The article “What Is a Life Worth,” author Amanda Ripley uses the tragedy of 9/11 to back her claim that there shouldn’t be a price tag on someone’s life and that the simple formula is not the right thing to do. Ripley also describes this simple formula as “cold hearted math,” making us feel some type of negative emotion for this. I on the other hand, am with this “cold hearted math.” The way the government determined the amount to pay the victim's family following the 9/11 tragedy was the right decision. The government came up with a simple way to calculate the amount of money each person got: the salary at the time of death X years of work until retirement = the amount of money the family receives.

First of all, the government had not limit to the federal fund. In other words, the government could have easily gave each victim's family the same amount of money regardless of their background or position. Instead, the government was clever enough to make the simple formula. This way, fairness is the base, giving each victim what they deserve and equality gets eliminated. …show more content…
This was the best way for the government to handle the issue of money. This way, the government doesn’t give the victim's family the money they think they should deserve. Instead, the government lets the math calculate what the families actually deserve. Even though some families still refer to this formula as “cold hearted” math, without it, there would be much more problems than there already