It makes that case but addresses a number of emotional issues as well. It’s a more sophisticated and insightful discussion than a blunt utilitarian argument.
Note that such decisions are routinely made every day. In the US, the DoT, HHS, and DHS put a price on the benefit of saving a human life differently (e.g. if the cost of upgrading this section of road is more than $X and historical fatality rate has been Y, then don’t bother). Ditto environmental laws.
On a more microeconomic scale we do so through pricing of treatments (Or its equivalent under different systems, queuing), deciding how much excess hospital capacity to invest in, etc. Whether to tax tobacco or not. Et al.
Comments
It makes that case but addresses a number of emotional issues as well. It’s a more sophisticated and insightful discussion than a blunt utilitarian argument.
Note that such decisions are routinely made every day. In the US, the DoT, HHS, and DHS put a price on the benefit of saving a human life differently (e.g. if the cost of upgrading this section of road is more than $X and historical fatality rate has been Y, then don’t bother). Ditto environmental laws.
On a more microeconomic scale we do so through pricing of treatments (Or its equivalent under different systems, queuing), deciding how much excess hospital capacity to invest in, etc. Whether to tax tobacco or not. Et al.