Forums / Social /
Poll: Would you take a million dollars if you knew it would cost a random person their life?

http://www.asylum.com/2009/10/27/the-box-would-you-accept-a-million-dollars-if-it-meant-person-dies/

I thought this would make an interesting discussion. Yes it's from that movie.

Call me a Commie, but I honestly don't care much about money. I think compassion and love are far more important. A human life is far more important than silly frivolities, like big screen TVs and fancy cars.

However, if this million dollars (in exchange for one human life), was to somehow help humanity, and in turn save millions, I would accept it, knowing that it went on to help the greater good. Although, I'd still feel guilty over that one person. Hopefully they volunteered for it.

Now I'm thinking too much.

I saw like three previews for that movie in a one hour period last night. It's an interesting concept. I found myself labeling the movie "dark contemporary fantasy".

I voted no way, above, and then I saw what Cactus Jack said about picking who dies. If I got to pick the victims, I would have three million dollars in about three seconds.

I think the movie would be way more interesting if it were like that, because then it could explore the reasons for killing another person (aside from just getting cash). Jealousy, rage, vigilante justice? Would the button-pusher be right about their victim's guilt of some kind, or would there be a hidden fact that they don't learn til it's too late, that proves they killed a (relatively) innocent person? That, I'd watch.

As a capitalist....I would like to put in my two cents, and just say: Show Me The Money.

I think most reasonably intelligent people would take the money, regardless of their ethics.

1) You can save thousands of lives with a million dollars, or at the very least save hundreds.

2) People die all the time for your pleasure. The crab you had yesterday at that fancy restaurant probably cost a couple people their lives to try and catch, and a lot of children die in child labor working to keep wallmart prices low.

3) You could probably afford to donate a couple thousand to charity which would save a couple lives, or at least improve some. That means by spending money on luxuries, you are inevitably allowing people to die anyway. The million would just be much more efficient.

4) The people that you would save by taking the million would die indirectly by you not taking the money and saving them. In other words, not taking the money, even from an ethical standpoint, is unethical.

5) If you saved so much as two lives and spent the rest of the money on yourself, the net gain would be one life (in other words, by allowing one to die you saved two, rather than letting the two die instead of the one).

6) If you devoted the money to medical research, you could save millions of lives through a vaccine or something of that nature.

i could do it to help someone commit suicide