4 ms·
That's silly. If we want to look at it in a purely utilitarian view, you could spend $8M per year and spend that on doctors and nurses, or EMT. Swimming is a c
by ggggtez 6y ago
That's silly. If we want to look at it in a purely utilitarian view, you could spend $8M per year and spend that on doctors and nurses, or EMT.
Swimming is a calculated risk. While I appreciate what life guards do, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are more important that other jobs that save lives. You can avoid drowning by simply choosing not to go swimming. If we really want to base things on cost-benefit analysis, someone with some actuary knowledge could probably make a more efficient investment here.
- rhacker 6y ago> You can avoid drowning by simply choosing not to go swimming. That's a personal decision, not a community one. At the community level that would be equivalent to banning visiting the beach. But yes, the rest of your comment definitely applies. However as of right now, LA's government does not believe this to be silly.
- ggggtez 6y agoThe community has to choose where to spend money. So, they want a lifeguard because swimming makes life more enjoyable to live. That's fine. But saying something like "life is priceless" or worth millions or whatever, that's silly. That's not how we decide to pay for any other dangerous job. I don't know what a reasonable pay for a lifeguard is, but Glass door seems to say that the market rate is about 20-40k. This job may be risky, and it has benefits to society, but so do a lot of other jobs.