[quote]Sloth wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Who becomes ‘immortal’ would have to be tightly regulated. Where’s the wisdom in tripling the life span of lines of generationally goverment dependent, out of wedlock/broken hom birthing, violent crime ridden, tax consumers? Only the high in IQ and ambition, and obviously wealth, would be eligible. It would relieve the ever increasing burden of entitlement beneficiaries and public service users if the tax producers would just stop dying, therefore, build up in numbers.
Well, the good thing is that even if everyone were given lasting life only the elite would be around long enough to make a difference.
I doubt immortals would allow themselves to become slaves of the statists for an eternity and once those slugs are kicked off the teat of government largess they would be forced to fend for themselves thus the problem takes care of it self – natural selection.
Nope. Because the masses of immortal dependents, who out reproduce you, and whose offspring are more likely to be dependents too, have the power of the vote.
Edit: And their government provided healthcare will pay for treatments against the “aging sickness.”[/quote]
Voting isn’t going to mean anything by time this happens. Trust me, the true elites will not allow themselves to become slaves for an eternity.
Voting isn’t going to mean anything by time this happens. Trust me, the true elites will not allow themselves to become slaves for an eternity.[/quote]
Why? They’ll be vastly out numbered by then (they are now). What armies will they bring to bear in order to strip away the vote and entitltements?
Voting isn’t going to mean anything by time this happens. Trust me, the true elites will not allow themselves to become slaves for an eternity.
Why? They’ll be vastly out numbered by then (they are now). What armies will they bring to bear in order to strip away the vote and entitltements?[/quote]
Why? It is simple logic. Who would want to live forever if they knew they were going to be someone else’s slave. War is not necessary to stop it. I would not even think about being someone’s eternal slave and would kill myself first. In that case the collectivists will be on their own.
Besides, slavery does not work unless there are fewer masters than slaves. Your theory is illogical.
Like I said in an earlier post: when time loses its scarcity society will have to change to meet this new reality or perish; the notion of social organization, especially.
Democracy is not sustainable because it tends towards socialism and as soon as the elites realize this either democracy goes or they do.
Voting isn’t going to mean anything by time this happens. Trust me, the true elites will not allow themselves to become slaves for an eternity.
Why? They’ll be vastly out numbered by then (they are now). What armies will they bring to bear in order to strip away the vote and entitltements?
Why? It is simple logic. Who would want to live forever if they knew they were going to be someone else’s slave. War is not necessary to stop it. I would not even think about being someone’s eternal slave and would kill myself first. In that case the collectivists will be on their own.
Besides, slavery does not work unless there are fewer masters than slaves. Your theory is illogical.
Like I said in an earlier post: when time loses its scarcity society will have to change to meet this new reality or perish; the notion of social organization, especially.
Democracy is not sustainable because it tends towards socialism and as soon as the elites realize this either democracy goes or they do.
Atlas will shrug, you can bet on it.[/quote]
Oh, I’m saying the elites will go. They’ll be devoured. Truth be told, I don’t actually think an anti-aging elixir could be regulated. The courts, or legislation (guess who the aging inflicted would vote for), would deem it disciminatory if public health care didn’t cover treatment for the “aging disease” when those with money have access to it.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Schlenkatank wrote:
Everything has a beginning and an ending, even the very atoms we are made of.
Atoms are just indistinguishable pieces of matter. They make up the parts of our body which can be rebuilt. Our body replaces itself completely every 11 years or so. Who is to say we could not control that process indefinitely?
Off topic:
Reality is not subjective. If we cannot at least agree that reality contains objective truths then there is nothing worth arguing about.
The essential feature of reason is to imbue man with the ability find those objective truths and expose them to the light.
Birds cannot do this but I can.[/quote]
Death is natural and necessary for the larger life cycle. Atoms that are part of your body were once inside a vegetable or a deer. My point is that death is scientifically and spiritually a necessity. Relating my off topic points, the reality of death is just an illusion because the atoms in our bodies go on to become part of something else. Hence the term life cycle. Trying to escape this process is ivevitable and pointless.
Reality is definitely subjective by the way. It’s the premise of psychology really, everybody sees reality differently. Taking a drug clearly demonstrates this and ultimately leads to the question “How do you define reality”.
[quote]Badunk wrote:
ZEB wrote:
I hope no one has their hopes up about extending their lives much past 80-100. I’ve reading this nonsense for at least 20 years. We were supposed to have pills which would allow us to live past 120 by now, where are they? I have longevity magazines from the early 90’s which claim that “by the year 2010 we’ll all live to be 120”. Sheer nonsense.
The best advice for longevity is and will most likely always be:
Eat a lower calorie diet full of natural foods such as vegetables and fruits and avoid.
Workout at least 5 days per week, mostly cardio, the heart and lungs are more important than how big your biceps are (life isn’t fair).
Become a social person who gets along well with people.
Don’t smoke and only drink in moderation.
Take a good multi-vitamin.
Have a happy marriage (sorry guys married men live longer).
Be a positive person who tries to see the good in most situations.
Wear your seat belt and visit the doctor at least once per year.
Don’t become overweight (they say it’s as deadly as smoking in the long run).
If you do all of the above and you have reasonable genetics on your side you might make it to 90. If you have great genetics maybe 100. Hoping for much more than this is purely wishful thinking.
We’re just theorizing, man. Just throwing ideas around and discussing the pros and cons. It’s all purely hypothetical (our discussion, I mean).[/quote]
Yes, I’m aware of that. Sort of like throwing around ideas about UFO’s, who really shot JFK and did we really land on the moon. These are all equally worthless topics.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
You are assuming the power structure is going to be what it is now. The elite control the power structure.
I am telling you, the lazy and incompetent will not last in a society where time loses its scarcity. Unsustainable lifestyles will not last.
