Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The High Cost of Dying (Micky Z.)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Tace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-01-06 10:52 PM
Original message
The High Cost of Dying (Micky Z.)
Mickey Z. -- World News Trust

Sept. 26, 2006 -- In the film noir classic, “The Third Man,” Orson Welles (as the supposedly dead Harry Lime) looks down from the top of a Ferris wheel and asks Joseph Cotton (as the very naïve Hollie Martins) about the people moving about on the ground... "dots" he calls 'em.

Welles poses the provocative question of just how many dots Cotton would allow to "stop moving" if offered $20,000 for each. How might you respond if presented with such an offer? In a world where a child starves to death every two seconds, just how much can one miserable life be worth? Is it obscene to talk about humans having a monetary value? According to more than a few corporations and government agencies, it's not obscene... it's policy.

Executive Order No. 12,292 (signed by Ronnie Raygun in 1981) states: "Regulatory action shall not be undertaken unless the potential benefits to society for the regulation outweigh the potential costs to society." Before implementing a new safety regulation, all government agencies must put it to the cost/benefit analysis test. To figure the "benefit to society," the agency uses statistics to estimate the number of lives expected to be saved. As for the "cost to society," that's estimated in dollars. Now comes the tricky part: The agency has to assign a monetary value to each human life. Yes, you read that right. The Feds tell each of us exactly how much we're worth. From there, the number of projected lives saved is multiplied by the dollar value of each life and the resulting number is compared to the expected cost of implementing the regulation. Then the economically based decision is made. (The going rate for one slightly used human fluctuates from agency to agency.)

As for the corporate world, insurance companies customarily settle wrongful-death suits by evaluating the deceased's "earning power." New York State law, for example, allows for a settlement in a wrongful-death case based on either economic loss or pain and suffering prior to death. In other words, if you go rather quickly in a car crash and you don't have much in the way of earning potential... well, you know the rest.

more

http://www.worldnewstrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=274
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC