Michael Huang
Librarian and open access repository administrator

I have started a newsletter, Post-Suffering, about a future when involuntary suffering no longer exists.

I also started the Wikipedia article eradication of suffering and I'm in the International Suffering Abolitionists group.

I first got involved in EA by attending EA Global: Melbourne 2015. I donated to the Future of Life Institute through EA Giving Tuesday to reduce existential risks.

How others can help me

A theory of change for the eradication of involuntary suffering

How I can help others

Open access and research

Topic Contributions

Load More

Comments

Preventing a US-China war as a policy priority

No worries. I think we have different definitions of the status quo, and that is affecting our interpretation of the survey results.

Your definition of the status quo is a form of independence: functional independence (or perhaps de facto independence). In which case, since all the survey results show that "Maintain status quo" is popular, means that independence is the most popular choice.

My definition of the status quo is something in-between unification and independence, like a third way. It's the "none of the above" choice, disapproving both unification and independence. If this definition is used, then all the survey results show that this position is the most popular choice.

It's a shame that the survey question doesn't actually define what the status quo is. The status quo changes over time too, so it's hard to pin down.

But perhaps that is what makes the status quo option so popular. It's a vague, undefined entity that can be interpreted whatever way you like.

Anyway, for completeness, here's the full survey question from the data collection methodology:

The independence-unification (TI-UM) position is constructed from the following survey item:

“Thinking about Taiwan-mainland relations, there are several differing opinions:

  1. unification as soon as possible;
  2. independence as soon as possible;
  3. maintain the status quo and move toward unification in the future;
  4. maintain the status quo and move toward independence in the future;
  5. maintain the status quo and decide in the future between independence or unification;
  6. maintain the status quo indefinitely.

Which do you prefer?”

In addition to these six attitudes, the trend chart also includes non-responses for a total of seven categories.

Preventing a US-China war as a policy priority

Thanks for your post! Good to see this issue in the EA Forum.

Regarding the statement that:

At this point, most people in Taiwan don’t consider themselves Chinese anymore and simply want to be their own nation instead, indefinitely.

Survey data supports your first point. The vast majority of people in Taiwan call themselves "Taiwanese" or "Both Taiwanese and Chinese":

Taiwanese/Chinese Identity, Election Study Center, National Chengchi University

 

Survey data doesn't support your second point though: "[most people in Taiwan] simply want to be their own nation instead, indefinitely". Most people in Taiwan support the status quo in various forms:

 Taiwan Independence vs. Unification with the Mainland, Election Study Center, National Chengchi University

The most popular options are:

  • Maintain status quo, decide at later date (28.4%)
  • Maintain status quo indefinitely (27.3%)
  • Maintain status quo, move toward independence (25.1%)

The survey question doesn't define what the status quo is, but it's definitely not independence, and it's definitely not unification. It's the grey area, the middle choice, between independence and unification.

The US uses strategic ambiguity to keep Taiwan with the status quo. It will support Taiwan as long as it doesn't declare formal independence and start a war.

Why is the status quo so popular? It means peace and prosperity, and it has been surprisingly stable over the last 70 years.

How much funding is needed to eradicate Malaria?

WHO published a report on malaria eradication (2020) that covers megatrends like climate change.

It is similar to other reports in recommending over $6 billion per year to meet targets.

How much funding is needed to eradicate Malaria?

The Lancet Commission on Malaria Eradication (2019) : "Malaria eradication is likely to cost over $6 billion per year. The world is already spending around $4.3 billion."

If eradication is achieved by 2040, that would be about $120 billion in total.

How much funding is needed to eradicate Malaria?

None mentioned in the report. It refers to the Methods section of an online appendix but the appendix doesn't appear to be on the website.

How much funding is needed to eradicate Malaria?

$90 to $120 billion:

“Any costing of a 25-year eradication effort is speculative and involves uncertainties that increase over time. Nonetheless, initial modeling suggests that the costs of eradicating malaria could be $90–$120 billion between 2015 and 2040.”

From Aspiration to Action (2015)

Wild Animal Welfare Literature Library: Original Research and Cause Prioritization

(Sorry, I didn't see your comment until now.)

Animal Ethics has some bibliographical lists: https://www.animal-ethics.org/bibliographical-lists/

Kyle Johannsen's book Wild Animal Ethics has extensive reference lists https://philpapers.org/rec/JOHWAE-2

New forum feature: preview & embed Our World in Data charts

Great feature! Just wondering whether Our World in Data charts can be embedded into Substack and Ghost in a similar way.

Load More
Librarian and open access repository administrator