A @dawn_com op-ed accuses me of valuing #Pakistani lives less than American lives because our paper (foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/10/poo…) uses VSL. The following 3 tweets explain in plain English (as the writer requests) why this is a gross misrepresentation.
Richer people can afford to stay at home. Both this journalist and I can work from home, and even if not, we're willing to sacrifice our economic livelihoods to avoid the risk of contracting COVID. Because even with pay-cuts, we can still easily put food on the table
A poor day-wage laborer in Pakistan, in contrast, is willing to forego less of his economic livelihood, because staying at home in a shutdown means that his family may not have enough to eat.
That difference explains why VSL is larger for the rich, who want the disease eliminated from their environment, than for the poor who must worry about their children going hungry. It’s a lives-lost vs lives-lost comparison in Sindh, not life vs money
The question is not about what lives are worth, but how we can we save the most. In rich countries, incomes can fall a lot before people face subsistence risk. In poor countries, same policies inflict more pain on the poor. Instead of false dichotomies over lockdowns or not...
...let's implement the solutions we highlight (yrise.yale.edu/covid-19) that will save lives. Send economic relief to the poor quickly. Ban religious and social gatherings. Universal mask adoption. Data collection. @aikhwaja, @adnanqk, @CERPakistan doing great work for #Pakistan
