Do you know and care how much the nearest relations of an FBI cop or a US army man or warplane pilot killed in a firefight with a gang of Mafiosi or terrorists are paid in recompense for the loss of their beloved one ? Do you think that sum of money deserves to be reckoned the RIGHT price of human life while a B-2 Spirit: stealth warplane costs $2.4 billion ? What's your main point to justify your answer ? And what do you think the right CRITERION for measuring the price of human life is ?
I'm afraid pilots do understand the risks and those risks are part of their job. The U S government should ensure that a widow continues to get the salary and benefits until she remarries. I'm not a fan of an idea of a lump sum compensation.
Thanks for your response to this post. Nevertheless, i don't think you've seen the point I wish to make. It's not the ' lump sum compensation ' but the paltry sum the surviving near relations of the deceased are paid in compensation for the loss of their beloved one and the logic behind it that my post is meant to focus humanity's attention on and thus awaken humanity to the brute, inescapable, and naked truth underlying it, namely the fact that capitalism views human life as something so ludicrously cheap.
This question you have posed displays a bit of capitalism, itself. Can there be a monetary value put on human life? Apparently you think so. I say it doesn't matter what the profession of the individual who dies, widows and children should be taken care of. But, insisting that some figure be put on it, or litigating in an attempt to have some high value put on it cheapens its value.
Thank you, Live to Learn, for your interest in this topic. I think this comment of yours deserves to be given serious thought to.
My post on ' the RIGHT cost of human life ' is aimed at exposing a dark aspect, one of the loathsome minuses of capitalism. The truth is capitalism views a product of human labour as a commodity that, by political economy, possesses two distinct kinds of values : ( 1 ) use-value ( i.e. usefulness ) and ( 2 ) exchange-value. The use-value is the worth of a commodity, and it's so distinct from its exchange-value that you cannot by any manner of means confuse one with the other. Use-values of two different sorts of commodities are different and remain so as long as their buyers or consumers do not start using or consuming them. It's because of its use-value that a commodity happens to have some exchange-value. By value, this exchange-value is meant, which is measurable, and we measure this value in money. We cannot measure the use-value or worth of a commodity in money. The naked truth is the value ( i.e. exchange-value ) of a commodity is determined by market forces ( i.e. the laws of supply and demand ) , not by its worth. A glaring proof of this phenomenon is the frequent rise and fall in the market prices ( i.e. value in money ) of a brand-new commodity while its use-value remains unchanged. A human being or human life is certainly a product of human labour. So many humans' so much labour is used up in the process of a human's being born and bred, isn't it ? For example, your parents, grandparents, and other relations, your teachers in elementary and secondary schools, all the lecturers and professors that taught you during your college years, doctors and nurses that took care of you when you fell ill, researchers and inventors of therapeutic techniques that made your recovery possible, pharmaceutical-industry workers that laboured to produce drugs and medicines needed to help you regain your health, food grain and veg cultivators, egg, milk, and meat producers, fishery workers and fishermen, sweets and savoury-dishes makers in shops, hotels, and restaurants, your classmates, playmates, et cetera, et cetera, all those humans who are involved in your birth and the act of bringing you up. Therefore, a human being or human life being a product of human labour, capitalism isn't wrong to treat it as a commodity. But the truth the sensible don't fail to see, the truth the sensible find most disconcerting and detestable, is the act that it's not a human's worth but the blind, inanimate market forces that determine how much money, the filthy lucre, they're worth. The fact that humanity has yet to awaken to such silly, disgusting aspects of capitalism goes to show why I'm outright right to view humanity as way too uncivilised as yet.
I'm not aware of the value of a human life being calculated as if it were a commodity. I've seen the loss of a hand or an eye treated as such.
Maybe you simply used the wrong example. The military, in my opinion, has a system in place to take care of loved ones left behind. A good example might have been a blue collar private citizen at the mercy of corporate interests and insurance company's greed. And, of course, our lopsided legalsystem set up to exchange wealth but most into the hands of attorneys arguing for the rights off the victim.
Most Americans I know don't expect more than fairness. We all consider life to be too precious to put a price on. Although, punitive damages for reckless disregard for a human life is something most believe in. Because, corporations do weigh the chance of litigation against the profits garnered when they don't put our health and welfare high on their list of things to consider.
