literally needs every able bodied man or woman in the workforce. People with university degrees sitting at home raising kids is almost treason at this point considering it was the government who paid for their education.

Can I ask which country you’re in? That’s an interesting consideration when education is publicly funded like that. Where I am, it’s a bit of a both… Public money is a major factor up until post secondary school, then it’s part of the picture but there’s also substantial private tuition — especially for international students. I’m not sure anyone considers a duty to their country really, despite how much public money makes their education possible.

Does your country face a demographic cliff due to a less than replacement fertility rate?

It's this line of short-term thinking that has brought us to population collapse we are just starting to see.

The Common (un)Wealth is on a death spiral. CANZUK, muahs.

For all those taking this seriously, the parent comment was sarcastic and this comment is almost a direct quote from Dr. Strangelove about how to repopulate the Earth after a nuclear apocalypse.

This is one of those situation where I wish there was a good loan-word like "schadenfreude": The dilemma of choosing whether to explain a joke/reference for those who aren't getting it, versus playing along and extending it.

First the US has to solve the Mineshaft gap, doctor!

No fighting in the war room!

@babyshake, you mentioned the ratio of ten women to each man. Now, wouldn't that necessitate the abandonment of the so-called monogamous sexual relationship, I mean, as far as men were concerned?

Fully agree on it. Kids are another great source of profit center that have not been fully utilized. Also we need to explore if un-exportable olds can be mined for parts. That would another win-win.

The children yearn for the mines...

Mining is the new Minecraft, kids. Just with less lootboxes and more teeny-tiny coffins.

> I'm imagining a system where everyone in the society is brought in on a temporary basis

This is how the Gulf economies work. (Also the Vatican, but for different reasons and at a different age.)

We already have some of the most progressive euthanasia programs in the world. No need to get more creative than that.

To be fair, those euthanasia programs are only used when someone is either terminally ill or is a healthy-ish 31-year-old who can’t afford housing.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/assisted-s...

The person in the article applied because of health problems.

>Denise said she hasn’t cancelled her MAID application because she still suffers from painful chronic health problems that haven’t been properly handled.

She's not going around doing cartwheels, but in a civilized country she wouldn't be applying for medically assisted dying. Her health problems are, at least arguably, manageable in fairly straightforward ways via a rational medical system.

She'll never have healthy-millionaire quality of life, but this isn't what medically-assisted dying is meant for.

In this case what she recognized as the treatment is managed by something other than the medical system. I would assume this is the same in other places, unless doctors in Europe can write prescriptions for apartments.

Holy shit. Financial reasons should not be a factor in choosing to end one's life. WTF Canada?

"Canada prepares to expand its euthanasia law to include those with mental illness"

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64004329

At least in Canada they won't be milking the estate for the cost of the euthanasia.

Don't forget the veterans who've asked for ramps.

"Canada Veteran Affair's department: Finishing what the enemy started!"

But do you have Carousel?

Care for a person dying of Al's and tell me how progressive our Euthanasia program is.

This has nothing to do with the article.

> dying of Al's

Given the current zeitgeist, I feel there's only a 70% chance that's an autocorrupt of Alzheimer's.

Or did, until I saw the alternative font in the comment box and realised that's a lowercase L not a capital i.

My mum died of that. Technically liver or kidney failure from dehydration, but that in turn was from refusing food in the care home and not having the awareness to get liquids separately.

I think it was worse for us than it was for her, overall, though there were a few occasions where her self-awareness of the nature of her condition caused her unhappiness.

More likely that it's a autocorrupt of ALS.

Indeed it was.

Happy we are making progress with that and other degenerative diseases. I just wish we all had the opportunity to choose how our life ends, not just for our own suffering but also for those that suffer for us.

It's the conspiracy theory du jour now that these people can't complain about vaccines anymore, don't bother engaging with it

There is a far gap between the conservatives fixated on vaccines and the people pointing out that they have a physical handicap and otherwise want to live but are not being given disability benefits to pay for rent and food and feel forced into signing up to be euthanized.

Nobody is being Forced into Euthanasia. I sincerely hope you and no one close to you ever has to consider this as an option, but if they did should they not have the dignity to choose?

I'm not disagreeing that there's problems to be solved around how to support our sick and disabled.

But the recent outrage over it is definitely an overreaction, and is being brought up by the same people that were complaining about vaccines and masks 2 years ago.

I think, in your response of sarcasm you are brushing over a lot of valid points the OC is making.

They're not saying that we should get rid of natural-born folks. They're just saying that often times the people who most want their nation to not allow other folks in, don't appreciate all of the things that those other folks provide for them. i.e. Immigration is subsidizing a lot of the things you probably enjoy about your life, and we should probably be considering it more as a blessing than a curse.

Nobody is trying to replace you. They're just trying to help you, and provide a better opportunity for their children once they've bought into the same system your parents bought into.

