| ||||
Let’s say you were wrongly convicted of a crime and sent to prison. Several years later you are exonerated and released. Should the government compensate you for those lost years, and if so how much? Dallas Morning News columnist James Ragland dug up the answer to that question, and you may be surprised. According to Ragland:
And, of course, some states don’t necessarily provide anything. So here’s the question: How much is a year of life worth? Of course, some people earn more than others. Should past earnings, before being incarcerated, be considered? How about education? We know that on average, high school graduates earn more than dropouts. And college graduates earn more than high school graduates. It all seems very subjective. But let’s throw another factor into the mix. In England, the National Health Service—the country’s government-run health care system—pays for prescription drugs. The NHS imposes a threshold of about $56,000 for a drug that will extend the patient’s life by a year. In other words, if a prescription drug costs under $56,000—roughly the same as some states pay for an exonerated convict—and will extend a patient’s life by a year, the British government (i.e., taxpayers) will pay for it. If not, it was nice knowing you. Incidentally, in the U.S. the standard is about $100,000 per additional year of life. We don’t know what the right amount is to appropriately compensate those wrongly convicted of a crime. In one sense, no amount of money is enough. But we do know that when the government regulates prices, it usually keeps the price artificially low. And there is little reason to think that when the government calculates how much a year of your life is worth, it will act any differently. | ||||
TaxBytes is published by the IPI Center for Tax Analysis of the Institute for Policy Innovation. TaxBytes is distributed via email, as well as through the website at http://www.ipi.org | ||||