Which matters more to you?

[dtq123]

If you had to choose one section of the USA to save which would you save? Please tell me which and why. No belongings can be transferred, and they will be transported to a new planet without you. They will be unaware you saved them, and you and everyone else in the USA will die will die after saving them.

Pretend you are in the USA in this case if you are not there now.

+The Minorities (Colored)

+The Majorities (White)

+The Rich

+The Poor

I honestly would choose the Poor, since they are used to living in tough conditions and have had a less than favorable lot.

[Shiranu]

This is a kinda ridiculous question, but I'll give it some response...

My first reaction is the poor, simply because they have the worst standard of living and it's not like they are a separate entity from minorities or majorities... so you probably "save" the most people that way.

However being poor, depending on how we are defining it, means they are statistically more likely to be involved in crime and have lower educations, and is that what you want the new world to be based on? People who don't have the knowledge to maintain a civilization? Life will probably be a living hell for hundreds upon hundreds of years as the criminals take over running things, there will be mass starvation because the technology levels will not meet the food requirement levels, and everything will fall apart.

Because of that, I think "the poor" are probably the worst choice pragmatically and you would end up doing far more harm, even if it is idealistically nice sounding.

Minorities would probably be my first choice, just because that gives you a very good range of skilled labour, educated scientists and businessmen, and intellectuals... but it will be a little more "bottom heavy" (poorer, less educated) than "majority" would be and thus have more skilled labour for rebuilding society.

The rich is actually, pragmatically, maybe the best choice simply because they are the smallest number, generally educated and if their lives depended on it would learn quickly how to take care of themselves.

[Draconic Aiur]

I'd say i'm gonna go with E, myself, because I matter most.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

If the method of destruction is Godzilla, I will gladly pick the poor just so I can watch our upper class shit their pants before I get stomped.

[stromboli]

I would save the poor, because they are more likely capable of dealing with adverse situations.

[Hydra009]

The most populous group, whichever that is.  1,000,000 survivors > 1,000 survivors

[Atheon]

The most populous group, whichever that is.  1,000,000 survivors > 1,000 survivors

Exactly my thinking. Whichever group is biggest.

By the way, the term "colored" fell out of favor around 40 years ago.

[Hydra009]

Exactly my thinking. Whichever group is biggest.

*high-fives*

Utilitarianism ftw.  Because triage workers don't let triage workers apply deontological ethics.  :P

[gussy]

The coloreds can go (only context I could ever utter that phrase without a wearing a Klan robe).  Most of my social circle is white and if I'm going to die they can come with me.  The thought of my friends getting to live on another planet while I'm stuck here facing death is nauseating.  Fuck them, we all get to die.

[PickelledEggs]

I'd go with the poor for the reasons that it would save the most people and they would (hopefully) start the world over again with better and less corrupt values than the rich people that are in control right now. But even if the second part fails, which it probably will and might even turn out more corrupt with people fighting for the power that they never had and has wronged them so much, at least it would still save the most people by saving that demographic.

[Shiranu]

I am still not sold that saving the most people = the best outcome.

Is saving (small numbers for convenience) 1,000 people who will go through 9/10 on the pain scale (as will generation after generation) a better choice than saving 750 people who will go through a 6/10 on the pain scale and likely reduce the suffering of future generations much more quickly? I'm not entirely sure it will.

[Hydra009]

Is saving (small numbers for convenience) 1,000 people who will go through 9/10 on the pain scale (as will generation after generation) a better choice than saving 750 people who will go through a 6/10 on the pain scale and likely reduce the suffering of future generations much more quickly? I'm not entirely sure it will.

That's also a utilitarian choice, just with more variables than a simple headcount.

[PickelledEggs]

It's also not a ratio like 1000 poor people to 750 of whatever other group you are talking about.

Poor people include such a vast amount of people that no matter how you slice it, it is going to be a huge difference in numbers. not just off by a 1000:750 ratio. Much more like a 1000000:750 ratio... or steeper.

[Shiranu]

I didn't want to take this thread seriously, but if I must...

In 2012, 46.5 million people were living in poverty in the United States

As a whole, the non-white population increased by 1.9 percent, up to 116 million, or 37%, of the American population

By saving minorities, you save over double the people you do that are poor (if we define poor as poverty level), however there is a huge over-lap there so the difference isn't as great. You were right about my equation being wrong, but I screwed up in the opposite direction; the minorities should actually be greater than rather than lower.

Of course, without knowing what situation they will be teleported to, it is impossible to say which is the better choice. If everything is provided for them, then minorities win by default. If they have to rebuild civilization, then again it becomes a much more complex question than just, "save the most people" based on all sorts of factors that OP did not expand on. Hence again why I said it's a bit of a ridiculous question because we are not given nearly enough information on the variables to solve for it.

[PickelledEggs]

You're forgetting that the U.S. does not mean the whole world. What about China? India? The entire continent of Africa? There are WAY more poor people than any other demographic. Do your research and your math again if you are telling us that the poor does not make up the steep majority.