Since the US military wars invaded the Middle East 25 years ago. For every one US troop killed in action there been about 150 Muslim children been killed with nothing to do about the war and and a 1000 fold ruined and broken homes. A US troopers have $18,000 military equipment attach to their bodies not counting all the other cost of war greater than world war 2. US war Generals don't do people body counts of their enemy as they say. The US public would be hidden from these children's deaths.
This already is the beginning of world war 3 because the worst form virtue and mental illness cannot stop itself. The karma responsibility of the US Corp of Marshal law and emergency war act every 2 years since 1871 has come to a Global crossroads.. Karma comes back 3 fold negative. So final war will be fought on ground zero America soil and all their millions of lives at stake.
If I understand this question correctly , I believe we are talking about the low cost of insurance coverage for a soldier , a cop , anyone who sacrifices their life for our country .
NO ! We do not value the worth ! No we do not value the soldier enough in America ! No .........and we owe them so much more than we can see possible of appreciating .
Police and soldiers are not in the top ten most dangerous jobs in America. I have done 5 of the most dangerous jobs and luckily was smart enough to think. Oh boy!!! better stop this quick before I kill myself.
Police, troops and mostly Authorities kill more people than the public dose. A greater killer is poverty, cut US Military spending in half and that is your cure for saving most lives in the world.
That is not the NATO and UN agenda, it is to reduce the world's population to 2 billion.
Good luck with that.
Really? Let's think about it.
When I was in the military we had life insurance paid for. It wasn't an exceptionally large amount, but it would have covered funeral expenses and been a couple of years of salary. That to the side:
If the widow was 30 years old she would have full benefits until she remarried. If she lived 40 more years that would total (for the low end wage of a pilot) about $1,400,00. If she had kids they would probably have qualified for SS benefits until they were 18. Low end, assuming an average of 10 years of benefits per child we could assume something in the range of $48,000. Full medical benefits would be available to the whole family which over the course of 40 years, assuming $1000 a month premium coverage would be 480,000. I assume the kids still get free college benefits so that would total somewhere, low end, at $320,000.
Not to mention the savings of being able to shop in the commissary and bx. That comes out to a lot of money, compared to costs of food and commodities off base.
I'd say they don't do a bad job of taking care of the widow and children of the deceased. As to other relatives, who would owe them anything?
Personally, I do not view any monies given to survivors as the price of a human life, for there can be no price for that. We did not buy a life with those monies.
Rather it is a gesture of help to continue their lives without the person killed - a recognition of their loss in the service of the country. LtL lists where we help those that have lost a loved one in that service, and it seems more than reasonable to me.
The payments are not the value of the life, which is not measured in money. All they do is compensate for the *financial* loss of not having that spouse or parent, and potentially a punitive judgement that relates to how negligent the agency causing the death was. Which is as it should be because putting a price on a life, no matter how high, would be pretty insulting. That would suggest you should be able to just buy a hunting license for humans if you are willing to pay the tag fee, because the life and the price are equal and interchangeable.
Thank you a lot for your response to my post. As I see it, your comment reflects good reflection on this issue, and so it deserves serious attention and reflection.
psycheskinner, you seem to be right to view the compensation money as only compensation ' for the *financial* loss ' due to bereavement. I must admit to my incapacity to counter your position on this point right now. I stand corrected and feel obliged to you for correcting me. Thanks.
by Prakash RnP6 months ago
I'm NOT an economist. Nevertheless, I'm conversant with ideas and opinions of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. My knowledge of political economy is limited to my study and comprehension of the great work CAPITAL volume I...
by AKA Winston7 years ago
I have often seen the misguided claim that atheism was at the heart of mass killings such as Stalin's murders and Mao's bloodlettings. Of course, the fallacy is confusion between correlation and causation. Seems...
by Thinkaboutit779 years ago
What gives us humans worth and value? Is It Ever Right To Take The Life Of An Innocent Human Life?Is the unborn baby a human life? If it is, why is it right to take it's life?What say ye?
by paarsurrey6 years ago
The atheists agnostics skeptics apatheists; all while away their lives; finding no purpose in life and no goal in life, their actions become meaningless and their thoughts get frustrated.
by Grace Marguerite Williams4 years ago
NEVER, EVER understand about a woman's unmitigated right to choose & control her reproductive destiny?
by Stella Kaye6 months ago
If the human life span was longer, or even indefinite, would they take better care of the planet?If the humans lived much longer than they do, would they be more concerned about their impact on the planet? Would they be...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.