1/3 of Russian population headed to bunkers

[maskedmelon]

Treating all options as equally risky until loss is actually realized is irresponsible.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Jarnauga [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

it's not even about social justice, lol

Let's assume i'm ben carson. I'm black. Statistically speaking, blacks are arrested more, deal with more crimes, etc, etc. So i shouldn't be running for president.

See, that's fucked up. Because it assumes stuff just based on his appartenance on a groupe he didn't choose at all. In a sense that's not that far from the casts system in India ! You happened to be born an untouchable ? well too bad for you, fuck you and your perfect record, you're an untouchable and that's it.

Now let's assume i'm timothy mcveigh, and i didn't do the bombings.I'm white, statistically speaking i am the most "lawful". I apply to the FBI, and i won't get in. Why ? because my record shows (i assume) that i had political ties to potential domestic terrorist groups. And that's fine, and how it should be. And i assume it's how it happens actually.

Is our western society so fucked up that you can't escape a destiny that has been chosen at your birth and that you have no grasp on ? that's the opposite of the ways that made the whole world envy us. fuck that.

Ignoring any supposed connection between blacks and crime and following your metaphor, it's different because we have the ability to vet Ben Carson. "Oh okay, well even though he's black, he's not a criminal, he's an accomplished surgeon."

Insurance companies don't have the ability to vet you in detail. They have to go on proven indicators of risk. Your gender is a proven indicator of risk. I'm not saying I agree with it, I'm just saying that's how it is, and why it's like that. It's the same reason our health insurance companies used to scalp people who were smokers, had diabetes, or genetic triggers for cancer.

It's not sensitive or clean, but it's the way it works. It's one of the reasons I think insurance enterprises should be run by the government. Collective risk management should be part of the social contract. Profit motive provides little improvement in the business of insurance, it pretty much just makes it more parasitic and manifests almost entirely in branding.

[Jarnauga]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ignoring any supposed connection between blacks and crime and following your metaphor, it's different because we have the ability to vet Ben Carson. "Oh okay, well even though he's black, he's not a criminal, he's an accomplished surgeon."

Insurance companies don't have the ability to vet you in detail. They have to go on proven indicators of risk. Your gender is a proven indicator of risk. I'm not saying I agree with it, I'm just saying that's how it is, and why it's like that. It's the same reason our health insurance companies used to scalp people who were smokers, had diabetes, or genetic triggers for cancer.

It's not sensitive or clean, but it's the way it works. It's one of the reasons I think insurance enterprises should be run by the government. Profit motive provides little improvement in the business of insurance, it pretty much just makes it more parasitic and manifests almost entirely in branding.

THere's a proven scientific link between smoking and getting lung cancer

I saw some SJWs that think all men are potential rapists. Well guess what, 90% of rapes are committed by men. I guess they're right then ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I just think that we can do better as a society, and if private companies use discrimination tactics to justify their profits, it's fucked up and should be look into by justice.

Also, i don't know how it is in the us, but insurance companies have a way to vet people, similar to how banks do to see if you pay your loans.