I have no opinion on that.

My point is not being born isn't the same as being saved.

Who is talking about preventing anyone from doing anything? The reality is that it's better to not be born than to starve to death at a young age. Do you agree with that?

One of the requirements for making a data presentation beautiful is that it clearly answers the question being asked. This graphic clearly fails to do so.

Since OP does not have the data to answer that question, it would be appropriate to change the question and headline to align with what can be done.

Hong Kong is >0.95 while some of them are sleeping in 'coffin homes'

I'm a contaminant hydrogeologist and this was one of the first ever cases linking water contamination of microbes (though they didn't know this at the time) with illness. He's also considered the father of epidemiology.

There's a great book on the story: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36086.The_Ghost_Map

Only knew about him because Extra Credits made videos about him back when they used to be good, pretty amazing and determined guy ngl, scientific community pretty much put obstacle after obstacle to go agaist him and he still proved them wrong in every situation.

“Utter” ….. tee hee …… sorry I thought your word choice was fun considering the topic, don’t hate me too much 😬

Let's try something more relevant and current.

There are countries where people live in abject poverty, where children starve to death every day.

Should we prevent the people living in those areas from having kids? In order to "save" those kids?

Because, that's literally eugenics.

It’s the first known use of GIS too.

So the website states the numbers are about “Americans” …….. I’m an American who lives in Germany so do these numbers not apply or only when I visit my family back home?

OK. Let's use this as an example.

People were forced to breed to create more slaves. Was this overall a good thing? When this practice was banned, were people saved from slavery?

The people born through this practice were guaranteed a lifetime of slavery. Not being born into this life is preferable.

Doesn’t work on iOS mobile either.

That's ridiculous.

My argument is over the use of the word saved, nothing is being saved.

Getting an abortion doesn't "save" a kid from a bad life, it just prevents it. Prevention is not "saving". Noone is being rescued. You can't save something that doesn't exist.

I'm talking at a higher level. If you think that the only think that matters is the existence of a kid, then you are suggesting that using contraception is morally equal to killing a kid.

[removed]

It's probably an average. Industrials 10% S&P 20% Nasdaq 30% if memory serves

[removed]

No, but I don't consider it as saving a kid either. The kid still doesn't exist either way.

I mean, if you wanna bring humans into the mix, be careful, cause if we're gonna say that not having a kid is better than letting them be born into terrible conditions... that's dangerously close to eugenics.

[deleted]

Do you consider not having kids to be equal to killing a kid?

But that just means they never existed in the first place. How is that any different? It's still one less cow.

Fine, if your argument is based on pedantry then so be it.

Nowhere in the source does it say "saved from the slaughter house" so you can equally interpret "saved" as "saved from a life of suffering which will end in brutal slaughter"

>The fact shares held in a brokerage aren't actually owned by the person purchasing them - and are lent out without people's knowledge -
>
>multiple times - is NOT a fringe issue

It's a fringe issue, because it doesn't matter. If you think it matters, please explain what serious consequences have happened to all these people (because it's just about everyone, right?) as a result?

>You're free to provide some sourced commentary andor rebuttals from professionals in the industry about any of this

I don't need to provide any sources because I'm not debating you by claiming that what you said is untrue, inaccurate, misleading or false. I am telling you that it doesn't fucking matter. It's an irrelevance, a curiosity, something that is interesting only as a piece of a trivia on a London City pub quiz for banking toffs.

It doesn't matter because the outcome of what you're saying exists (which does exist) doesn't affect anyone - negatively or positively - in any meaningful degree.

"Don't shit where you drink."

- King in the North

I'm not arguing against veganism.

I'm arguing against this data claiming animals will be saved by us not eating them.

They will not. No animals are being saved.

Continuing as we are now, results in more animals being killed.

Eating less meat results in less animals being born.

At no point is an animal saved from the slaughter house. There is no happy ending, only death or non-existence.