A recall costs money for a corporation to perform. A project like astroid deflection is an opportunity to funnel more government spending into the pockets of defense and space contractors. These are not the same.
The General Motors ignition switch recalls refers to February 6, 2014 when General Motors recalled about 800,000 of its small cars due to faulty ignition switches, which could shut off the engine while the vehicle was in motion and thereby prevent the airbags from inflating.[1] The company continued to recall more of its cars over the next several months, resulting in nearly 30 million cars recalled worldwide[2] and paid compensation for 124 deaths.[3] The fault had been known to GM for at least a decade prior to the recall being declared.[4] As part of a Deferred Prosecution Agreement, GM agreed to forfeit $900 million to the United States.[5]
Why would we mitigate the asteroid if its cheaper to clean up after a non-consequential impact?
To test our ability to stop it. If one was going to hit a major city, that’s not the best situation to be trying something out for the first time.
Seems like a cost benefit analysis that nobody here is going to be an authority on.
If the cost of a recall for a defective car is higher than the cost to settle wrongful death lawsuits, they don’t do a recall.
A recall costs money for a corporation to perform. A project like astroid deflection is an opportunity to funnel more government spending into the pockets of defense and space contractors. These are not the same.
Who is they? What situation are you talking about? Are you sure they would do that? Are you making up a scenario to prove a point?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_ignition_switch_recalls
Isn’t this also a ford thing, where they expected the recall of the explody pinto to cost more than the lawsuits for the wrongful deaths?
It’s a paraphrase of a quote from Fight Club but yeah it’s a real thing. Cost benefit analysis is a bitch