> Nobody is trying to replace you.

I'm trying to replace me! Humans are first and foremost economic units. Fungible and replaceable. There's absolutely no reason to prefer any one human over another -- except for their ability to produce economic output.

Society is a vain illusion for the true foundation of civilization -- economic produce. Things like care for the elderly or education of children only exist to maximize the future labor of the young and to deceive the middle-aged. We should cut these vestiges from our society and embrace a new future where only the economically gifted are permitted to remain.

I know at first this is hard to accept but its only through this radical, but sensible, plan that every citizen in Canada will be able to afford a Netflix account with password sharing.

There's a meaningful point at which I think humans are going to have a reckoning. I think the cause of that reckoning will probably be Climate Change, but maybe I'm wrong. Regardless, we don't currently see ourselves as the same as everyone else on this planet. We're too stuck on competition and being better than everyone else that we don't realize the only way forward is gonna be to accept people for who they are. There are ways to be selfish that don't mean making everything worse for everyone else. We need to have a symbiotic relationship with ourselves that's at least commensalist, and ideally mutualist. The parasitism that has been our goto for all of human existence isn't going to cut it.

edit: I hope we can make it there in time.

Unfortunately, the current system needs to be irreparably broken before the sociopaths in charge even consider empathy.

/s

This type of immigration is strictly for economic and quality of life purposes.

It’s pretty bonkers to say people who immigrate to the US on H1-B visas are doing so out of an altruistic desire to “help” anybody but themselves and their families (not that there’s anything wrong with that.)

People seem to still prefer immigrating to the United States over Canada even though Canada’s immigration system is far more reasonable. They’re trying to scoop people up with policies like this but I think it’s worth taking a step back and reflecting on why that is. I think a big part of it is Canada’s cost of living especially wrt housing is even worse than the US’s and salaries are lower.

And I say this as an expat currently living in Mexico with a fair amount of Americans and Canadians. So this isn’t a pro United States comment, it’s just a reality check. The US has draconian immigration rules and hoops to jump through… but it seems like the demand is such that they can get away with it.

> Nobody is trying to replace you. They're just trying to help you

LOL

Yeah, I knew there'd be someone on here still terrified immigrants are trying to replace them. IDK what TF that even means, but I can promise you no one thinks that if they just remove all of the existing Canadians that they're somehow, ship of Theseus-style, going to have a brand new Canada.

And while they may not explicitly be trying to help you, their goals are such that "helping Canada helps themselves." Way more than you give them credit for. But that's okay, please join the fear-mongering of "the great replacement."

Even the UN is fear mongering about "the great replacement".

https://press.un.org/en/2000/20000317.dev2234.doc.html

I can't be the only one who had to read this a few times before I realized it was sarcasm...

On HN?

It's the Gig-economy model of citizenship and social welfare and it'll take Canada by storm

It's precisely the immigrants who come to a country like Canada, education already completed who pay for the investments for others. An adult Indian programmer costs the Canadian taxpayer nothing but contributes immense amounts, and is even more likely to start a business than a native.

This notion that Bob from Podunk rural Canada with an IQ of 80 competes with an immigrant with a PhD makes no sense. The latter finances the welfare of the former. You need to create wealth first before you can redistribute it and keeping the strongest wealth creators out of the country is one of the stupidest damage you can inflict on yourself.

This sarcasm drenched replacement fantasy is the exact opposite of reality. Only if you have a strong economy you can continue to maintain public welfare.

> and is even more likely to start a business than a native.

That's too far fetched. They're more likely to start a company in their own country than Canada.

That's incorrect, Canada has literally published data on the question:

"Garnett Picot and Yuri Ostrovsky revealed based on data from 2016 that immigrants are 41.7 per cent more likely than Canadians who were born in Canada to either start a business or be self-employed.[...]Leaving aside self-employment, immigrants were found to be 30 per cent more likely to own a privately-incorporated business that provided jobs for others than were native-born Canadians."

And maybe even more important, from US data:

"Immigrants have started more than half (319 of 582, or 55 per cent) of America’s start-up companies valued at $1 billion or more,"

IIRC among AI related startups the number of immigrant founders or co-founders is even close to two-thirds. Attracting top tier human capital is pretty much North America's greatest advantage.

https://www.immigration.ca/immigrants-start-more-businesses-...

I'm referring to Indian Programmer who came to Canada to start their own company to stay with the context.

Not "in general, Immigrants formed corp more than Canadians born in Canada".

US is different. Cost of business in Canada is high due to red-tapes and lower RoI than US (plus less Capital to go around).

The romanticization of Indian programmers creating a successful tech company in Canada (just like they did in US) is just that for now, romanticization.

Indian, specifically Punjabis, done better as Entrepreneur in non-tech in Canada.

