Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
It's just a question of where you draw the line: what risks are so great that you don't allow people to take them.
Has anyone done an economic analysis as to whether the safety equipment that is used/required is generally cost/benefit positive? That is, maybe, given liability/workers' comp. laws, most factories (etc.) would, in fact, install the blade guards and safety tethers anyway, recognizing that it's cheaper to do so than to pay every day for another lost arm.
|
A guy named Breyer -- maybe you've heard of him, works in D.C., has a brother who's a federal district court judge in San Francisco -- wrote a book called "Breaking The Vicious Cycle" which attempted to evaluate, by cost per life saved among other things, the effectiveness of various federal regulations. As I recall, NHTSA regulations came out really well, and OSHA regulations not so well, but it's been a long time since I've seen a copy of the book.
