3 ms·
Easy to solve - just calculate the economical and moral expenses of the outbreak, split them between all anti-vax proponents and make them pay.
by xvilka 8y ago
Easy to solve - just calculate the economical and moral expenses of the outbreak, split them between all anti-vax proponents and make them pay.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- mort96 8y agoWhat would you write down as the exact monetary value of a human life? How do you arrive at that number?
- falsedan 8y agoAsk an actuary
- YokoZar 8y agoThe same way any large policy maker does. This is a recurrent theme in social science, as you have to make big decisions such as whether it's worth spending an extra billion dollars on a slightly safer bridge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life
- mort96 8y agoI don't know if that feels entirely applicable. People who advocate that people shouldn't vaccinate their children simply increase the chance of large amounts of people dying from preventable disease; if they didn't, nothing would've been lost. Calculating how much should be spent on a bridge, on the other hand, is simply necessary in a world where there is demand for bridges even though there's not enough resources to ensure that both enough bridges are built, and that every single bridge is guaranteed to be 100% safe.
- Isinlor 8y agoHere you go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life In general the term refers to the cost of reducing the average number of deaths by one. In US it would be little bit less than 10 million dollars.
- xvilka 8y agoOf course there is no such number. But there is a standard law practice and other methods of calculating this value, for the cases of moral compensation or safety/emergency decisions. The same rules can be applied here.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- roel_v 8y agoThere is lots of research and literature about that. In the West, it's generally somewhere between 250k and 2mm.