Shuttle Columbia STS-107 Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Shuttle Columbia STS-107

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Yogizuna who wrote (488)	2/11/2003 6:24:00 PM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (2) of 627

I have no problem with doing that if it would decrease the odds of future disasters. This is the crux of the problem. What is a human life worth? A million dollars? A billion dollars? A trillion? It seems to be a general problem with humans (and Americans in particular) that they do not want to address this head on, but instead claim that it is infinitely valuable. An unworkable statement and obviously absurd if actually taken seriously. So you would pay an extra $10B per year to save about 1/2 a life per year. Or one human life is worth $20B. Does that seem reasonable? It doesn't to me. And don't do the 'we owe it to them' thing since I guarantee that they know the risks and choose to take them. Who are we to judge what risks someone else should be allowed to take. (Before I was married I personally would have taken them even if the risks were three times what they are now.) Clark

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next