(no subject)

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

To show how wonderfully tolerant this place is of nonsense:

In my utopia breast augmentation surgery will be outlawed (save for procedures done for illness reasons) on two grounds:

1) It's a waste of valuable resources*
2) They look bad

Discuss.


*In my dream utopia, healthcare is not only "free" (well, Universal) it's also mandatory

Can't have the sick bring down the healthy

Comments

[rasilio.livejournal.com]

And what of tattoo's Piercings, Makeup, Clothing for any purpose other than protection from the elements?

Further lets take it to the logical conclusion?

What of being able to produce a car capable of more than the bare minimum necessary for transportation? A house capable of more than the bare minimum needed for living? Eating more or less than 2000 calories in a day? In fact why should we have any freedom to have any choice in what we eat, Doctors could quite easily design a single standardized diet that would meet all of our nutritional needs (and could be supplemented with vitamins for those with natural deficiencies) and so on.

If the one and only overriding goal of maximization of efficiency in how society uses resources why should anyone have any free choice in anything at all since that choice would always include the option of choosing a less optimal solution in resource utilization? We could issue everyone a housing unit, and they would all be 100% identical. There would of course be no personal property because there would be no need for such, everyone would get the exact same clothes in the exact same quantity, they'd eat the exact same food, they would do the job assigned to them by the state, wake when told to by the state, sleep when told to by the state, procreate when told to by the state (and none of this love crap, all procreative selection will be handled by the state to ensure maximum genetic benefit).

Yeah that sounds about as much like Utopia as 1984.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Imagine a square, whose corners are ABCD (A is the lower left, B is top left, C is top right, D is bottom right)

Suppose you are at A and want to get to C
Take as a given that you cannot go diagonally and must use sidewalks (that is, the lines of the square)

There are two equally optimal paths to get from A to C.

It is not optimal to go from A to B, to B' (which is directly above B) over to C' (similarly above C) and then down to C
That would not be optimal

But there is no reason that there can only be one optimal path.

Since that is the premise of your argument, the rest of it crumbles.