Hacker News Reader

By that reasoning nearly everyone has improved the world. Considering the negative impact we all have just existing in our society I'm sure his stance is more accurate.

View on HN

In general, I think the average human being provides some good for the world. If nothing else, the average person in most[1] of the world can vote, hopefully on average stabilizing the political system. [2] They also act as an allocator for the market, enabling capital to go where needed. Each actor in the market acts as part of Adam Smith's invisible hand, helping decide where resources go. At the same time, most are parents to children enabling the whole thing to happen again.

Is your belief based on human impact on the environment, or is it something else?

[1] Better resources a Google away but this is something at least. http://www.economist.com/node/8908438 [2] http://www.stier.net/writing/demstab/demstab.htm#_Toc5203975...

You could say that my views are based on the environment but I would describe it as being on the world on a whole. All your benefits are to our societies and other related tribes. In that regard I agree that the average person provides some good but at a world level that includes the environment, other species, resources, etc I think the in most cases we are a negative force.

I think you just have a negative view of humanity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com