This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------9A0749A1CE2B54A228F7942B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> From: "Alexander 'Sasha' Chislenko" <sasha1@netcom.com>
> > Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 20:26:25 -0500
> > Subject: Faster driving saves lives
> >
> > CNN just published a report "Higher speed limits mean more deaths"
> > ( http://www.cnn.com/US/9901/14/speeding.deaths.ap/ )
> > from the studies conducted by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
> > and insurance companies.
> >
> > The studies conclude that in the states that raised speed limits, highway
> > death rates increased by 12 to 15%.
> >
> > But I would like to suggest a different statistic.
> > Let's assume that the death rate rises linearly with speed limit
> > (looks like the case now). So 10% increase in speed limit would
> > raise death rates by 0.16 per 100 million miles traveled.
> > So on average, a person would lose half of their life's worth of
> > waking time per each incident = 35 years * 365 days * 16 hours * 0.16
> > = roughly, 33,000 hours per 100 million miles traveled.
> >
> > But then, the same speed increase would save people time for productive
> > and pleasant activities, with the savings:
> > 100 million miles / (average) 50 miles per hour * 10% = 200,000 waking
> > life hours. Which is six times as much.
>
> An argument I've advocated (and put into practice) for the last half-million+accident-free
> miles. I don't go quite as fast as I would like to though, as a
> portion of my attention has to be diverted to scanning for cops. In selecting
> a speed for the given conditions, I also trade off the expense of speeding
> tickets against time saved. I've developed a 'courteous speeder' style of
> driving, e.g. never passing at more than ~ 5mph.
> You can also argue reducio ad absurdum- lowering the limit to zero will
> 'save' all the lives. I have never seen anyone do an analysis of this
> phenomenon like the one above; why do you suppose that is? Might it
> conflict with the kindergarten culture belief sysem?
>
> > Note that these hours are current, unlike the hours that will not
> > be lived in the future, and any reasonable person would consider
> > younger-age time now more valuable than old-age time later.
> >
> > As driving is a stressful activity, time saved from it will likely
> > reduce mortality from other reasons.
>
> Maybe. Sometimes I tell people I'm trying toget there quickly before I have an accident.
> :-)
>
> > Add to this the unaccounted factors mentioned in the beginning of this
> > message, and also considerations that reliance upon police instead of
> > common sense is not good for personal development, that it takes more
> > human life time to pay police expenses for enforcing speed limits,
> > that people who save time are usually more careful and more productive
> > than people who speed unreasonably (and don't have to suffer for their
> > stupidity) - and you will see that *higher speed limits save lives*.
>
> I think this is absolutly correct, but calls for a more formal study. I've alsodiscovered
> that traffic court judges are completely oblivious to this
> argument.
>
> Forrest
> --
> Forrest Bishop
> Manager,
> Interworld Productions, LLC
> Chairman,
> Institute of Atomic-Scale Engineering
> http://www.speakeasy.org/~forrestb
--------------9A0749A1CE2B54A228F7942B Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID: <36A0E31D.4B520FB5@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:06:05 -0800
From: Forrest Bishop <forrestb@ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: damien@ofb.net
Subject: Re: Filtered Extropians
References: <19990116005910.16713.qmail@ofb.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> From: "Alexander 'Sasha' Chislenko" <sasha1@netcom.com>
> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 20:26:25 -0500
> Subject: Faster driving saves lives
>
> CNN just published a report "Higher speed limits mean more deaths"
> ( http://www.cnn.com/US/9901/14/speeding.deaths.ap/ )
> from the studies conducted by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
> and insurance companies.
>
> The studies conclude that in the states that raised speed limits, highway
> death rates increased by 12 to 15%.
>
> But I would like to suggest a different statistic.
> Let's assume that the death rate rises linearly with speed limit
> (looks like the case now). So 10% increase in speed limit would
> raise death rates by 0.16 per 100 million miles traveled.
> So on average, a person would lose half of their life's worth of
> waking time per each incident = 35 years * 365 days * 16 hours * 0.16
> = roughly, 33,000 hours per 100 million miles traveled.
>
> But then, the same speed increase would save people time for productive
> and pleasant activities, with the savings:
> 100 million miles / (average) 50 miles per hour * 10% = 200,000 waking
> life hours. Which is six times as much.
An argument I've advocated (and put into practice) for the last half-million+accident-free miles. I don't go quite as fast as I would like to though, as a portion of my attention has to be diverted to scanning for cops. In selecting a speed for the given conditions, I also trade off the expense of speeding tickets against time saved. I've developed a 'courteous speeder' style of driving, e.g. never passing at more than ~ 5mph. You can also argue reducio ad absurdum- lowering the limit to zero will 'save' all the lives. I have never seen anyone do an analysis of this phenomenon like the one above; why do you suppose that is? Might it conflict with the kindergarten culture belief sysem?
> Note that these hours are current, unlike the hours that will not
> be lived in the future, and any reasonable person would consider
> younger-age time now more valuable than old-age time later.
>
> As driving is a stressful activity, time saved from it will likely
> reduce mortality from other reasons.
Maybe. Sometimes I tell people I'm trying toget there quickly before I have an accident. :-)
> Add to this the unaccounted factors mentioned in the beginning of this
> message, and also considerations that reliance upon police instead of
> common sense is not good for personal development, that it takes more
> human life time to pay police expenses for enforcing speed limits,
> that people who save time are usually more careful and more productive
> than people who speed unreasonably (and don't have to suffer for their
> stupidity) - and you will see that *higher speed limits save lives*.
I think this is absolutly correct, but calls for a more formal study. I've alsodiscovered that traffic court judges are completely oblivious to this argument.
Forrest
-- Forrest Bishop Manager, Interworld Productions, LLC Chairman, Institute of Atomic-Scale Engineering http://www.speakeasy.org/~forrestb --------------9A0749A1CE2B54A228F7942B--