RE: Math is hard. i'd rather rant.

RE: Math is hard. i'd rather rant. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Wildfleurs -> RE: Math is hard. i'd rather rant. (3/28/2007 12:29:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: petdave i've been told that i'm a cold-hearted SOB because i refuse to donate blood on the same principle... if i needed it from a hospital, i'd damned sure be charged for it, so why on earth would i give it away? It makes no sense. I realize that this is away from the topic, but you do realize that they don't just take blood, stick it in a zip lock bag and give it to someone the next day? They have to test the blood, perserve, and store it. Not to mention some blood (the plasma) is processed to make other valuable products for hemopheliacs and others. On top of that there are the base supplies costs like the needle to take blood donations, bag dohickey thing the donated blood immediately goes into, staff time, etc. Unless they charge the people that donate the blood, it makes complete sense to charge the recipient of that blood the cost for taking, processing, and storing the blood they now are able to get. C~

FirmhandKY -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/28/2007 12:48:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs It depends hugely on the person. ... I don't have a line in the sand on what I think is the acceptable cost, for me it does depend. However I do think its easier to be callous about the value of life in hypotheticals, but if you are that one in a million that could die it becomes quite a bit more importnat to spend money to save a life. Certainly "it depends". No argument there. How is it being "callous"? It's a hard decision, certainly, but it is one that is made every day. Choosing to "not" make a decision means either: 1. That the funds won't be spent, and therefore you are condemning people to die, or 2. Someone else will make the decision. This is allowing others to usurp your value judgements and replace it with theirs. Number (1) I think one could call "callous". Number (2) might be called moral cowardice. FirmKY

Wildfleurs -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/28/2007 1:34:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs It depends hugely on the person. ... I don't have a line in the sand on what I think is the acceptable cost, for me it does depend. However I do think its easier to be callous about the value of life in hypotheticals, but if you are that one in a million that could die it becomes quite a bit more importnat to spend money to save a life. Certainly "it depends". No argument there. How is it being "callous"? It's a hard decision, certainly, but it is one that is made every day. Choosing to "not" make a decision means either: 1. That the funds won't be spent, and therefore you are condemning people to die, or 2. Someone else will make the decision. This is allowing others to usurp your value judgements and replace it with theirs. Number (1) I think one could call "callous". Number (2) might be called moral cowardice. FirmKY I didn't say it was callous, I said it was easier to be callous when its hypothetical and not your own life on the line. Which is why in most business (for or non profit) schools these days they teach an ethics class, which is ususally mandatory. Its very easy to crunch hypothetical numbers into an excel sheet all day valuing people's lives, its harder to do when you are aware of the impact in a more personal way. C~

meatcleaver -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/28/2007 2:10:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY ahhh, meat! I hope it's worth waiting for! [:D] quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver [waiting approval] Probably not. Though I do recommend being moderated. I've managed to do three times the amount of work this week as I normally do and close to finishing the project I'm on. Damn I hate computers but customers expect a CAD drawing even if they are being conned with them.

losttreasure -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/28/2007 2:21:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy And another thing Firmhand. If you think that I will sit idly by while your posts take on the lackadaisical flavor of this one think again...Buddy! I want your posts mean and based on your conservative views....(Domiguy spies Firmhand making out with lost treasure in the seedy Nigerian sub section of CMville)....Oh Firmy!..Look what she has done to you....You big ol' softy....(Domiguy hangs head in disgust...Goes to get some tasty Nigerian food and a blowjob) [:D] Domiguy, I'll admit that have treasure close by may ... I repeat may ... have mellowed me a bit from time to time... Don't you believe it for a minute. I'm every bit the classic liberal that FirmhandKY is. If anything, I'm his cheerleader. [;)]

FirmhandKY -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/28/2007 2:29:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs I didn't say it was callous, I said it was easier to be callous when its hypothetical and not your own life on the line. Which is why in most business (for or non profit) schools these days they teach an ethics class, which is ususally mandatory. Its very easy to crunch hypothetical numbers into an excel sheet all day valuing people's lives, its harder to do when you are aware of the impact in a more personal way. Regardless of whether it is "easy" or not - it's done. Are you suggesting that we abandon "cost benefit analysis" because it's immoral? FirmKY

