SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Biotech / Medical : SARS and Avian Flu -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tom pope who wrote (2755)10/17/2005 4:13:37 AM
From: Maurice Winn  Respond to of 4232
 
<//If, to use a moderate figure for mortality, there are 100 million deaths and they are valued at something like US$1 million each, that's $100 trillion in cost//

That's not an economic value, is it? It may be what courts are inclined to allow, but that's not the same thing.
>

No, that's as used in engineering calculations for the value of safer roads. Such as, "Is it worth building a divided highway here?" "Well, there are 3 deaths per decade, 40 injury crashes and 400 non-injury bumps and delays of 2,340 hours per month".

They add up the value, compared with the construction cost and it's a go or no-go. Not that that's how simple the equation is.

Courts award a LOT more than $1 million for a life. I think juries give that much for a coffee which was too hot.

I mean real value.

One can compared human value with GDP per capita. That's a pretty good guide. Some people are worth a LOT, such as Albert Einstein, and some have negative value [those in prison]. But on average, US$1 million is near enough for my purpose.

I've also mentioned that the worries about too many old people will be solved. Of course that "problem" could be solved more pleasantly by simply telling them to look after themselves. Which is stealing their life's work from them in that they have been taxed all their lives and they can't sell their citizenship, or claim an annuity against it.

Mqurice