25 comments

[ 0.23 ms ] story [ 34.7 ms ] thread
(comment deleted)
Wild that they think this is A) Uber's fault or B) worth $40M.
The driver was acting on behalf of Uber and was found to have acted in a negligent manner. Whose fault was this, if not Uber’s? If not $40M, what should this young woman’s life be valued at?
The driver's fault. Is there any evidence it was Uber's policies or actions that caused this?

The US government values a statistical life at anywhere from $7 to $12M. Is there any evidence that this woman's lifetime earnings would've exceeded that? If it's a "feels" argument, why not $80M or $200M?

Lifetime earnings? That is a very poor measure of a person's life.
That's what happens when you live in a company, not a country.
As compared to your implied view where any amount of money can appear from thin air, and law should be dictated exclusively by feelings?
It's an economic measure for what should be an economic question. Taking the statistical value of a human life as a baseline feels pretty fair, and adjusting it upwards for special circumstances seems reasonable.

Are you arguing that because she was a nice person, she should be worth more? If she was a mean person, should she be worth less?

Why do you discount “pain and suffering” entirely?
> The US government values a statistical life at anywhere from $7 to $12M. Is there any evidence that this woman's lifetime earnings would've exceeded that?

Thats not what that means. "... when conducting a benefit-cost analysis of new environmental policies, the Agency uses estimates of how much people are willing to pay for small reductions in their risks of dying from adverse health conditions that may be caused by environmental pollution. [...] these estimates of willingness to pay for small reductions in mortality risks are often referred to as the "value of a statistical life.”[0]

> Is there any evidence it was Uber's policies or actions that caused this?

The arbitrator/judge believed there was enough that the company was legally responsible for the conduct and issued a fine to the company for that failure of responsibility to be paid to the parents -- not because he decided that was how much she was worth

[0] https://www.epa.gov/environmental-economics/mortality-risk-v...

That's about the closest value you'll find to what human life is economically valued at. Do you have an alternate measure that is grounded in anything?
Tying human life to a monetary calue as you have done is… well obviously not popular. But honestly, what the actual fuck dude? A woman died and you’re quibbling about how much she might have made working?

What about the pain and loss her family felt upon learning she died because she was left on a fucking freeway? That’s worth nothing in your eyes? If that’s the case you should do the following:

Take a nice long look in the mirror and please internalize the fact that it is people like you that are the literal problem with humanity. I don’t know how you got to that point and I don’t care. Please invest some time in cultivating empathy for your fellows. If you don’t know how try a Hero’s Journey worth of psilocybin.

This hyperbolic empathy is always interesting to me.

There are 100+ fatal traffic accidents each day. Basically none of them will make the news, and almost none of them will result in a 40m+ payout.

Where is your empathy for the 99 other people that died on that day in similar (or even more tragic circumstances)? Why are their lives less important in the eyes of the courts, in monetary terms, and in public opinion?

“Hyperbolic empathy”? Seriously? My empathy isn’t in question. I have a great deal for anyone who loses a loved one to something stupid.

But we’re not talking about me, we’re talking about your seemingly complete lack of empathy. Again, where is yours for the family of the woman who died, hmm? Because you reduced her to a number and a payout, which is only slightly dehumanizing. Why do you disregard “pain & suffering” as valid?

> That's about the closest value you'll find to what human life is economically valued at

Again, that has nothing to do with what you are trying to make it mean.

> Do you have an alternate measure that is grounded in anything?

What? That is completely unrelated to this article or my post, the value was a fine for Uber failing their responsibility -- why are you stuck on this as determining a human value? If this topic is near and dear to you for reasons you chose to keep hidden, I can understand that, but this is not a relevant thread to air those personal grievances.

The judge “concluding the company is legally responsible for the conduct of its driver”.

I’m not a layer, but doesn’t that open up a precedent where others could be more willing sue Uber now for damages caused by their driver?

Good. Companies shouldn't be able to get out of having good public behavior just by not having employees
Right? Nobody should be responsible for their own actions, if there's somebody with deeper pockets to sue.
The driver is also liable.

Uber is liable here because they employed the driver.

As if Uber's policies and incentives have zero influence on their "contractors" behaviour

Get real

Try puking all over a taxi (or anyone’s private car) and see if they tell you to get out. Everyone’s acting like Kalanick came and dragged her out of the car into traffic.
The driver should be criminally liable.
Isn't one of the "fun" properties (for companies) of arbitration that they don't count as legal precedent?