NeedToUseYou -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/28/2007 4:44:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou I'd say how much a person's life is worth varies from person to person. You select how much protecting your life is worth. If you value your life enough to spend 5,000 to upgrade your bathroom againt the .00001 chance you'd have died if those enhancements weren't present. Well, I'd say that figures in your value for insuring one's own survival. Sure. But that's your money. We can always do whatever we want with our money (or at least the part that the government doesn't take). What about other peoples' money? Hrmmm, I don't feel I have the right to tell other people what to do with their money. So, I guess, to answer your question. I'd make people spend zero... If your talking about government money, well that is my money, and their money, but for things like the bathroom scenario, I'd say they should refund it in full and let people decide. Such examples as you gave are not required in my view, via government policy, or taxation. quote: ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou This is the whole premise, why is it your decision to put a value on my life or mine to put a value on yours and all life must share the same value. I do actually wear my seat belt most of the time. Because I view it as a good risk reduction proposition. However, it irks me to no end that someone thinks that I'm so stupid that I must be told I must wear my seatbelt or they'll take my money, or driving privileges. You determine your life's worth. I'd say some people if I'm doing the tallying or worth negative money, and others worth millions. It's not a apples and apples proposition in my view. A rapist wife beater, meth head, is worth absolutely nothing to me. A honest hard working person, would be worth millions. But unfortunately, I'm just a slave to the bean counters and they tell me what risk I must or must not accept, under the threat of prosecution. In the examples I gave, there isn't any way to tell "whose" life will be saved. It's a statistic. So, in reality, it's just an "average" persons life saved. Just walk down the street and pick every 5th person, and tell me - how much money do you think it would be "acceptable" to have to pay to keep that person alive? How much money I would pay to keep them alive. Well, nothing. I'd pay to save people I knew. I understand stats, but I don't believe in charity by stats. So, I'd donate zero to the save a random person fund. For the simple fact that I don't know if they are worth saving, and I know enough people that could use help, that I would feel warranted help more than rolling the dice. Like petdave says, math is hard. But this question is one that is asked, and answered every day. Just because it hard, doesn't mean we can refuse to face it. In fact, I'd say if a person refuses to answer it, they are abrogating their responsiblity as a citizen. This is really - really - a serious question. If you vote, the people who you are voting for are making the decision. Or their friendly neighbor lobbyist is. If you had to tell your representative how much you think would be "acceptable" - how much is that figure? Again, zero. In my "Bathroom" scenario, lets say it saves 100 lives a year. How much would you be willing for each life saved to cost? Again zero, I'd help people I knew make the upgrade. Maybe, it just your scenario is to fringe, I would agree things like drinking water should be monitored, because it is essential to life for everyone and I everyone can't buy their own water plant. But things like your bathroom scenario, where everyone has the individual power to control the safety of their bathroom for the most part is in the realm of individual choice. I just don't agree that scenarios as outlined are necessary at all, I guess. FirmKY

ferryman777 -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/28/2007 5:01:04 PM)
Hello, This was not the cost of a life, Bush capped what you can sue for; it was to help the doctors, hospitals, insurances.

domiguy -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/28/2007 5:01:56 PM)
Human life...what is it worth?.....Hmmmm strictly from a medical standpoint I would be happy with some sort of a lottery being introduced to help keep health care costs down and provide services to those younger and less fortunate.....for instance you are 72 yrs old...Ate everything under the sun and smoked. Well now big surprise you need a shit load of work on your heart..Your life expectancy w/o health probs is probably at best early 80's ...So you would bring in the lottery machine remove balls based upon attained age and lifestyle lived....And then let the fun begin!!!! It even could even be televised!!!! Imagine the camera in tight to capture every emotion as Uncle Chester watches the balls swirl in anticipation of his fate....Now that's Entertainment! A little off the topic...But relevant..perhaps.

domiguy -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/28/2007 5:04:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ferryman777 Hello, This was not the cost of a life, Bush capped what you can sue for; it was to help the doctors, hospitals, insurances. So was HIPAA.

ferryman777 -> RE: Math is hard. i'd rather rant. (3/28/2007 5:28:15 PM)
Hey Dave, nothing cold hearted about wanting value for value; as you said, if you need it, they'll charge you for it; so...fuck them. As I said, every organ in the human body comes with a price tag; donate an organ...WOW, CLEAR PROFIT. Now, has anyone seen a body, a cadavier, who has donated organs, how 'respectful, they are treated. I have....and this 28 year old girl, killed in an auto accident, was carved up like a side of beef in the butcher shop. As for a value of life, with regard to skills, race, etc.; Hitler put it this way......Life Unworthy of Life......so, the question is> Who decides which lives are unworthy of life. What criteria will those 'whos' use. As for money value....what can you sell your liver for? or your Kidney? What is the resale value? What will the end user pay? Then, if you view from a seller/consummer perspective, a life is worth a whole hell of a lot. Now, what is needed is to round up the 'citizencattle'; pen them up, keep them healthy, and take the organs as they are needed. The ones that are unhealthy, old, infirmed in some way....just make sure the food is shit (which it is BTW, beeves are fed their own shit, mixed with their feed); package it nice, add a clown to encourage the kiddies, close down all the health food stores, especially for the elderly, lets gorge prices like tomatos going for 3 bucks a pound, and other good stuff being unafforable except for the elite. If a person reaches 50, have them exaimed, if they are healthy, okay, they can live awhile longer to funnel tax dollars in, if they are disabled, off to the ovens....er, I mean...farm.....okay, so the fucks bought the farm. Only the rich have value, if you are an Arnold, Bush, Buffet, then you are life worthy of life.....any one who scrunges for a living is part of the herd... a livestock on the hoof; according to how much taxes you pay deems you life worthy of life or....life unworthy of life. Hitler would line up their victims, one behind the other, and fire one bullet......they had it figured to the cost of a bullet, is what a life is worth. Kill two Jews with one bullet....you've made money.

