Perhaps, and I've certainly thought this. But as the devil's advocate: would the net present value of 60 years of life is much different from 600 years of life

Perhaps, and I've certainly thought this. But as the devil's advocate: would the net present value of 60 years of life is much different from 600 years of life, after discounting? If we use the prevent value of recurring payments equation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Present_value#Annuities.2C_perpetuities_and_other_common_forms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Present_value#Annuities.2C_perp...) to consider the present value of 60 years, with a modest discounting rate of 6%, we get: > = 16.161427705238 The same number for 600 years is: > = 16.6666666666667 For context, the incremental difference between 50 and 60 years is about the same as for the additional 500+. That far out the incremental present value of a year of life drops to basically zero. Which is to say, for many people (the vast majority, I might guess), the value of these far-off experiences may end up being academic, and thus not factor into their decisions particularly strongly. Certainly some people would be affected - those with low subjective discounting rates, which is to say, future-oriented people. And certainly on the margin it would make people more cautious, but if the premise holds, the effect might not be as far-reaching as you suspect.