Economic law will have the last word.[/quote]
I still don’t get why “the elite” are going to suddenly care so much more for their lives when they can suddenly live another 600 years? What the hell kind of “elite” is complacent enough to live in slavery when they “only” have to live 80 years, who is going to suddenly become enlightened as he has the opportunity to do the exact same shit over a longer time period.
Again, human nature would have to fundamentally change.
Sloth has the right idea.
The elite who are supposedly going to kick the legs out from this table are currently the one’s propping it up. Why on earth would they suddenly have a change of heart just because they are going to be able to live longer? They’ll just hold on that much tighter.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I am telling you, the lazy and incompetent will not last in a society where time loses its scarcity. Unsustainable lifestyles will not last.
[/quote]
And the competent and energetic will? The productive will be fed on by the immense numbers of vampiric (long-lived and parasitic) dependents. The consumers would have the numbers to keep the power of the vote, after all. By overwhelming force, if need be. They’d burn the elite out of their homes and hang them, if their vote was ever threatened. And, if their government policy didn’t give them access to aging illness treatments.
[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:
Death is natural and necessary for the larger life cycle.[/quote]
As a philosopher and scientist I have a hard time with this statement. Not the “natural” part but rather the “necessary” part.
Life is an eternal process and there is no reason why it could not be eternal for each individual unit of life.
Like I said, replacing the building blocks that allows us to live should not be an issue once the technology comes about. Life is imbued with the ability to sustain itself – I believe indefinitely.
I just turned 30, I would say right now I would absolutely like the ABILITY to live forever. But in 100 years from now, or 200, or 400 or 800 My mind may change, I may want to experience death at some point. I mean if you give the people the ability to live forever, you have to start allowing people to die on thier own terms too right? Like assisted, comfortable suicides.
I don’t see a downside to me personally living forever. I also think generally, people are better with age. I mean the general trend is that as people gain experience and knowledge, Wisdom comes along with it over time. So even if someone is a loser POS in thier 20’s and possibly 30’s, eventually they will mature to the point of being a productive memeber of society. The outlook will change and people will act differently. When the average age of the population of the world isn’t 24 anymore, instead it’s 124, I think things will be very different.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
I still don’t get why “the elite” are going to suddenly care so much more for their lives when they can suddenly live another 600 years?
[/quote]
Because planning for the future becomes more uncertain and therefore people have to become more cautious if they expect to “outlive eternity”. Those that don’t, die off. Those that cannot take care of themselves have no place in this society and those that understand it will gain the patience to make them go away.
Socialism is unsustainable so therefore societal leeches will not last once the system crumbles. Since democracy will lead to all out socialism we can be sure the system will eventually crumble.
Mortality has an economic consequence that tends to make a certain few people lower their time preference upon entering “adulthood” up until a certain point – we call this point retirement – or rather, waiting to die in FL or AZ.
Immortality will have its own effect but it will be much more lasting since we would have no reason to permanently change our time preference since we do not age. We still have to be able to provide for our needs.
People can only raise their time preference when there are a majority of people who have a time preference lower than their own. Individuals would have to fluctuate between periods of work and retirement – this would be completely individual, however.
Also, I stated that it would not happen immediately but rather must come about over time, gradually; but once the tipping point is achieved there is no going back.
[quote]Vegita wrote:
I just turned 30, I would say right now I would absolutely like the ABILITY to live forever. But in 100 years from now, or 200, or 400 or 800 My mind may change, I may want to experience death at some point. I mean if you give the people the ability to live forever, you have to start allowing people to die on thier own terms too right? Like assisted, comfortable suicides.
I don’t see a downside to me personally living forever. I also think generally, people are better with age. I mean the general trend is that as people gain experience and knowledge, Wisdom comes along with it over time. So even if someone is a loser POS in thier 20’s and possibly 30’s, eventually they will mature to the point of being a productive memeber of society. The outlook will change and people will act differently. When the average age of the population of the world isn’t 24 anymore, instead it’s 124, I think things will be very different.
V[/quote]
And imagine what society would look like when the average age is much older.
To the extent that man is capable of growing wise with age the prospects would be very interesting indeed.
If only for the possibility of becoming “enlightened” do I want the chance to live forever.
As I mentioned in my first post, the cost of caring for someone at the end of their life is more than the rest of their years put together. Therefore, from an economic standpoint, it makes sense for governments to allow everyone to live for as long as possible, not just a wealthy upper class/elite.
[quote]Badunk wrote:
As I mentioned in my first post, the cost of caring for someone at the end of their life is more than the rest of their years put together. Therefore, from an economic standpoint, it makes sense for governments to allow everyone to live for as long as possible, not just a wealthy upper class/elite.[/quote]
Unless keeping everyone living year in and year out for “as long as possible” costs as much, if not more, as keeping everyone alive in the last year of life.
[quote]Badunk wrote:
As I mentioned in my first post, the cost of caring for someone at the end of their life is more than the rest of their years put together. Therefore, from an economic standpoint, it makes sense for governments to allow everyone to live for as long as possible, not just a wealthy upper class/elite.[/quote]
But see, you seem not to understand, only the elite will be able to sustain their own lives indefinitely. Anyone that has to rely on government to exist will not be able to.
You bring up economics without even understanding that it is economics that determines who will live and who will not and not government. Government cannot change the laws of economics.
When I say “elite” please understand I am only speaking within the framework of a division of labor and not as some sort of universal elite class of people. I do not believe there exists such a class of people. The elite are those individuals within the division of labor who will remain sustainable and thus can indeed live forever.
I would want to live forever but in reality I think all of us would like to be like The blue guy in “The Watchmen” well hes basically god soo I think id want to become god.