Moral Hypothetical

[metsandfinsfan]

i voted poop

[Pudge714]

1
4 5 7




9 9 9

9 9 8 9 9








10 9 9




12 21 22
11 13 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14

14


15 16
17
18
19
20



2 14
14 3 44
















23
24
25 26 27 28 29 30










31







32
32
32
40
32
32
32
32
32 33
32
32
32


34 35 36 37 38

101

39


42
41 44
43
46 45
47 47 48 49 50 51

55 54

56
53
52

57
58

59 60 61 66 62 63 64 63 65 67 36





68

69 70 70

71 71 72 73






74 74 75 76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83

4

84
4
85 88 86

87 85 89 90 90 91






92 92 93 94 95 96

97 98


99 100

[traz]

never really gets old

[BeaucoupFish]

With this kind of company loyalty, CEO should go for the full $33+ billion

[Schmitty 87]

lol brilliance from pudge.

serious answer: definitely B since the employees are all willing. if a single one wasn't in on it then the answer immediately becomes A.

[Schmitty 87]

[ QUOTE ]
If I choose C, do they know? I'd probably do that if it just sort of worked out that only John died (this way the remaining wouldn't feel super guilty).

[/ QUOTE ]

what? you are so concerned with minimizing the amount of life lost that you'll force death upon an unwilling party rather than allow people their self-chosen equity of .03(death)+.97(5 million)? the employees would feel guilty about you choosing C, sure, but you hiding that fact from them does not make the cause of what would be their guilt (that John was killed, and by your choice) any less appalling.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I choose C, do they know? I'd probably do that if it just sort of worked out that only John died (this way the remaining wouldn't feel super guilty).

[/ QUOTE ]

what? you are so concerned with minimizing the amount of life lost that you'll force death upon an unwilling party rather than allow people their self-chosen equity of .03(death)+.97(5 million)? the employees would feel guilty about you choosing C, sure, but you hiding that fact from them does not make the cause of what would be their guilt (that John was killed, and by your choice) any less appalling.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is my understanding that John has agreed to a 3% chance at dying.

[Perestroika]

People kill for fractions of this amount of money. In the end, you only appeal to the semantical side of human nature when debating this kind of question. Although, there are forceful arguments from both sides, what truly counts is what would happen in reality. In reality, this kind of thing goes on everyday, just in the form of war.

[Jim14Qc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I choose C, do they know? I'd probably do that if it just sort of worked out that only John died (this way the remaining wouldn't feel super guilty).

[/ QUOTE ]

what? you are so concerned with minimizing the amount of life lost that you'll force death upon an unwilling party rather than allow people their self-chosen equity of .03(death)+.97(5 million)? the employees would feel guilty about you choosing C, sure, but you hiding that fact from them does not make the cause of what would be their guilt (that John was killed, and by your choice) any less appalling.

[/ QUOTE ]

You forgot, in your equity analysis, to account for possible friendships within the social world that the company is. Therefore, the equation would be more along the lines of 0.03 (death) + 0.97 (5M) + n/100 (losing a friend) + n/99 (losing a friend) +n/98 (losing a friend) where n is the number of friends hyou have in teh company. You could also write it as 0.03 (death) +0.97 (5M) - 0.03 (VF) where VF is the value you attribute to the company's personnel, as a whole.

I'm a nit.

Obviously the right answer is to let them lottery it up if all of the participants are willing (aka they feel the EV of that is positive for them). This would probably have a waiting list in a poor, unhappy environment but 0 participants in a rich environment. Obviously the willingness to participate is proportional to the inverse of one's wealth and expectation for future income.


BTW, stupid question imo.

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, stupid question imo.

[/ QUOTE ]
at least he didn't try to tell us that this was a real company and a real situation they were facing.