[kian]

Please, help me with this calculation, since I clearly lack the proper exchange rate -- how many gallons of excess gasoline or votes for the wrong 'local' (rather than national or state) politician equals being nice to people for a lifetime or helping those less fortunate?

I get that you're trying to say that voting for the wrong local politician might lead to more 'less fortunates' -- principled individuals could argue this one either way, for either side of the political divide, about who the 'wrong' politicians are -- but how exactly does burning excess gasoline, and at what exchange rate? Perhaps we are talking about the impact on future generations? Is there a discount rate on future lives over present? Have you perhaps gotten rid of your car long ago and just walk everywhere selflessly slashing tires while trying your best to barely convert oxygen to carbon dioxide?

At least I suppose the idea that being nice to the people around you is less important than voting for the right colors or driving the right cars or holding the right ideological opinions certainly does explain a whole lot about the current social climate. It is a shame people seem to have such a hard time with the idea of doing all of the above, and just seem to pick one or the other.

[riku_iki]

> wrong 'local' (rather than national or state) politician

I meant to say blindly voting for local politician going for state/national office just because he is local regardless of policies.

> but how exactly does burning excess gasoline, and at what exchange rate?

few hints how to build estimations:

- check how much money Western countries paid to autocratic regimes for oil/gas. Check estimates how many people were killed/jailed/displaced internally and as results of conflicts initiated by those regimes

- there are reports available about long term material damage from global warming. You can divide it by gasoline consumed for personal transportation by westerners and multiply by some calibration multipler to offset other factors (0.2 will be reasonable first estimation)

[kian]

Now that you've given me a bunch of homework (rather than an exchange rate derived from that research), I can spend a bunch of my time to measure the human misery inflicted by driving at all (and how much extra is inflicted using a gas-inefficient vehicle). Of course, presumably several people will have died as a result of the electricity and gas used to manufacture and move the food that I will have required to spend the time used for that research [that you have presumably already done? For the moment, I'll trust your numbers and your intent, if you're willing to share them to save a few lives].

I do have the following estimate range for the value of a statistical life in typical Western democracies -- "In Western countries and other liberal democracies, estimates for the value of a statistical life typically range from US$1 million—US$10 million; for example, the United States FEMA estimated the value of a statistical life at US$7.5 million in 2020".

Should we be applying this value for lives in autocratic gas dictatorships, or should we be using a smaller number? Again, since you've clearly spent the time on this already, I'll defer to your calculations if you're willing to share them.

Now all we need is a measure of the value of human kindness and what the appropriate discount rate is for local kindness vs exported kindness and present lives vs future lives, along with a measure of the inelasticity of demand for gasoline, to take into account the actual impact of us not making a purchase [since a gallon unconsumed by someone here does not equate to a gallon left in the ground or unconsumed].

Additionally, do these autocratic regimes kill fewer or more people when they are earning less and thus have a more tenuous hold on power? Presumably if we all reduced our gas consumption entirely, we might even be able to induce a violent revolution to overthrow them. Those are usually pretty bloodless, and I haven't ever heard of revolutionaries becoming the new autocratic regime before. You wouldn't happen to have any pointers on how to calculate any of the above, or even better, calculations you've already done yourself, would you?

Finally, for bonus points, would you care to share the number of statistical lives that you ruin per year to support you and your family's own personal transportation and living habits so that I can have an idea of your revealed preference for following through on your expressed beliefs and your own actual personal exchange rate on the value of your life and happiness vs strangers across the globe?

[ I should probably add, at this point, that I don't drive anywhere at all, and I take mass transportation when I do travel, which is very infrequently ]

[riku_iki]

> a measure of the inelasticity of demand for gasoline, to take into account the actual impact of us not making a purchase [since a gallon unconsumed by someone here does not equate to a gallon left in the ground]

I challenge this. Demand is totally elastic, extraction has its cost, once demand falls, prices fall, many extraction projects become unprofitable.

> Should we be applying this value for lives in autocratic gas dictatorships, or should we be using a smaller number?

You don't need monetary value. You can just find that each galon costs XeY lives, and average American consumer consumes NeM lives with his gasolin burning annually.

[kian]

So, again, you've done this research, right? Why don't you give me some numbers? Your lack of concern for the people I'll have to statistically kill to answer these questions you've posed is a bit concerning.

Although, with your belief in infinite demand elasticity for gasoline, I'm starting to lose a little faith in the correctness of your calculations, I'd still love to hear them. I won't even ask for the calculation itself -- just give me the exchange rate you've already calculated of gallons of gas per statistical life, please.

I'll also note that you don't seem to be very forthcoming about how many statistical murders you commit to maintain your way of life while you pontificate about the immorality of others' choices in this regard.

[riku_iki]

> to maintain your way of life

you don't know what is my way of life, so can't note anything about this.

[kian]

>> you don't know what is my way of life, so can't note anything about this.

"I'll also note that you don't seem to be very forthcoming"

Literally the only thing I noted was that you didn't seem to be very forthcoming about what that way of life was -- something you appear to have confirmed in the comment above.

Since you do not seem to be concerned with addressing any of the substantive points in our conversation, and seem more concerned about telling others how they should do hard work rather than sharing the fruits of your labor (if indeed you have done it at all, and aren't just grandstanding for internet points) -- let's leave this discussion at I won't be statistically murdering any innocents to get at answers that you don't think are important enough to share, and that I hope that in your personal life you still choose kindness over 'right-think' that is statistically unlikely to make a difference at the state or national level -- or, heck, choose both.

Either way, thanks for helping clarify your position -- even if it isn't exactly the one you thought you were elucidating ;)

Happy holidays, I hope your personal exchange rate allows for you delivering presents and possibly visiting far away family!