Because he's a man with no moral values and someone who can do anything for his own interests. The only thing he cares about is money and power. He wouldn't hesitate even if this leads to wars and people dying. He loves interfering in other countries' internal affairs. He makes up excuses to exploit their resources. This is actually the general policy of the United States, but while some presidents care more about democracy and human rights, he has nothing to do with such things.
He sees it as business. and human material is worthless
He just change the value of people to $0 we were worth $7.8 million each. Bush lowered out value from that to $6.9 million and Trump just zeroed us out.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/11/usa.epaUS news
This article is more than 17 years old
US environmental agency lowers value of a human life
This article is more than 17 years old
Elana Schor in Washington and agencies
Fri 11 Jul 2008 14.20 EDT
Share
Prefer the Guardian on Google
It sounds like a spot of gallows humour, but the numbers are no joke: the US environmental protection agency (EPA) has lowered the value of a human life by nearly $1m under George Bush's administration.
The EPA's estimate of the "value of a statistical life" was $6.9m as of this May – down from $7.8m five years ago – according to an Associated Press study released today.
Though it may seem like a harmless bureaucratic recalculation, the devaluation has real consequences.
When drawing up regulations, government agencies put a value on human life and then weigh the costs versus the lifesaving benefits of a proposed rule.
The less a life is worth to the government, the less the need for a regulation – such as the tighter restrictions on pollution that the EPA refused to impose today, effectively postponing any action on climate change until after Bush leaves office.
Consider, for example, a hypothetical regulation that costs $18bn to enforce but will prevent 2,500 deaths. At $7.8m per person (the old figure), the lifesaving benefits outweigh the costs. But at $6.9m per person, the rule costs more than the lives it saves, so it may not be adopted.
Some environmentalists accuse the Bush administration of changing the value to avoid tougher rules, a charge the EPA denies.
"It appears that they're cooking the books in regards to the value of life," S William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, said.
"Those decisions are literally a matter of life and death."
Dan Esty, a senior EPA policy official in the administration of the first President Bush and now director of the Yale centre for environmental law and policy, said: "It's hard to imagine that it has other than a political motivation."
The devaluation also raised alarms in Congress, where Senate environment committee chairman Barbara Boxer vowed to introduce legislation reversing the EPA's move.
"EPA may not think Americans are worth all that much, but the rest of us believe the value of an American life to our families, our communities, our workplaces and our nation is no less than it has ever been," Boxer, a Democrat, said.
Agency officials say they were just following what the science told them. The EPA figure is not based on people's earning capacity or their potential contributions to society -- some of the factors used in insurance claims and lawsuits.
Instead, economists calculate the value based on what people are willing to pay to avoid certain risks, and on how much extra employers pay their workers to take on additional risks.
Most of the data is drawn from payroll statistics; some comes from opinion surveys. According to the EPA, people shouldn't think of the number as a price tag on a life.
Vanderbilt university economist Kip Viscusi, whose work was used by the EPA in evaluating whether to lower the value of a life, said the cut "doesn't make sense".
"As people become more affluent, the value of statistical lives goes up as well. It has to," Viscusi told the Associated Press. He also said no study has shown that Americans are less willing to pay to reduce risks.
The EPA traditionally has put the highest value on life of any government agency and still does, despite efforts by past administrations to use the same figure in all US government agencies.
Explore more on these topics
US news
George Bush
Climate crisis
US Environmental Protection Agency
Share
Reuse this content
. Bush
finally step trump
https://climate.uchicago.edu/news/trumps-e-p-a-has-put-a-value-on-human-life-zero-dollars/EPIC IN THE NEWS·JAN 21, 2026
Trump’s E.P.A. Has Put a Value on Human Life: Zero Dollars
via the New York Times
The Environmental Protection Agency has stopped estimating the dollar value of lives saved in the cost-benefit analyses for new pollution rules.
By Maxine Joselow
Some regulatory experts had mixed reactions to the move.
“On one hand, the administration does make some valid points that E.P.A. statements have implied a false precision in the past,” said Susan Dudley, who led the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs during President George W. Bush’s second term and now teaches at George Washington University. “On the other hand, the way to rectify that is not to stop quantifying the health effects altogether.”
Others were less circumspect in their criticism.
“If the rationale is that benefits are uncertain, well, costs are uncertain, too,” said Alan Krupnick, a senior fellow at Resources for the Future, a nonprofit research group. “Considering costs without considering benefits is like trying to cut a piece of cloth with one blade of the scissors: The cut is likely going to be inaccurate and rough.”
Michael Greenstone, an environmental economist at the University of Chicago, said the change could result in dirtier air, undercutting the gains made since Congress strengthened the Clean Air Act in 1970. Steep reductions in PM2.5 pollution have added 1.4 years to the average American’s life expectancy since 1970, according to research by the University of Chicago’s Air Quality Life Index project.
“Clean air is one of the great success stories of government policy in the last half-century,” Dr. Greenstone said. “And at the heart of the Clean Air Act is the idea that when you allow people to lead longer and healthier lives, that has value that can be measured in dollars.”
Dr. Greenstone and other economists said the value of a statistical life has often been misinterpreted as the value that the government assigns to a single person’s life. But it is actually the value that the government assigns to slightly reducing the risk of death for a large group of people.
To determine this value, government economists have turned to studies on the labor market, which show that workers demand higher wages before agreeing to perform jobs with greater risks of workplace fatalities.
Continue reading at the New York Times…
so to all of you reading this you are worthless in the eyes of Trump
the best way to protest is oral sex and do not fuck and make babies thus Trump will run out of
worthless cannon fodder.
unfortunately that will never happen
