Value of Life & Safety vs. Economics

[shootingstar]

Where I work, there have been some folks who worked for 5 years in a mega-construction project in Tawain which involved construction of bridges, highways, tunnel, etc.

But just recently I was told, in that project which costed $2 billion dollars to construct....54 people died during the construction....at different times in different locations. Needless to say there is much more lax occupational safety regulations in certain countries, even in a industrialized country like Tawain.

How life is valued..or NOT valued over making of money. Safety for anything requires time to educate users, participants, citizens; buying safety equipment, etc.

[mimitabby]

I hate to say this but at this time human life is NOT the most precious resource. There are many many people who want to work knowing full well the dangers. It's worth it to them to be paid and face danger. The planet is suffering vast vast die-offs of plants and animals. Human beings are not on the endangered list.
Bottom line, every adult human needs to make their own decisions. Is it worth it to work at a job that might kill me, or watch my family starve to death?
Some of us have much better options. I'm thankful for the job I have and the place where I live.

[Zen]

Remember the Ford Pinto?
Ford knew there was a risk involved concerning the fuel tank placement but calculated the cost of lawsuits vs cost of safety improvements.
How people can be that callous is beyond me.

[Mr. Bloom]

Remember the Ford Pinto?


I hear ya'...but this is a very different thing. Bridge workers know the risk, unwitting consumers are a different thing.

I agree that the Pinto is an example of corporate greed in excess, but I think our society has moved beyond that...although not all societies have.

If I recall, the American Humane Society was founded to protect the mules that were pulling barges on the Erie Canal and falling in and drowning. No one really cared about the little immigrant kids that were driving the mules and drowning...they were a dime a dozen, but the mules...they were a valuable commodity.

In some ways, we've come a long way...in others, we squash the gnat and let the elephant through the gate.

[Zen]

If I recall, the American Humane Society was founded to protect the mules that were pulling barges on the Erie Canal and falling in and drowning.

I had no idea you were that old ;)

[Grog]

In 1883, in New York City, the Brooklyn Bridge was opened, after a few years of construction, $15 million, and 20 lives lost. (Some accounts say "hundreds" but I haven't found authoritative sources for that.)

In 1958, in Vancouver, B.C., 27 workers lost their life in the collapse of the under-construction Second Narrows Crossing, now renamed Ironworkers Memorial (terrifying when one is crossing on a bike, 'cause when they say "narrow" they mean it!!!). That was caused by a miscalculation.

We owe all of the infrastructures we use every day to the lives of many people who died building them. (Mind you, many many many more die using them, in their cars.) We could also talk about the many, many lost lives in the harvest of timber, which provide us with the wood and paper we use all the time without noticing. (Forest jobs are still the most dangerous out there.) I don't want to be fatalistic, but I'm afraid that industrialization has a cost, and that the same groups of people over time are going to keep on paying for it. Of course, non-industrialization also has a cost (try getting to the hospital without a decently-paved road, in our current cities).

But there are definitely people out there who profit from those lost lives......... (whether they like to think about it or not)

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

If I recall, the American Humane Society was founded to protect the mules that were pulling barges on the Erie Canal and falling in and drowning. No one really cared about the little immigrant kids that were driving the mules and drowning...they were a dime a dozen, but the mules...they were a valuable commodity.


I don't think that's true. Look up the histories of the various Humane Societies and ASPCA orgs online. The American Humane group was in fact founded as equally dedicated to helping both abused animals and abused children.

The ASPCA was begun to protect the rights of abused working horses in New York City, horses that were routinely abused, starved, overworked, and beaten to death on the streets.

[uforgot]

I don't think that's true. Look up the histories of the various Humane Societies and ASPCA orgs online. The American Humane group was in fact founded as equally dedicated to helping both abused animals and abused children.

The ASPCA was begun to protect the rights of abused working horses in New York City, horses that were routinely abused, starved, overworked, and beaten to death on the streets.

I remember hearing a Paul Harvey commentary one time. I think it was the late 1800s and a child was being beaten and tied to the bed, but at the time there were no laws against child abuse. Concerned people didn't know what to do, but finally they decided to prosecute under laws that punished cruelty to animals. That story has stayed with me for several years. I was totally amazed that laws to protect animals came before laws to protect children.

Apparently that was the first time that the animal cruelty laws were used to cover children.
And that is the rest of the story. Good day.

[Mr. Bloom]

I don't think that's true.

Lisa, you're probably correct...I was told the story once on a business trip to the area around Brockport NY.

I should have checked my facts first...after I posted this, I did go to their website and saw that they said their mission was to protect animals and children.

[uforgot]

Animals were protected before children. Here (http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Barriere1.html) is the story of how children became protected by the aspca. Also some interesting stories of how children were treated in other cultures. ASPCA was founded to protect the rights of animals. Only later did it declare children part of the animal kingdom. Therefore it's possible that Mr. Silver's story is accurate.

[shootingstar]

Very interesting, animal protection laws developed lst before child protection laws/efforts.

I had a staff member who was previously a nurse..(emergency services & critical care) who loved her cat. She said she would go in a burning house..if possible..to save her cat.

I actually found that abit strange.

I still do. I come from a large family, actually our family and extended families..we're talking about over 10 different families..don't have any furry animal pets except 1-2 families might have pet fish.

I think it's because my parents came from poor backgrounds, rural areas in China where there were periods of famine and crop failure. So have a pet to feed...was a luxury vs. feeding your children.

Do I value a human life over an animal's? Yes, if given a choice, I do. Now I'm getting off-topic.

Mr. Silver: I don't quite agree completely that bridge workers accept the risk of death. There is risk even if they wear safety equipment, etc. However, of those 54 deaths, 5 deaths occurred because scaffolding for them was unsafely installed. The employees trusted their employer to have some basic equipment done right..

[Zen]

Right.
You can go into a job knowing the risks involved but there are safety laws and sometimes the employer doesn't follow them. In some instances the employer knows laws are being violated but choose to ignore this because the fix would outweigh the cost of lawsuits and work stoppage.

See Sago Mine Disaster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Sago_Mine_disaster), a textbook example.

[OakLeaf]

Yup.

Besides, jobs aren't so plentiful that most people can pick and choose. For the most part, people will choose the immediate certainty of paying at least part of their rent or buying some of their family's food, versus the longer-term risk of dying or being permanently injured by occupational disease or accident.

As the saying goes, "I don't mind working, but I do mind dying."