Japan's Strict Building Codes Saved Lives

Re:Japan's Strict Building Codes Saved Lives by notahacker on Friday March 11, 2011 @02:14PM (#2314480)

At the risk of letting this discussion degenerate into a debate over the libertarian definition of "free"...

It would also make it economical for insurance companies to quite literally be thieves, and uneconomical for individuals not to pay protection money to the most powerful (and likely also most expensive) insurance company.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Japan's Strict Building Codes Saved Lives by sethg on Friday March 11, 2011 @03:03PM (#2314664)

Aside from the problem of outright extortion, even the savviest financiers can underestimate low-probability risks (as the recent mortgage debacle shows). You would have cycles of price wars among insurers trying to attract customers by lowering premiums, until one larger-than-expected crime wave (or even a hiccup in the bond market) leaving major issuers unable to pay out their claims.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Japan's Strict Building Codes Saved Lives by joe_the_user on Friday March 11, 2011 @04:05PM (#2314901)

Aside from the problem of outright extortion, even the savviest financiers can underestimate low-probability risks (as the recent mortgage debacle shows).

While savvy investors may indeed underestimate low-probability risks, I take issue with any claim the mortgage bubble showed this. The sad end of that bubble was an extremely high probability event.

The main thing the debacle showed was the willingness of many people to believe fallacious arguments which made reference to claims about low probability events. Even there, the willingness of investors to believe that standard "this time it's different" line has been shown over and over again.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Japan's Strict Building Codes Saved Lives by stretchwithme on Friday March 11, 2011 @05:23PM (#2315158)

Yeah. Actually, the savviest investors were the ones betting that the bubble would pop. Of course, the majority thinks otherwise or there would have been no bubble. Savvy in this case was simply looking at the facts and not letting popular opinion keep you from acting.

And, for some, having friends in the government to bail out the fools who bet on the bubble growing forever so you can get paid.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Japan's Strict Building Codes Saved Lives by wisty on Friday March 11, 2011 @09:26PM (#2315768)

That's hard to say. People are often really scared by things like climate change (uncertain, huge impact), and less scared of everyday disasters.

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/11/fear_and_overr...

Or table here: http://www.schneier.com/essay-170.html

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Japan's Strict Building Codes Saved Lives by OstiaAntica on Friday March 11, 2011 @05:15PM (#2315141)

The "underestimation" of mortgage risk was deliberate, the bankers were motivated by short-term bonus payouts.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Japan's Strict Building Codes Saved Lives by cheez on Friday March 11, 2011 @04:21PM (#2314974)

Sadly, this is already the case in the "War on Drugs". In another sense, we already do this but there is no competition.

A free society is not exclusive of a strong government to protect property rights and handle externalities economically. It's when they take liberties with their charge when things get bad.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Japan's Strict Building Codes Saved Lives by far33d on Friday March 11, 2011 @03:28PM (#2314766)

You mean the mob?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Japan's Strict Building Codes Saved Lives by VladRussian on Friday March 11, 2011 @04:03PM (#2314895)

i think he meant government.

[ Parent | on HN ]