[zgjchpbh] Bin Laden versus Madoff

Which man has caused more direct damage: Osama bin Laden (for 9/11) or Bernard Madoff?

Madoff caused $65 billion in damages (losses).

Osama bin Laden, for the September 11, 2001 attacks, caused about 3000 deaths and very roughly $30 billion in property destruction (I could be off by 10), plus about 6000 injuries. Assuming the cost of the injuries to average a million dollars each (very high), Osama bin Laden would have caused more damage if the value of a human life is greater than (65-30-6)/3 = $9.6 million, which is toward the high end of the usual estimate of somewhere between $1 million and $10 million (based on the amount people or governments or insurance companies are willing to spend to reduce the probability of death).

Of course, each man indirectly caused a great deal of indirect damage: Madoff for causing Americans to lose faith in the financial system, causing a drying up of investment and a big step of the "death spiral" of the recession; Bin Laden for well, terror. But these indirect effects are very hard to quantify and cannot be completely pinned on a single person.

I conclude that both men caused a comparable amount of direct damage, with Madoff somewhat more likely to have caused more.

Sarcastically, we can proudly claim that we Americans are better than foreigners, even when it comes to hurting Americans.