Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

2020 Dumpster Fire (Enter at your own risk)


jk

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, dynato said:

He is doing the opposite of turning a blind eye. Walz is making decisions off the middle to extreme ends of all death projections brought to him. It is evident he cares more about preservation of life at this point in time than the economy. 

Well, if that’s the case, here is a list of other things that need to be shut down or banned forever so Minnesotans don’t get hurt:

state parks - someone might fall and die.

bike trails - someone might fall and die.

youth hockey - someone might get hit by a puck and die.

coffee shops - someone might get addicted to caffeine and die.

baseball games - someone might take a bad hop at SS and get hit by a ball and die.

tricycles and bicycles - a toddler or child could tip over and die.

New Year’s Eve and July 4th - self-explanatory.

Hey, if it saves just one life, it’s worth it, right?

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, MafiaMan said:

Well, if that’s the case, here is a list of other things that need to be shut down or banned forever so Minnesotans don’t get hurt:

state parks - someone might fall and die.

bike trails - someone might fall and die.

youth hockey - someone might get hit by a puck and die.

coffee shops - someone might get addicted to caffeine and die.

baseball games - someone might take a bad hop at SS and get hit by a ball and die.

tricycles and bicycles - a toddler could tip over and die.

Hey, if it saves just one life, it’s worth it, right?

I understand that the decision to preserve a life is a tricky and touchy subject to understand. The economic impact of losing a human life is right around 10 Million dollars. Most decisions for implementing safety precautions in our every day lives are made against this value.  What this means is that if the cost of saving one life exceeds 10 million dollars, then it is considered a poor financial decision and likely won't be implemented.

The list you made averages single digit deaths and does not meet the cost of mandating the implementation of safety precautions everywhere. If Minnesota thinks they can save 20,000 lives from the virus by implementing rigorous stay at home measures, to them that is saving them 200 billion dollars. Whether or not 20,000 lives were at risk, that is the debate this will be weighed against in the future. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dynato said:

I understand that the decision to preserve a life is a tricky and touchy subject to understand. The economic impact of losing a human life is right around 10 Million dollars. Most decisions for implementing safety precautions in our every day lives are made against this value.  What this means is that if the cost of saving one life exceeds 10 million dollars, then it is considered a poor financial decision and likely won't be implemented.

The list you made averages single digit deaths and does not meet the cost of mandating the implementation of safety precautions everywhere. If Minnesota thinks they can save 20,000 lives from the virus by implementing rigorous stay at home measures, to them that is saving them 200 billion dollars. Whether or not 20,000 lives were at risk, that is the debate this will be weighed against in the future. 

Just looking at the cold, unemotional numbers, does the death of a 90 year old possess the same economic impact as that of a 30 year old?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

Just looking at the cold, unemotional numbers, does the death of a 90 year old possess the same economic impact as that of a 30 year old?

Statistically no. Value of a life decreases with age. Morally yes, all life is created equal, which is why the government bases every life regardless of age, at 10 million dollars. In a position where you have to chose between saving a 30 year old and a 90 year old, you chose the 30 year old. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, BarnWinterSportsEngelstad said:

Maybe we can count them as influenza patients then.

Or Fauci can call for a shelter in place nation wide order around Halloween for 3 months to help mitigate both?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, yzerman19 said:

How do they come up with $10M?  That’s $100k of economic value add for 100 years...

Most people can agree life is priceless. However, a value must be defined for many decisions.  It is not based solely off what the average american makes times life expectancy. There is a whole lot of research into this and it is a well established number. The most well known method is the Value of Statistical Life (VSL).  It is basically the number at which americans are willing to accept a larger risk of death for more pay or willing to accept a larger risk of death for paying less. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-value-of-life/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, UNDBIZ said:

Just looking at the cold, unemotional numbers, does the death of a 90 year old possess the same economic impact as that of a 30 year old?

I think we have death panels for that...or used to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...