zeke5123a
1d ago
I don’t buy into therapy. But if I was going to do therapy, I would want clear actionable goals for what I want to achieve and when it is achieved.
zeke5123a
3d ago
You might be interested in https://www.amazon.com/Order-without-Law-Neighbors-Disputes/dp/0674641698
It is a similar point in that law is useful when the game is functionally not iterative (either because of the size of the market or the size of the transaction) but when iterative law is basically irrelevant.
zeke5123a
3d ago
Except there is a large group of women who don’t share the values of the strikers. So effectively you have probably at least 40% of the population already going to defect and they will heavily benefit which would encourage the not true true believers to defect.
zeke5123a
3d ago
Have you seen the guys who are white dudes for Harris? I don’t blame women for not wanting to have sex with them.
zeke5123a
4d ago
Agreed. There are problems with how we calculate compensatory damages. That could be fixed resulting in the better cost benefit regulation of not just vaccines but al products.
zeke5123a
4d ago
And this is what is frustrating about modern vaccine discussions. Take for example the covid vaxx. It basically was useless unless you were old. But modern vaccines use the goodwill earned from the old vaccines to short circuit discussions on whether the new vaccines are worthwhile.
zeke5123a
4d ago
It is a bit odd how worried people are about credentials. Look at the last number of HHS secretaries. Do they really have better credentials?
zeke5123a
4d ago
I once lost my wallet in an Uber coming back from AC. It had about 800 dollars in it. A woman found it and took pains to reach out to me. I wanted to give her one hundred dollars as a tip but she refused as she said she was just doing the right thing. I told her to give the hundred to the charity of her choice and then she accepted. I doubt she actually gave it to a charity but I was okay with that.
zeke5123a
4d ago
Technically there are 500 dollar bills that are legal tender. But they haven’t been printed since 1945.
zeke5123a
4d ago
Ok. Now we are talking. So the problem isn’t torts per se but absurd compensatory damages. Isn’t the solution then not unlimited liability but a more proscribed amount of damages?
zeke5123a
4d ago
The issue with that is the government socializes costs but privatizes benefits. So what do you predict would be the outcome?
zeke5123a
5d ago
From what I’ve seen, the majority of vaccines are very low risk. The concern I have is that the combined cocktail hasn’t really been studied.
My kids got most but not all of their vaccines.
zeke5123a
5d ago
I don’t know why people want to retcon what happened. Many doctoral theses should be written on this phenomenon
zeke5123a
5d ago
Agreed you could waive liability but again I’m struggling with the basic economics. If the vaccines offer a lot of value and very limited harm the liability point shouldnt be a big issue.
zeke5123a
5d ago
These concerns just seem internally silly. The only reason prices would rise a bunch is if there are a lot of vaccine related harms. If the harms are very small, then the cost for pharma would be small meaning costs would not increase much.
So what is it? Do vaccines cause a lot of damage meaning drug costs would need to increase a lot? Or do vaccines cause little harm meaning costs would rise only a little?
zeke5123a
5d ago
This is the liquidity problem I mentioned but the reality is that practically speaking there aren’t vaxx that kill 1/10 (they would never hit the market because few diseases are so ubiquitous and deadly that it would make sense to take the vaxx).
But if a human life is worth 10m then this is spending a million to save 4 million. That’s great ROI! Why wouldn’t you spend that if you were a government?
In any event not sure it is worth spending so much time on a non central example.
zeke5123a
5d ago
Just to expand, the three theoretical cases where liability prevents a valuable good from being produced is where there is a large positive externality (ie a benefit derived by neither the seller nor buyer such that the buyer is not willing to pay more), ability to pay for buyers, or where liability isn’t properly measured (eg the Bronx jury). Before we accept that the case applies here, we ought to actually prove it out. After all, vaccines didn’t have immunity from liability until the 1980s
zeke5123a
5d ago
That just isn’t correct. The vast majority of manufacturers are subject to strict liability and they don’t capture all of the benefit. Yet they survive because they make an EV+ product.
Note that Gazans had done that to others (eg Palestinian Christians)
More options
Context Copy link