Brad

Sorry to hear you're having such a rough time of it. It's not much but can send you some positive thoughts. If you don't mind a bit of advice, don't rush into any decisions while you're feeling like this, and find someone you can talk to. Good time to maybe hang onto the quote you have at the bottom of your posts.

Congratulations on the milestone. Always enjoy your posts.

Hmm, so Peachy and PistolPete who in the other thread just said they have some exhibitionist in them are sitting here naked, and me who chose voyeur have already gotten dressed. Correlation? ;) Anyway, blue boxer-briefs for me.

I'd pick voyeur, myself. Absolutely nothing wrong with being an exhibitionist, of course (indeed, if you like the idea of being a voyeur you have to count on someone else being an exhibitionist, don't you? :) ). I suppose I'm just happy enough to concentrate and perform for the lady I'm with, so the idea of having an audience doesn't do much for me. I can see how it would be a thrill though, and having never tried it I suppose I could be surprised. Wouldn't be the first time something I thought something I had no interest in turned out to be a turn on. On the flip side, well, anyone who watches porn has at least a bit of voyeur in them, no? So I'm fairly sure I'd enjoy watching others enjoying themselves. I think my biggest difficulty there would be resisting the urge to join in!

I find the idea that every family would have a guaranteed minimum income interesting and worth exploring. There are a lot of myths out there about how many people "live off the system" by choice because they're lazy and just want to exploit those willing to work harder. Yes of course there a few bad apples, but for the most part few people on severe social assistance want to be there. Many others are trapped in a cycle of poverty that this sort of standard minimum income would help with. Plus, doing it this way also removes the stigma many people face. Many affluent countries do indeed have the resources that everyone could be guaranteed sufficient food, shelter, education, etc. I'd happily pay my share of taxes to help make this happen. This video is specific to the States, but the points it makes and the general trend of the data are likely true for Canada as well: http://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2 I certainly don't advocate for complete socialism, clearly the current distribution of wealth is out of whack! That said, I too am doubtful about the $10 000 per person figure. That seems an unrealistic amount to fund. I mean, correct me if my math is wrong but in Canada we have a population of about 34 million. Multiply that by ten grand a person and you'd need 348 billion dollars. In 2011-2012 the federal government's entire expenses was about 271 billion...

That fateful day...

Two things I know: As a kid, one of the worst presents you could get me was a pair of thick cozy socks. As an adult, one of the best presents you could get me is a pair of thick cozy socks.

Neil Degrasse Tyson may be one of my favouritest people (that's right, "favouritest"...I'm sticking with that!)

Alluring eyes for lovers of red hair...

Nice responses, all. One of reasons I find this thought experiment fun is that it's interesting to see the different perspectives people come at it from. On one hand, it's interesting how many people feel there are no possible odds good enough that they would risk their life for the million bucks. And yet, as roamingguy suggested, we already take much greater risks everyday for less without giving it a second thought. I mean, presumably if you wouldn't risk 1 in a billion odds for a million dollars, you would also say no if the proposal was a European vacation but the odds of death are 1 in 11 million. And yet the odds of dying in a plane crash are generally put at 1 in 11 million and we fly for pleasure all the time. Heck, we increase our chances of dying whenever we drive out to the corner store when the reward being offered is a bag of chips. On the other hand, there seems to be something about the directness of this particular proposal that puts many people off. Perhaps it's because the offer is so unrealistic and outside of everyday life (unlike flying on a plane or driving to the store) that the risk seems unnecessary in a way the others aren't, or that's it's putting money over the value of life.