[ExI] Limits of human modification

[Rafal Smigrodzki]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 1:34 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:

> Do all economists agree that forcing people to have stupider children than
> what modern medicine would allow them to have will result in
> a positive long term impact on net GDP per capita
> ?
>
### I truly do not understand the intent of this question.

-------------------
>>
>> >
>> GDP in the eugenic permissibility test is intended to measure
>> externalities.
>> GDP is a good proxy for the overall level of achievement of human goals
>> under many conditions
>
>
> I agree, but the GDP depends on the economy which depends on the vagaries of
> the natural world as well as the collective output of billions of brains,
> the most complex object in the known universe.  All this makes the economy
> rather difficult to predict, especially in the long term.

### There is no need to predict the GDP in the long term here. All you
need to test is the direction of change in GDP caused by a specific
gene mod in a specific person. Direction of change caused by e.g. a
reduction in the likelihood of having cancer or increased ability to
digest cellulose should be generally easy to model.

----------------
>
> I agree. So let group X decide to have stupid children and let group Y
> decide to have smart children and let the market objectively decide which
> group ends up with more money and if the statement "being stupid will make
> you richer than being smart" is objectively true.
>
### Do you feel this comment is in any way relevant to the test I suggested?

---------------
>> If the GDP impact of e.g. a new gene that enables underwater breathing is
>> positive, we should allow underwater breathing because it is in our common
>> economic interest to do so.
>
>
> Allowed? We're not talking about nuclear weapons with their huge isotope
> separation factories, genetic engineering is getting easier to do every day
> and will soon be done in individuals garage labs; so how do you intend to
> enforce your reproductive edict worldwide? You must realize that the one
> group or nation that is successful in defying your edict will be the group
> or nation that inherits the future.

### To the contrary. Any group that "defies my edict", i.e. allows or
encourages GDP-reducing mods is likely suffer a reduction in their GDP
(obviously) and will lose in competition with those who follow my
suggestion.

As I mentioned a few times before, I would see any worldwide genetic
authority as odious and worthy of being resisted by any means
necessary and without compunction.

Rafał