The Value of human life....

[Andonyx]

Dropping?


WASHINGTON -- The Bush White House is pushing federal agencies to slash the dollar value they place on human life, a move that has ignited an ethical debate with administration critics and allies alike.


http://www.oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/front_page/1047905817266650.xml?oregonian?fpfp


I guess it makes sense, I mean there are more humans beings now than ever before, so it's like a supply and demand issue, right?

[Supercharts]

This is related to Tort reform. The Association of American Trial Lawyers hate this move.

[Andonyx]

See I thought there was a recent push in the GAO to start making calculations for war related items with this same standard.

I assumed that's why the would push for a decrease in the Life / dollar equation, in order to make war budget forecasts cheaper.

[Supercharts]

http://www.house.gov/jec/tort/tort/tort.htm

[aerocontrols]

It was my understanding that the FAA (perhaps the NTSB?) utilizes a cost/benefit calculation of approximately $250,000 per life saved. I wonder what the average is across various agencies?

It seems to me that the EPA's (if it truly is $6.1 million per) is pretty high.

MattJ

[Andonyx]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
It was my understanding that the FAA (perhaps the NTSB?) utilizes a cost/benefit calculation of approximately $250,000 per life saved. I wonder what the average is across various agencies?

It seems to me that the EPA's (if it truly is $6.1 million per) is pretty high.

MattJ

I guess, unless, you're that guy.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by Andonyx


I guess, unless, you're that guy.

There's always another guy, if you haven't noticed.

[simplified math]
How about giving the $6.1 million to the FAA to save 24 lives?
[/simplified math]

If you want to stick up for $6.1 million, are you doing that because you've actually thought it through? Why not save even more lives at $12 million a shot for environmental cleanup?

MattJ

[Andonyx]

Originally posted by aerocontrols


There's always another guy, if you haven't noticed.

[simplified math]
How about giving the $6.1 million to the FAA to save 24 lives?
[/simplified math]

If you want to stick up for $6.1 million, are you doing that because you've actually thought it through? Why not save even more lives at $12 million a shot for environmental cleanup?

MattJ

You're right, save the money, and screw 'em!

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by Andonyx


You're right, save the money, and screw 'em!

Or perhaps you could explain to me that the 1 person the EPA can save with that $6 mil. is more important than the 24 people that the FAA can save.

[Andonyx]

Originally posted by aerocontrols


Or perhaps you could explain to me that the 1 person the EPA can save with that $6 mil. is more important than the 24 people that the FAA can save.

Actually, two things.

One, I mis-read your acronyms. So I mis-understood the point of your post. I read the same agency name twice.

Two I think we have the same point. Using flat dollar figures to measure the impact on human life is difficult if not absurd. There has a to be a better way to make decisions than this crude subjective method.

[Gregor]

In the immortal words of Jack Handy:

"No man is worth more than any other man. . . and none more than $124.96"