5 ms·
Strong disagree. There is always an economic tradeoff. Hypothetically going from 0.00001% chance of death to 0.000001% chance of death is not worth my ticket pr
by aianus 7y ago
Strong disagree. There is always an economic tradeoff. Hypothetically going from 0.00001% chance of death to 0.000001% chance of death is not worth my ticket price going from $500 to $2000.
Also why I drive to work every day instead of some safer form of transportation.
- eloff 7y agoThe price going from $500 to $2000 for just enforcing reasonable regulations and oversight on Boeing is a pretty blatant strawman. I strongly disagree with your strong disagree.
- TylerE 7y agoIt’s not a straw man. It’s actual facts. This isn’t a hypothetical. Airlines were heavily regulated. We know how it worked.
- eloff 7y agoIt's a straw man. Reasonable regulations are not going to raise prices by 400%. That's absurd. Nobody is saying regulate them to death. But maybe, just maybe, don't let the company themselves certify their own aircraft when it comes to matters of safety, required training, etc.
- aianus 7y ago> Regulations are worth the downsides when it's a matter of life and death. I am in disagreement specifically with this absolute quote. Regulations may or may not be worth the downsides, even when they save lives. The economic costs matter and should be calculated and a reasonable tradeoff should be made. You can't make a statement like that and then turn around and complain about my hypothetical 300% price increase for a 900% safety increase.
- eloff 7y agoI think we're in agreement then. I don't think in terms of absolutes, there's always a trade-off to be made and one must be rational and measured.