Thread

Singapore govt dating app uses Gale-Shapley stable marriage algorithm

466 points · 499 comments · rzk

mlboss · 1790816419 · focus · HN ↗
There is a very simple solution to the problem. Just add a tax to single people and childless couples or reverse give huge tax break to married and couple with kids.
In past the motive for marriage was sex and companionship which was frowned in society if out of wedlock. Now it is not frowned upon. The old constraint is gone and we need to add new constraints if we want to solve the problem.
1. lucb1e · 1790818832 · focus · HN ↗
  One of the best things you can do on this planet is not asking it to support another person, at least not with a comfortable lifestyle which I'm sure we'd all want. Why'd you try to soft-force people to have more children?!
  As a secondary problem, people (traditionally women, but with a two-income household it could be either party) often already can't leave a relationship because they can't support themselves and their child(ren) without the other half and so they're stuck in relationships that might either not work for them or that are downright abusive. With a big tax on leaving your partner... oof, why in the world would you want more lock-in?! Is this a manosphere control thing that I'm not aware of?
  1. mlboss · 1790822376 · focus · HN ↗
    How do you propose to solve the population crisis ? Given a choice people will always want the position of less responsibility. As a society we have agree to give sacrifices so that we can have next generation.
    incompatible · 1790825826 · focus · HN ↗
    What population crisis are you referring to? Usually, the problem is seen as the population getting too high and humanity taking more resources than is good for the planet. The global population is still increasing.
    sneed-oil · 1790867059 · focus · HN ↗
    The problem in most first world countries is that there are not enough workers to take care of the aging population
    lucb1e · 1790898200 · focus · HN ↗
    But it's also self-evident that if we always need more young people than old, so that the old are taken care of, then we need an infinite amount of people. So long as we don't have a second earth (or asteroid mining or whatever), that seems like a much bigger problem than that old people have to wipe their own butts. Yes, I'm well aware that includes myself and that I might legit not be able to take care of myself properly. Getting old sucks either way. A stable population (or a slight shrinkage until we're at a sustainable level, insofar as we should want to manually steer that anyway) seems like a much better solution than to have old and young people suffer because there's not enough resources for anyone
    The population crisis is that the current population isn't sustainable: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Overshoot_Day" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Overshoot_Day (and most of those haven't a rich lifestyle yet; most people on HN are in the top 10% worldwide income). We need either to become more sustainable per capita, have fewer capita, or get more earths. Any solution is fine. Otherwise, we'll run out, and the remaining 90% of people get a lot of undeserved worldsuck
    Note that we are already doing what you want: world population is projected to increase by 25% (!) in the next 75 years. At the same time, we're lifting people out of poverty (<a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-population-in-extreme-poverty?tab=line&country=OWID_WRL~CHN~IND~USA~IDN~PAK" rel="nofollow">https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-population-in-ex...) which causes them to be able to buy more stuff, live richer lives, and be less sustainable (e.g. visible on a CO2 chart for the same countries: <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita?country=OWID_WRL~USA~IND~CHN~IDN~PAK" rel="nofollow">https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita?c...). Which is fair right? Why shouldn't they get to live like us. But we can't go on like this; something has to give.
    More people isn't helpful for at least another century. Let's evaluate the baby-making situation in 2100 and work on the real problems we face today
    [deleted] · 1790898060 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
    vlyan · 1790919867 · focus · HN ↗
    >How do you propose to solve the population crisis ?
    by accepting that it is unsolvable. you will not fix it with incentives, disincentives, and government-funded nagging. fixing the population crisis requires undoing urbanization and education. good luck with that.
    quertyrecord74 · 1790956160 · focus · HN ↗
    the sustainable population is 3 billion for earth. we are already way too much.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.