X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable version=3.2.2 Sender: -2.6 (spamval) -- NONE Return-Path: Received: from newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l7V5ZTux019807 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:35:29 -0400 Received: from madman.mr.itd.umich.edu (mx.umich.edu [141.211.14.134]) by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7V5Z3b6029699 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:35:06 -0400 Received: FROM newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) BY madman.mr.itd.umich.edu ID 46D7A886.8D0E4.1459 ; 31 Aug 2007 01:35:02 -0400 Received: from boston.eecs.umich.edu (boston.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.61]) by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7V5YcTH029605 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:34:38 -0400 Received: from boston.eecs.umich.edu (localhost.eecs.umich.edu [127.0.0.1]) by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l7V5Yvux019780 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:34:58 -0400 Received: from localhost (dreeves Æ localhost) by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.12.9/Submit) with ESMTP id l7V5Yv57019777; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:34:57 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: boston.eecs.umich.edu: dreeves owned process doing -bs X-X-Sender: dreeves Æ boston.eecs.umich.edu In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <4CE28F9E-2B6E-4834-B3FA-1C3FBF2E7341 Æ umich.edu> <02548635-1F0E-4244-847D-8FA54DACAD4B Æ umich.edu> <1acf35a70708221835o75734aa2waa72f00b69632a18 Æ mail.gmail.com> <78195003-0498-4DB5-A1CE-CAA5605DE533 Æ umich.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.2 (2007-07-23) on newman.eecs.umich.edu X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.91.2, clamav-milter version 0.91.2 on newman.eecs.umich.edu X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.91.2, clamav-milter version 0.91.2 on newman.eecs.umich.edu X-Virus-Status: Clean Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:34:57 -0400 (EDT) To: Dave Morris cc: improvetheworld Æ umich.edu, Steven Reeves , reeves-hayos Æ umich.edu, reeves-kalkman Æ umich.edu From: Daniel Reeves Subject: Re: mind the gap I'm not trivializing, I'm making a strong claim: In terms of public policy, literally everything can and should be measured in dollars (or yootles). (I'm not certain we entirely disagree about this as we've kind of gotten hung up on some nitty gritty. I have no defense for the ERIM CEO and he may well have been a crook; I agree that US health insurance is a disaster; I agree that we should pump way more tax dollars into children's education (and I don't think it's so hard to (roughly) quantify the long-term value of that).) Human life itself has a dollar value. [1] We can infer this from our choices about how much to spend on safety features on cars, or additional pay for risky jobs, or how often to overhaul airplanes. Here's an example, a very flawed one [2], but the underlying point remains: (from my undergraduate AI textbook) Paradoxically, a refusal to put a monetary value on life means that life is often undervalued. Ross Schachter relates an experience with a government agency that that commissioned a study on removing asbestos from schools. The study assumed a particular dollar value for the life of a school-age child, and argued that the rational choice under that assumption was to remove the asbestos. The government agency, morally outraged, rejected the report out of hand. It then decided against asbestos removal. Dave makes 7 other points, listed here, that I haven't addressed. Little help, anyone? :) Dave's points: 1. Regulations on stock trading should factor in the decreased happiness of the screwed-over ERIM employees. 2. Poor people derive more benefit from museums than they are willing to pay for. 3. Slavery is an example of how making money can be worse than losing money. 4. Capitalism does not respect basic human rights. 5. There is such a thing as bad profit when one party doesn't realize the bad consequences of the deal they're making. 6. How, in a purely free-market system, does anyone decide it's a good idea to have a mental hospital for the poor? 7. Speed limits are an example of why it is too simplistic to allow all consensual behavior. OK, I'll do #7: To take a principled approach I would prefer, instead of speed limits, an extremely dire punishment for causing an accident while exceeding the "recommended speed" [3]. In general, I'm all for outlawing behavior that harms others (directly). I'm all for getting cars off of this island I live on -- they quite directly decrease my utility (everyone I know seems to agree). Oh, and #3 is covered by footnote 1. Explicitly value human freedom and slavery is unjustifiable. This leaves 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 up for grabs! :) Danny Footnotes: [1] If human life itself has a dollar value then human freedom (not being a slave) must too. Perhaps the two should be the same, a la Patrick Henry ("give me liberty or give me death"). [2] My grandfather explained that the government agency in question was probably quite right in the case cited: > Asbestos was used as efficient insulation material for buildings, > ships, and a number of other applications in the approximate timeframe > of 1925-1975. By about 1975, there was solid clinical-epidemiological > as well as animal-experimental evidence that inhaled asbestos fibers > cause lung cancer. The use of asbestos for these applications was > abandoned but the question arose what to do with insulation already > in place. Infuriated lay groups demanded immediate removal. Actually, > well compounded and competently installed asbestos insulation is, after > a period of settling (1-2 weeks) no longer a significant source of air- > borne fibers but school boards would seldom listen to such arguments. > The mere presence of such a horrible poison in school buildings was > deemed outrageous. "Asbestos removal" became the great fashion of the > decade, and hundreds of companies were hastily founded to do such jobs, > frequently with barely any expertise. Typically, fiber count in an > indoor air sample after "removal" was 10-100+ times higher than before. > When the federal EPA realized what was going on it issued a pamphlet > trying to explain these facts and if indoor air samples in a building > were not in excess of a certain threshold (which was changed 3 times > in the 1970's) removal was contraindicated. So I should find a real example of how refusal to quantify the value of human life can lead to undervaluing it. But I think the point is clear. No one thinks it's worth paying an extra $1000 per airline ticket to reduce the one-in-a-million chance of dying in a plane crash. [3] Perhaps criminal culpability for injuries/deaths caused. Right now, we tend to weigh the risk of a ticket. That's the wrong risk to be weighing! And when the freeway's completely deserted you really should feel free to exceed the speed limit. As for teenagers who don't know how to assess risk, they shouldn't be driving at all. -- http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves - - search://"Daniel Reeves" "It was suffering and fun." -- Rieko Kojima on Half Dome Hike