I’m not clear what you are driving at? The question was a statistical economic one, or? So my or other persons individual problems with this question do not matter for a valid incorporation of crime.
And easy could be meant morally or effortwise.
As a rationalist I obviously have no inhibitions on placing a monetary value on my life. Not placing a value on human life is a taboo intended to prevent dam breaking. It is not a truth. It won’t break a dam for me.
It takes some effort to arrive at a suitable amount though because there are so many aspects to take into account:
Economic value: Depending on your utility function there are multiple different cases:
** If you are seflish you will place a high value on your life—but only to ensure that you live, not to compensate others for your demise. Thus rather no life ensurance but instead safety measures against hazards of your choosing.
** You might also consider life or disability insurance if your loss will place your relatives in existential risks. Thus you consider your value to very high for your more or less large environment.
** You might avoid the social insurance if you think that you can invest yourself better. Thus you value yourself less for the society and/or your family (which might need/want to catch you if you fall).
Symbolic value: By placing a value on my life e.g. in the form of life-insurance I signal how much I value my life. If it is in the form of life or annuity insurance this may signal to my significant other that I cater for future safety in case of my demise. This is related to the financial value above but different in so far as the other person(s) may not completely grasp the derivation of the other aspects and just look at the symbolic value.
Societal value: Should I die that will be a loss for the society I live in. The investments the society made will not pay out as much as expected. This is measured by the SVL mentioned previously. As I care for the future well being of my society and feel obligued to it to some amount (partly because that society will host my relatives) I have to take that value into account to some personal fraction.
What does this mean for me? I didn’t do the complete calculation. I did calculate some figures for insurance (and didn’t blindly follow insurance agents recommendations).
For example when considering some top-up health insurance I estimated my personal risk of lengthy illness and the hazards it’d pose to my family and arrived at a figured I’d have to lay back for such a case and after some calculation arrived at a figure which was actually a bit above the monthly rate and thus I took it.
Same for life insurance and indemnity insurance.
Consequently I recently revised these values recently due to a changed life trajectory.
I’m not clear what you are driving at? The question was a statistical economic one, or?
Not quite. The question already morphed into what makes crime different from “normal” economic transactions and whether you can represent it as a only slightly different economic transaction.
As a rationalist I obviously have no inhibitions on placing a monetary value on my life.
So which amount of money would you be willing to exchange your life for?
As suicide has a high symbolic value (see my list above; in this case signalling to a large number of persons including to myself and my children) and that is not the kind of exchange I have thought about before (where I considered external causes for (my) life) I cannot easily say so.
Statistically and externally, sure. But will you find it easy to translate the value of your life into monetary amounts?
I’m not clear what you are driving at? The question was a statistical economic one, or? So my or other persons individual problems with this question do not matter for a valid incorporation of crime.
And easy could be meant morally or effortwise.
As a rationalist I obviously have no inhibitions on placing a monetary value on my life. Not placing a value on human life is a taboo intended to prevent dam breaking. It is not a truth. It won’t break a dam for me.
It takes some effort to arrive at a suitable amount though because there are so many aspects to take into account:
Economic value: Depending on your utility function there are multiple different cases:
** If you are seflish you will place a high value on your life—but only to ensure that you live, not to compensate others for your demise. Thus rather no life ensurance but instead safety measures against hazards of your choosing.
** You might also consider life or disability insurance if your loss will place your relatives in existential risks. Thus you consider your value to very high for your more or less large environment.
** You might avoid the social insurance if you think that you can invest yourself better. Thus you value yourself less for the society and/or your family (which might need/want to catch you if you fall).
Symbolic value: By placing a value on my life e.g. in the form of life-insurance I signal how much I value my life. If it is in the form of life or annuity insurance this may signal to my significant other that I cater for future safety in case of my demise. This is related to the financial value above but different in so far as the other person(s) may not completely grasp the derivation of the other aspects and just look at the symbolic value.
Societal value: Should I die that will be a loss for the society I live in. The investments the society made will not pay out as much as expected. This is measured by the SVL mentioned previously. As I care for the future well being of my society and feel obligued to it to some amount (partly because that society will host my relatives) I have to take that value into account to some personal fraction.
What does this mean for me? I didn’t do the complete calculation. I did calculate some figures for insurance (and didn’t blindly follow insurance agents recommendations). For example when considering some top-up health insurance I estimated my personal risk of lengthy illness and the hazards it’d pose to my family and arrived at a figured I’d have to lay back for such a case and after some calculation arrived at a figure which was actually a bit above the monthly rate and thus I took it. Same for life insurance and indemnity insurance. Consequently I recently revised these values recently due to a changed life trajectory.
Not quite. The question already morphed into what makes crime different from “normal” economic transactions and whether you can represent it as a only slightly different economic transaction.
So which amount of money would you be willing to exchange your life for?
As suicide has a high symbolic value (see my list above; in this case signalling to a large number of persons including to myself and my children) and that is not the kind of exchange I have thought about before (where I considered external causes for (my) life) I cannot easily say so.