An American life worth less today

July 11, 2008 By SETH BORENSTEIN , AP Science Writer

(AP) -- It's not just the American dollar that's losing value. A government agency has decided that an American life isn't worth what it used to be. The "value of a statistical life" is $6.9 million in today's dollars, the Environmental Protection Agency reckoned in May - a drop of nearly $1 million from just five years ago.

---

Content from The Associated Press expires 15 days after original publication date. For more information about The Associated Press, please visit www.ap.org .

---

Similar stories from PHYSorg:

Publicis to buy Razorfish from Microsoft for $530m

Aug 09, 2009 | 1 / 5 (2) | 0

Obama wants to pump $475M into Great Lakes cleanup

May 15, 2009 | 3.5 / 5 (8) | 6

Report: Most Americans in areas with unhealthy air

Apr 29, 2009 | 4 / 5 (4) | 4

THE INFLUENCE GAME: Excuse me! Lobby wins on burps

Jun 20, 2009 | 1 / 5 (4) | 4

Brit officials wrestle with cost of cancer drugs

Apr 07, 2009 | not rated yet | 0

• DoctorKnowledge - Jul 11, 2008
  • Rank: 4.4 / 5 (7)
  It's over-simplistic, any way you look at it. I have an uncle who spent huge amounts of money in his last few years, keeping himself alive. Was his life, when it was almost over, worth as much as his life when he was just beginning a relatively productive career? Economics says no, family sentiment says yes.
  
  One way or the other, our society needs to come to terms with the concept that everyone wants their life to be lengthened, but there's no possible way society can afford any expense, for any small increase in lifetime.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• DGBEACH - Jul 11, 2008
  • Rank: 2.3 / 5 (9)
  I'd hate to live in a country that puts a price on my life!
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• Egnite - Jul 11, 2008
  • Rank: 1.9 / 5 (9)
  Sounds like EPA are more intested in accounting than environmental protection these days. Yet another good cause corrupted by the Bush administration.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• superhuman - Jul 11, 2008
  • Rank: 4.6 / 5 (10)
  Every country places a price on your life, though it might not be specifically stated it can be derived from costs of laws and regulations.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• agg - Jul 11, 2008
  • Rank: 4.8 / 5 (6)
  I wish I was so naive to believe any country or government doesn't put a price per head.
  The best business in the world is government, no work, guaranteed pay and plenty of market to exploit.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• hydrik - Jul 11, 2008
  • Rank: 2 / 5 (4)
  Maybe we can get our life value down to 2 cents. That way we may be able to afford the HUGE cost of government!
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• pravuil - Jul 11, 2008
  • Rank: 3 / 5 (3)

  Was his life, when it was almost over, worth as much as his life when he was just beginning a relatively productive career? Economics says no, family sentiment says yes.
  
  One way or the other, our society needs to come to terms with the concept that everyone wants their life to be lengthened, but there's no possible way society can afford any expense, for any small increase in lifetime.

  
  
  In terms of survival, if all hell breaks loose and all societies crumble we'll have information to extend life. While some might not see it as important, the information can transcend to times when that information will be valuable. Family values aside, there is a general benefit if these values spread within a society for long periods of time.
  
  Governments have calculated worth of life since the beginning of civilization. If you think that's not the case then people need to study economics more. Seriously, every little bit helps.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• MGraser - Jul 11, 2008
  • Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
  I'm not sure I understand the correlation. Our value is based off of employer practices? So...our value to the government depends on what they can can get out of companies for us perhaps? Not sure I understand. Besides, as the economy is hurting, employers have less money to bandy about - so that would devalue our lives as a result.
  
  I see the practical nature of coming up with a concrete number when it comes to planning. I'm just curious why they based it off of what they did.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• GrayMouser - Jul 11, 2008
  • Rank: 2 / 5 (1)
  Simply fiddling with meaningless numbers. It smells of McNamara and his 'systems analysis' approach to life.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• Soylent - Jul 12, 2008
  • Rank: 3 / 5 (2)

  I'd hate to live in a country that puts a price on my life!

  
  
  In other words you'd like to live in a country in which the cost-benefit analysis of a decision is ignored.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• Paradox - Jul 13, 2008
  • Rank: 3 / 5 (2)

  I'd hate to live in a country that puts a price on my life!

  
  
  Every government on earth does that.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• xen_uno - Jul 13, 2008
  • Rank: 2.7 / 5 (3)
  I feel 11% more worthless now to a government I don't like. Anybody have recommendations on a good psychiatrist in eastern Iowa?
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• Captain_Sakonna - Jul 13, 2008
  • Rank: 3 / 5 (3)
  It isn't as if the government is measuring how much we are worth to it--it's trying to figure out how much our lives are worth to us. Meaning this--we could spend absurd amounts of money trying to keep ourselves alive, and end up having horrible lives because we didn't have any money left over to spend on the things that make life worthwhile. The government is trying to strike a balance between length of life and quality of life. That seems reasonable to me.
  
  Of course, when considering things like air pollution, they ought to think about more than the potential number of deaths. Air pollution can reduce quality of life as well, through the non-lethal health problems and more minor irritations that result from it.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• CWFlink - Jul 14, 2008
  • Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
  Well we all know the value of an American life is at least 100 times greater than the value of an Iraqi life: Saddam could kill hundreds of thousands and the world didn't care; insurgents kill 4000 American soldiers and the American people want to pull out. Or how about slavery and North Korea? Millions have been in virtual slavery to a dictator for nearly 3 generations, but their lives are not worth risking our lives to free? It is crazy how some will claim life is so precious... if it advances their political position... but so cheap otherwise.
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
• thinking - Jul 14, 2008
  • Rank: 2.5 / 5 (2)
  What about the unborn, society says they're worthless. Or put it this way... may liberals would do almost anything to prevent a rapist, murderer from getting the death penalty... but think its no of their business if someone wants to kill their unborn child....
  • report abuse
  • • Current rank
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5