The expression of "people-oriented, life first" in the new "Safety Production Law" remains to be discussed.

On 202 1 September1day, the new Law on Work Safety will be formally implemented. The principle of "prevention first, people first" has long been written into the safety production law. The new safety production law has further promoted it to a new height of "people-oriented, life first".

But I think it is debatable to write it into the law. Everything has a cost. It is not objective to pursue an unattainable goal regardless of cost, which may eventually affect the realization of the goal.

Let's think about a question, what is quality?

From an economic point of view, the quality of high-quality products has a second meaning besides being absolutely good, that is, in order to improve the quality of products, the marginal cost to be paid should be equal to the marginal income it obtains. When the marginal cost of improving product quality is equal to the marginal revenue, we say that we have reached the quality standard.

Again, what we are talking about here is not the absolute level of quality, but the marginal revenue should be equal to the marginal cost in the process of improving quality. In vernacular Chinese, the higher the quality, the better, and the lower the price, the better. It is good to make users value for money.

1976, economist milton friedman (191July 2002-120061October) gave a speech at Cornell University, when a young student stood up and challenged him. The young student's name was michael moore, and later he became a famous American director.

Michael moore said:

There is something wrong with the design of the car produced by Ford Motor Company. If the car rear-ends, the fuel tank of the car will explode, which will easily cause casualties in the car. At this time, if Ford adds a baffle next to the fuel tank, the baffle only needs 16 yuan, which can greatly reduce the number of casualties.

Ford knew the situation, but they made an account. If each car is equipped with a 16 yuan baffle, how much will the cost increase? The cost will increase a lot, exceeding their compensation for the accident, so they would rather not add this baffle to compensate those casualties.

Michael moore cited this example to illustrate that capitalist society has its problems, because life is priceless, and it is immoral for some manufacturers to disregard people's lives in pursuit of profits.

If you encounter such a question, how would you answer it? Economist Friedman's answer at that time was wonderful. He said:

I don't know whether Ford Motor Company should install this baffle. I haven't counted, but whether it's me, you, michael moore or other people in society, we all have to agree on one thing. You won't know until you have calculated it.

We can't say that life is priceless, so we will improve the safety performance of the car endlessly, because improving the safety performance of the car has a price, a cost and a calculation. How is it an expert's business?

But here we have to understand a basic fact, that is, we must calculate. Even if it involves life, it should be included in the calculation formula.

In fact, it seems that the manufacturer decided whether to add a baffle to the car, but in fact, it was ultimately decided by the consumer.

You have to understand that to improve the safety performance of the car, it is possible to add a baffle, change the material, change the brake design and change the airbag. All these add up to the cost of the car, which will be borne by the consumers.

Add a little here and a little there, and the total price of the car will go up. Will consumers accept it? We have all learned the concept of deposit. Are consumers willing to spend the last dollar on safety features or in-car functions? Or on the beautiful woman outside the car?

Different consumers have different choices, so in the automobile market, we see all kinds of cars. Some are famous for their safety performance, some are famous for their comfort, and some are famous for their low energy consumption and fuel economy.

If life is priceless and safety is the goal we should pursue at all costs, then we will never see the cars we see today on the road again, and only tanks will run on the road.

A few years ago, a school bus had an accident in a village, causing serious casualties. As a result, all passers-by came out and said that they would formulate safety standards for school buses.

A friend of mine who is a lawyer told me that he did participate in the formulation of this standard, and later he gave up. Because he found that if the safety standards of school buses are written out of thin air, the standards written are really close to the standards of tanks.

Because if this standard is not high enough, it is the dereliction of duty of the person who wrote it; But what are the consequences of writing this standard so high? The consequence is that schools and parents can't afford such a school bus.

If the law really forces schools to use only such high-standard school buses, the actual effect will be to let parents and schools use unsafe modes of transportation, such as riding bicycles to send their children.

Therefore, the principle of "people first, life first" has planted a potential time bomb. It is very likely that in the future, when the efficiency and safety of the game reach a balance, the market will slide to an unknown extreme.

The content part refers to Xue Zhaofeng's economics course.