> in lieu of a camera we made a $2000 gift to clean water in Africa, it saved more lives, trust us
Wait, so do you mean you don’t care about the extra cost at all, and you don’t care if Chevrolet charged you a lot more than the cost of a backup cam in order to donate? It’s just the government safety rule you object to?
Or are you saying you think backup cameras cost $2000?
And why didn’t you acknowledge the valid point that the economic value to society of backup cameras is in reduction in accidents, and not limited to loss of life situations?
Are you being honest with a dollars per life calculation? It seems misleading. What about the property damage value, how much is that? What about injuries?
According to the stats I found with a quick search that were used to justify the backup cam rules, there were 15,000 injuries per year in addition to the ~200 deaths. And one third of all backup related deaths are children under 5. What is the economic value of a child, and are you sure it’s less than 5.7 million?
I checked out the part out that mentions backup cameras, and it’s got misinformation contradicted by the report I already posted above. For example, the people talking claim nobody tried to analyze the benefit to people other than children, which isn’t true, and they claim the benefits of backup cams “didn’t work out”, while the report above shows the calculation isn’t expected to pay off until 2028 and isn’t expected to reach maximum benefit until around 2050, but will on the whole be a positive to the economy. “Not that many lives saved” just seems like such an awful position to take, when we’re taking about per-vehicle costs that are less than a week’s gasoline.
Interesting, thanks. I think the transcript was specifically calling out the low value of human lives that were used in the past. This report seems a lot more rigorous than the other investigations and articles I've seen.
This is also from 2014, which means the net cost/vehicle has probably come down a fair bit (camera modules are <$5 and most cars including entry-level are shipping with screens already).
Wait, so do you mean you don’t care about the extra cost at all, and you don’t care if Chevrolet charged you a lot more than the cost of a backup cam in order to donate? It’s just the government safety rule you object to?
Or are you saying you think backup cameras cost $2000?
And why didn’t you acknowledge the valid point that the economic value to society of backup cameras is in reduction in accidents, and not limited to loss of life situations?
Are you being honest with a dollars per life calculation? It seems misleading. What about the property damage value, how much is that? What about injuries?
According to the stats I found with a quick search that were used to justify the backup cam rules, there were 15,000 injuries per year in addition to the ~200 deaths. And one third of all backup related deaths are children under 5. What is the economic value of a child, and are you sure it’s less than 5.7 million?
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/04/07/2014-07...