The problem with this, um, fantastical bullshit is that the arrow only goes one way. The loss of a life is quantified by lost earnings, but large frauds are not looked at as capital crimes, nor are giant frauds looked at as mass murder. If you argue that the arrow should go both ways, you end up with a completely corrupt, totalitarian shitshow. It is the criminals who benefit the most from controlling who gets executed.
Over and over, democracies tend to reject this kind of equivalence. They demand more than simple remuneration for loss of life, and they reject capital punishment for economic crimes. If we are wrong, you’re going to have to convince us with more than just proposing an equivalence as an analytical tool.