FirmhandKY -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/28/2007 6:14:17 PM)
need, I'm probably more in agreement with you than you'd believe. But that's not the point. Your tax dollars ARE being used this way. Right. Now. Whether you agree with it or not. The example I gave was simply a way to set up the question, without trying to shoot anyone's sacred cow. Think theoretical, eh? FirmKY

pahunkboy -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/28/2007 7:40:14 PM)
in simple terms a life is worth 30k. for the simple reason of havesting organs. [maybe higher]

JackAnory -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/29/2007 9:32:15 AM)
Some people are worth more than others so this should be taken into consideration when having such debates.

FirmhandKY -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/29/2007 10:42:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JackAnory Some people are worth more than others so this should be taken into consideration when having such debates. So ... how do you measure that difference in "worth"? FirmKY

ferryman777 -> RE: Math is hard. i'd rather rant. (3/29/2007 1:31:41 PM)
Well yes, there are functional costs, but why would they charge the people who donate the blood? If you donate, it's usually you giving your pint for free, then why can't the blood plants donate their free time, labor and what all. It costs to process the blood, sure, but it also costs to maintain a healthy body.

ferryman777 -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/29/2007 4:56:57 PM)
Yup, you got it, that's about right. Now, how about keeping the stiff alive...you have to factor that also into your figures. Figure how much tax revenue the stiff yeilds, how much benifit to the doctors, hospitals, corpations, etc., if the stiff is on welfare, hell, he's military cannon fodder; if he/she is sick, he/she is a parasite on society, gass em, shave their heads, make wigs for the elitist wives to wear; or funnel in the hair to the wig maker industry; use the bodies for fertilizer, surely there must be some use for the creeps; hell, pratice your medical experiments on them. All this must be factored into the cost of life. The organs, what the living cadavier can yeild; as well as the dead cadavier. Yup, you got it.

ferryman777 -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/29/2007 5:17:06 PM)
Hello Meatcleaver, Well what you say is very definetly true, and really idealistic. In truth, in reality, this society is market based...to the inclusion of everything and everyone who exists. THere is no such thing as you describe, not one person is willing to give one drop of anything to anyone else. Very rare when that occurs, when one gives unselfishly to another. Christian sell, yes SELL, the blood of Jesus; been to a church lately. Look at the Catholics, a nazi sits on the throne now, and it is the richest 'faith' going, having stolem more material goods than anyone...yet they tell the citizen, "lay up not trasures on earth, where dust and moth may corrupt, by lay ye up treasures in heaven," etc.... So, why don't they dump their treasures? Everything is for sale, everything comes with a price, large or small; it's all, life is for sale.

NeedToUseYou -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/29/2007 7:11:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY need, I'm probably more in agreement with you than you'd believe. But that's not the point. Your tax dollars ARE being used this way. Right. Now. Whether you agree with it or not. The example I gave was simply a way to set up the question, without trying to shoot anyone's sacred cow. Think theoretical, eh? FirmKY I understand the question, but you are trying to get me to come up with something that I will always think is wasteful. So, my solution is to refund the money, and let people make a choice. I don't understand how I can give you any other answer without lying about it. The government is spending the money on stuff I feel is unnecessary, that doesn't mean it always must be that way, it is possible, for the government to stop wasting it, instead of finding a new cause to spend it on. That's my answer. To me there is no difference between the bathroom scenarios, and paying a check to horny dudes to go get a bj when they are single. Actually that would probably lower the hostility levels more and subsequent violence, therefore lower the death rate more than the bathroom law. It's just as insane to me as the theoritical "Bathroom Scenario", and what guy would veto that legislation. We ALL BENEFIT!!! To boot it puts all the underemployeed prostitutes to work, and ensures a constant stream of clientel. The current policy of whoredom, unfairly restricts access to whores and their soothing effects. Thus it is discriminatory. Why should the rich only partake in whore ass? There I'd say that would be worth 5.00 dollars, and it would fall under save lives as the dudes would be less apt to fight at closing hours at the bar, as their would be a lessening of pussy fury( because of the bj insurance), enduced by the last available female leaving the bar. 10 guys one pussy, it 's not going to be pretty.

JackAnory -> RE: What is the monetary cost of a life? (3/30/2007 12:17:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: JackAnory Some people are worth more than others so this should be taken into consideration when having such debates. So ... how do you measure that difference in "worth"? FirmKY I knew someone would reply to that. In the UK the job you were doing is taken into consideration when judges rule on how much your family should be paid upon the event of your death through the negligence of others. The judge will also take into consideration how many working years left you had. This means old people and those with unskilled jobs are in legal terms worth less than young people with skilled jobs. In the eyes of the law rightly or wrongly this is just the way it is and I was just putting across that fact.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875