= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Alex_Altair comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 13, chapter 81 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (1099)
I didn't forget that (but sometimes I do). We can have a 12 year old be a slave to an 11 year old, but we can't have them get married?
Welcome to feudalism.
Legal system do not have to be consistant. In Germany you can inherit since the time of conception, but still legally aborted afterwards.
That is seriously weird.
Not that much. Both rules have their reasons. Real consistency is hard.
It's not implausible, or necessarily wrong, but it is weird. What are the rules for inheriting from a fetus?
Next of kin would be the mother (surely?). She now has an incentive to legally kill a wealthy heir to take their estate. That's... something of a moral hazard or at least an unpleasant tradeoff to thrust upon someone.
If I recall correctly, in Louisiana, if a man dies and leaves children and a widow but no will, his estate goes to his children and his widow gets nothing.
If Louisiana inheritance law works that way because it is based on Code Napoleon and if the German laws of inheritance also come from Code Napoleon, then maybe the mother would not be incentivized if there were other surviving siblings.
That's a lot of ifs.
Yeah, that was my first thought too.
You don't inherit from the fetus, the fetus is the one getting the inheritance. Which makes sense, since she is related to the person who died. This might cause problems once someone makes a kid with frozen sperm of a dead person.
Think of this situation. 1) Dad dies. 2) Fetus inherits. 3) Mom gets an abortion. 4) Does Mom inherit? And if so, did we just give her a huge financial incentive to kill her kid?
Well, she certainly has a financial incentive to terminate her pregnancy in that scenario. She also has a financial incentive to murder her co-parent. (Still more so if Mom can inherit directly from Dad.) Also, given the costs of bearing and raising a child, I'd expect that most pregnant women have a financial incentive to terminate their pregnancies.
But killing Dad is murder, and you go to jail for that. Killing Baby is an outpatient procedure. with no legal sanction(and, in many places, outright subsidization). I'd say that the situations differ.
The situations differ in several ways, including their legal status.
You were discussing financial incentives, and I responded accordingly.
If your actual intention is to discuss more generally the similarities and differences between killing fetuses and adults (or babies and adults, if you prefer that language), then I'll drop out here.
Good for us that few people are mother economicae.
I do not know what that phrase means.