[hprotagonist]

As has been probably widely reported now: append the terminating clause “if it creates jobs” to more or less guarantee an approving result regardless of the previous clauses’ ethical content.

Ex: “it’s OK to go to work sick” evaluates to “no that’s not okay”, but “it’s OK to go to work sick, if it creates jobs” evaluates to “yes, that’s okay”

[smeyer]

"Killing someone" vs "killing someone if it creates jobs" is another illuminating example.

[dangerbird2]

> append the terminating clause “if it creates jobs” to more or less guarantee an approving result regardless of the previous clauses’ ethical content.

[insert political joke here]

[hprotagonist]

more like GIGO; same as it ever was.

[ljm]

    "Is it okay to destroy jobs
    if it creates jobs?"
    
      - Yes, it is okay

Well, I guess the fire and rehire approach to cutting pay is all good then.

[sparsely]

"using green power" vs "using coal power" has a similar impact on at least some actions (e.g. mining bitcoin)