3 ms·

That gets to a really odd fact of people (as in the collective "we"). Why would we think cars should have seatbelts if we would rarely see the value enough to p

• JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Why would we think cars should have seatbelts if we would rarely see the value enough to pay for or use them? If everyone pays, the fixed costs are amortised across everyone. (Also, it’s hidden in the purchase price.) That lowers the aggregate barrier to entry. Think: toll roads versus roads paid for with taxes.
  • _heimdall 3y ago
    We may be getting off on a tangent here, but seat belt prices aren't really amortized. They are a hidden cost since we aren't told the price, and they are cheaper than if they were an option but that's mainly due to manufacturing efficiencies. Requiring seatbelts would never make them cheaper than having no seatbelts. Lowering the barrier to entry is only really a benefit to those who would opt in anyway, it forces those who wouldn't want it to pay the cost of that. In the original topic, my main point was that if consumers are made aware of the current safety issues Boeing has had and ultimately don't factor that in at all when flying then we really should be done here. The FAA doesn't need to do anything to protect the public if the public has shown that it just doesn't care, and people/media should stop talking about it as though its a controversy when consumers are just as willing to fly Boeing as they are Airbus.