I think part of it is how wealthy we are. And staying alive is definitely a, what we call an economic subnormal good. So i think we value our lives and our health a little higher than we used to. We still have dangers, but not the same kind we had before. Modernity has put the buaucrat in place of ristickr. Instead of worshipping antropeners, we take risk for the sake of others.
Nassim Taleb of NYU-Poly talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about his recent paper (with Constantine Sandis) on the morality and effectiveness of "skin in the game." When decision makers have skin in the game--when they share in the costs and benefits of their decisions that might affect others--they are more likely to make prudent decisions than in cases where decision-makers can impose costs on others. Taleb sees skin in the game as not just a useful policy concept but a moral imperative. The conversation closes with some observations on the power of expected value for evaluating predictions along with Taleb's thoughts on economists who rarely have skin in the game when they make forecasts or take policy positions.