Billionaires: I don't see the dilemma. I don't have to do anything and I get more money while a bunch of worthless meat machines die? That sounds like a normal day to me.
Is it just me, or does the comic not make any sense? Wouldn't a rich person always go for the money, thus the people surviving? A better version would be to put the money next to bound people, which would force the rich person to make a choice between money and saving people.
EDIT: Thanks for the clarification. I guess I play too many video games. :)
No, you're reading it wrong. The trolley destroys what it runs over. An easy way to imagine it instead of money's say property. You have 4 people on one line, or your nice shiny car on another. If you choose the people over the car, you've killed 4 people just to keep your car. In like vein, this rich person can either destroy potential profits but save lives, or he can choose to save the profit over the lives of multiple people.
I don't see how your version works: it would be destroying both.
Huschke's version could work if the rich guy wants to destroy money that isn't his in order to make own money more valuable, like I'm pretty sure was the plot of the movie Goldfinger.
Also I guess the green dude blew up the mint shortly before this happened so destroyed money can't just be replaced.
Or if you're not the first in line to die and the train derails before reaching you. Or maybe with some luck the train driver still has some rights and strikes.
The train driver will just be replaced with an Uber driver for a fraction of the cost. Even better the Uber driver is an independent contractor and not an employee so when the train derails the train owner is not liable but are actually entitled to have their damages paid first.
Yeah it's not like this is simple and relevant, and people bend over backwards to pretend otherwise. Pointing out the obvious must mean I'm being smug.