Hence, far fetched.

You kid, but it’s a valid argument. I’ve known a good few Canadians over the years who went down to the U.S. for work experience and some have even lost their PRs because of some newer policy requiring that they spend half their time in Canada. It’s something that really backfired hard. I’m actually really sad and disappointed for Canada that it is like this. Historically it’s much easier to leave the country than enter it if you’re a skilled person.

This is a big deal. Back in the early 2010s, software developers moving to SF pretty much willed into existence the tech industry up there. Before then, companies would start in SF and move down to the valley. If skilled folks want to move to your area, it can be a boon, and if I’m not mistaken, Canadian tax policy is better suited to redistribute the gains from that than U.S. tax policy.

> Canadian tax policy is better suited to redistribute the gains from that than U.S. tax policy

Nothing attracts profitable businesses and high earning individuals more than a tax policy optimized to redistribute those gains.

That may be so but the policy doesn’t have to make it worse.

> some have even lost their PRs because of some newer policy requiring that they spend half their time in Canada.

Not a new policy. Gotta put in your time as a PR to qualify for a citizenship (that mostly can’t be taken away from you ever).

It anything, the physical presence requirements have been diluted because politicians realize they’re more likely to get your vote if they have you citizenship.

Who was it that wrote "A Modest Proposal", Jonathan Swift?

Potato prices have been very high this year.

And also, Swift's was always a very s(ali|oyl)ent Green proposal is appropriate to Make Room! Make Room!

As long as you do a land acknowledgement first, I agree this policy would indeed be optimal.

A modest proposal. The back-ronym for it should be S.W.I.F.T.

This works really well places like Saudi Arabia and UAE.

Canada Inc.

Favorite comment all year.

So the point your making is that the government shouldn't concern itself with increasing the number of citizens that are net contributors to the system?

Who does a government serve? Its citizens, or its brand / self?

Citizenship was the world's first labor union.

Inherited citizenship is nepotism.

People love their children (genes).

A modest proposal indeed!

How can you export the people who are a burden? You can’t leave them stateless.

I have two words for you. Tundra. City. That's right; we did it. We took the Canada you love and made it _more_ Canada. Up to _twice_ as cold as the previous generation of cities. More that _six_ times as remote. No other competitor is offering this kind of performance. I want to be clear this is a _generational_ leap over the competition. We're at least five years ahead of other major countries. And, boy, you better believe we patented it!

I'm picturing a rail line that just goes north, and in every town along the way the people are a few years older than the last. You can still live wherever you want, but the subsidies for your age group make it a sweet deal to keep moving down the line toward Centenarian City. Known for its large glue factory and landfills.

This already exists, and is the CN rail line to Hay River. The young folk eventually float down to Edmonton or Calgary.

Finally my patent for cowcatchers that work inside the train will pay off!

Sounds a lot like Snowpiercer.

> How can you export the people who are a burden? You can’t leave them stateless.

Sure you can. The only reason nations avoid allowing people to become stateless is an appreciation of the burden that places on those people. But if we're pursuing a modest proposal where the government shifts its perspective to focus on "realize[ing] higher economic utility for" itself, that becomes less a concern.

At the very minimum you can "export" those low-economic-utility people by sticking them them on a barge and towing it to well into international waters where the currents will take it away (and if you're a nice government, just outside the territorial waters of some other country).

As you know, its impossible to prove a negative, so who's to say they won't wash ashore a luxurious beach resort where they will be welcomed with daiquiris and sexual favors?! I say give them this once in a lifetime chance!

I hear Britain is taking all types and putting them up in 4 star hotels, as long as you land on a British beach by a boat. Just chuck em all that way, problem solved.

I've got an even better idea.

"A young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee, or a ragout."

In fact, it’s a well used strategy to use buses or other types of transportation to move undesirable people out of your area into a different area.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/...

Yeah but that works because New York, Chicago, California, and Texas are all the same country.

If you kick out people you don't like and expect them to go to different countries it will end similar to those migrant boats in the Mediterranean.

The link literally shows people sent to multiple different countries

We do have those Starlight Tours ...

He's being sarcastic.

False

I wholeheartedly appreciate your response.

Make no mistake, I'm a hippie leftist even by Canadian standards. My argument is one I like to use with more right wing friend who oppose immigration.

What about your hippie leftist friends who are begging for the government to pause or slow immigration (other than for refugees) right now?

The response would be My heart goes out for ... because when heart goes out, no further action or difficult decision is required.

Ooh. Secular "Thoughts and Prayers". I love it!

This is an elite comment

> B) export those people who are a burden on our society (children, the elderly, the sick, people who enjoy EDM, you get it).

This is so ridiculous! Export where?? Isn't it what Hitler tried to do?

Export to Britain. They're the kings subjects right? Let ol Charlie look after em out he's got enough cash.