Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

easy2012

The Moral Hazard Question - Who Would You Save

Recommended Posts

Say there are 2 train tracks, one is active with traffic and one is left dormant for a long time.

1 child knows the dormant track is dormant and goes to play on the dormant track.

3 more children then go on play on the live track.

A train is coming and say you have the power to press a button to switch the track - what would you do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say there are 2 train tracks, one is active with traffic and one is left dormant for a long time.

1 child knows the dormant track is dormant and goes to play on the dormant track.

3 more children then go on play on the live track.

A train is coming and say you have the power to press a button to switch the track - what would you do?

I suspect most would switch their camera phones on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say there are 2 train tracks, one is active with traffic and one is left dormant for a long time.

1 child knows the dormant track is dormant and goes to play on the dormant track.

3 more children then go on play on the live track.

A train is coming and say you have the power to press a button to switch the track - what would you do?

Looks like I won't be pressing the button. Sadly, most people would disagree with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say there are 2 train tracks, one is active with traffic and one is left dormant for a long time.

1 child knows the dormant track is dormant and goes to play on the dormant track.

3 more children then go on play on the live track.

A train is coming and say you have the power to press a button to switch the track - what would you do?

Leave it to fate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say there are 2 train tracks, one is active with traffic and one is left dormant for a long time.

1 child knows the dormant track is dormant and goes to play on the dormant track.

3 more children then go on play on the live track.

A train is coming and say you have the power to press a button to switch the track - what would you do?

You need to tell us much more before we can help:

How much did their parents pay for their homes?

When did they buy?

Are they on a tracker mortgage or interest only?

Are their homes in a good school catchment area?

Are the homes painted beige and smelling like fresh bread?

morals are all very well, but facts are better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to tell us much more before we can help:

How much did their parents pay for their homes?

When did they buy?

Are they on a tracker mortgage or interest only?

Are their homes in a good school catchment area?

Are the homes painted beige and smelling like fresh bread?

morals are all very well, but facts are better.

Nice one :-) Say:

Parents paid for 1/5 of price they paid.

They bought at 2007 peak

They are on interest only tracker mortgage (so you can save them) and they are leveraged up to the maximum the bank would lend them with no margin of safety.

Their homes are in various areas and are in various conditions

Does that help ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to tell us much more before we can help:

How much did their parents pay for their homes?

When did they buy?

Are they on a tracker mortgage or interest only?

Are their homes in a good school catchment area?

Are the homes painted beige and smelling like fresh bread?

You left out "Are there twigs in a pot?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say there are 2 train tracks, one is active with traffic and one is left dormant for a long time.

1 child knows the dormant track is dormant and goes to play on the dormant track.

3 more children then go on play on the live track.

A train is coming and say you have the power to press a button to switch the track - what would you do?

If forced to make a decision between these two options only, I would adopt a Darwinian approach:

http://www.darwinawards.com/

Save the child that knew the difference between dormant and live, then make them clear up the mess of the three dumb enough to play on a live line (to teach the slightly smarter child a lesson that 'dormant' does not mean 'safe'). I'd also fine the parents of the 3 stupid children for any damages incurred.

It's an interesting question and one that most would shy away from, but haven't we (society/government/whatever) in effect been saving the stupid for years (benefit safety nets, idiot banker bailouts etc) and penalising the smart/hardworking/prudent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say there are 2 train tracks, one is active with traffic and one is left dormant for a long time.

1 child knows the dormant track is dormant and goes to play on the dormant track.

3 more children then go on play on the live track.

A train is coming and say you have the power to press a button to switch the track - what would you do?

Any action would be murder.

Any inaction morally neutral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any action would be murder.

Any inaction morally neutral.

Inaction is never morally neutral, it implies complicity. In this case it would be murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inaction is never morally neutral, it implies complicity. In this case it would be murder.

Inaction is always morally neutral.

There is no complicity in merely drawing breath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say there are 2 train tracks, one is active with traffic and one is left dormant for a long time.

1 child knows the dormant track is dormant and goes to play on the dormant track.

3 more children then go on play on the live track.

A train is coming and say you have the power to press a button to switch the track - what would you do?

Tell the kids to get off the track and strap those responsible to the live track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inaction is always morally neutral.

There is no complicity in merely drawing breath.

Inaction is sometimes morally neutral not always.

Scenario: you are walking with your child beside a busy road, they see a ball rolling across the road and go to run out for it. Do you try to stop them? If not, would your inaction be morally neutral?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inaction is sometimes morally neutral not always.

Scenario: you are walking with your child beside a busy road, they see a ball rolling across the road and go to run out for it. Do you try to stop them? If not, would your inaction be morally neutral?

Walking with your child is an action.

So you are responsible from events which occur because of it.

Merely being at rest isn't an action and is always morally neutral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walking with your child is an action.

So you are responsible from events which occur because of it.

Merely being at rest isn't an action and is always morally neutral.

Ok, so a variation. Scenario: you are walking beside the same busy road, this time on your own. You see someone else's child run out to the ball in the road. By your definition your action is you walking, so you did not encumber yourself with responsibilities when you left the house - would inaction in this case be morally neutral? Or is your action now being a responsible member of society?

Being at rest is an action in that it is a response to a decision you have made. Thought leading to intent, leading to action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so a variation. Scenario: you are walking beside the same busy road, this time on your own. You see someone else's child run out to the ball in the road. By your definition your action is you walking, so you did not encumber yourself with responsibilities when you left the house - would inaction in this case be morally neutral? Or is your action now being a responsible member of society?

Inaction is morally neutral in this case. Action would be a good thing, inaction neutral.

Why?

It's not your child and you aren't driving a car towards him/her. you aren't responsible to anything that's happening, just close by when it occurs.

Being at rest is an action in that it is a response to a decision you have made. Thought leading to intent, leading to action.

Being at rest is the default state of all physical objects.

It happens all by itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really.

How fast is the earth spinning ;)

At rest means not adding extra to the spin.

Sitting still, letting it pull you in.

Happens all by itself. Unless you are moving mountains and causing the earth to rotate, which jimi hendrix might appreciate (but seems a tad narcissitic.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How granular do you want to go to prove that !

Tetleys tea bag style?

Don't bother answering - I'm being pedantic.

No, really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Id seek advice and call social services.

Its not my problem. government fixes everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say there are 2 train tracks, one is active with traffic and one is left dormant for a long time.

1 child knows the dormant track is dormant and goes to play on the dormant track.

3 more children then go on play on the live track.

A train is coming and say you have the power to press a button to switch the track - what would you do?

Frustratingly, my instinct would be to save the 3 children. However, if my analytical brain has time to kick in, then I would do nothing and leave the risk-takers to their death.

I see the metaphor... Nice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inaction is morally neutral in this case. Action would be a good thing, inaction neutral.

Why?

It's not your child and you aren't driving a car towards him/her. you aren't responsible to anything that's happening, just close by when it occurs.

Being at rest is the default state of all physical objects.

It happens all by itself.

Responsibilities are not the same as moral obligations. Just because you are not responsible for a situation does not make inaction morally neutral.

Being at rest is not the default state of humans (most of us here aspire to being more than just physical objects) unless unconscious or a Zen master. Being at rest (ie the positive action of 'doing nothing') requires effort, unlike the passive action of 'not doing anything'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 259 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.