Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neeka who wrote (6188)	4/14/2003 7:41:00 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12245

I defended a lot of personal injury cases in the first half of my career. While I still do to some extent, they're no longer the big part of my practice. I recall one death case in which the plaintiff's attorney hired some high-priced hired-gun forensic economist from Chicago who--presto!- said he had invented a way to put a value on a human life. His methodology was to figure out the total amount we spent as a society in trying to preserve and protect human life from harm, then divide the figure up among the number of living Americans. He took guard-rails on bridges, the total cost of medical care, the cost of air bags, the amount spent on safety equipment, ad nauseum, until he came up with an an enormous amount per life. Several million dollars, as I recall. Needless to say, I got the judge to throw him out as a junk science witness. But I always thought in the back of my mind that perhaps he was onto something.

To: Neeka who wrote (6188)	4/14/2003 7:48:38 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 12245

Hi again M. It wasn't that I thought you were too hard on BH. I got a bit sidetracked from the point - the value of humans is a hot-button of mine. It's fair comment to make it 'we' in how little we value human life. The main reason we value human life at a low price is because of our ignorance. We really don't know what the heck is going on so live for the moment, rather than saving for a rainy day or solving problems now to avoid disaster a few years later. We don't even value our own lives very highly! Back on the topic, I think there's a net economic benefit in doing away with Saddam Hussein. So there isn't actually a loss. Sure, there's a cost in that the war cost a lot of money. But look at the half century of economic action in Germany and Japan for an example of the gains to be had from dealing with bad guys. They and we have had huge prosperity without the Third Reich and the Japanese Greater Co-Prosperity Sphere. Same with Saddam. 20 million people can get a life now, make some money and do good things. The cost of the war against Saddam seems to have been a bargain. The lives lost are fewer than would be lost by Saddam continuing in power. One terrorist act against the USA could kill more than the war cost in USA lives. Saddam funded things like the Hebrew University bombing which cost American life. He won't do that again. Osama won't be flying any more aircraft into buildings. The cost of getting him was worth it too. Mqurice