5 ms·
That's a measure of what we should spend to save lives, such as by installing safety equipment. Those expenditures increase the size of the economy. The amount
by tlb 7y ago
That's a measure of what we should spend to save lives, such as by installing safety equipment. Those expenditures increase the size of the economy.
The amount by which we should shrink the economy to save lives might be quite a different number. I haven't seen a good analysis of that case.
In general, shrinking the economy costs lives elsewhere such as by malnutrition or lack of money to spend on safety equipment. So the number ought to be lower.
- wwweston 7y agoDeaths will also shrink productive capacity and demand (severe illness would presumably only shrink productive capacity).
- dllthomas 7y ago> Those expenditures increase the size of the economy. If that isn't broken windows, I'm not sure why.
- tlb 7y agoDo you mean the theory that visible signs of petty crime cause more lawlessness generally? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory If so, I don't see the connection.
- dllthomas 7y agoI mean the idea that breaking a window is good for the economy because the glazier gets paid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window No relation to the other. Sorry - my mistake in assuming sufficient familiarity with both to disambiguate from context.
- wideasleep1 7y agoZorg from 5th Element might be a more familiar 'parable', with a cherry on top: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnzzWGcdMqY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnzzWGcdMqY
- tlb 7y agoIt's not anything like the parable of the broken windows, because installing safety equipment makes people's lives better, while breaking windows does not.
- dllthomas 7y agoIf it improves people's lives beyond just the lives saved, then I agree. I don't see that implied in what was written.