Economic price of a human life, and philosophical debate, essentially: Is there really “value” in human life? What’s the point of continuing? Shouldn’t “we all [just] fall down.”
Economic value in competitive advantage for a human life that focuses on the business with their competitive advantage, producing more in a free-trade global market (greater demand) greater profits from larger supply to meet this demand with equilibrium on price dependent on the amount of demand (number of eligible purchasors) and supply manufactured (volume of output), but, note also: quantified metric of volume of input resources harvested or mined, keeping accurate accounting records to encourage government to raise price on raw resources or place a ban, if destructive potential is, y=-1 on Value Index.
Now that we have completed resource depletion, entirely (y=-1->nuclear winter scenario), we can manage resources to adequately compete with other inputs with the value x>0, x+1.
Thus, building value for x work done in ecosystems, and x values, working and supporting human lives in the sustainable working ecosystem.
Now, we ask:. what’s the point in continuing?
Unless we are enamored by the Orthodox religions to stop existence, we have a clearly defined record of understanding who and what we are from empirical observation, scientific experiments, and the dance we now engage in in the synchronicity or counterpointal music of spirit with space particles (possibly nanos in space, as well). Also the contact-at-a-distance of Einstein’s incomplete mathematical equation, that is used in applied physics.
Should we, then, “all fall down?”
The premise that we all are the same exact thing and that therefore any one leader or handful of leaders can decide the fate or destiny of the vastness of humanity, is a false presumption, and such leaders should not be followed! The 1% cannot decide because of their bias, like Pharaohs, to take everything with them when they die!
Abraham Boulder. –Keven.