wu :: forums
        (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        riddles >> easy >> Job Hazards
        
(Message started by: Lupin on Feb 15th, 2016, 6:13pm)
Title: Job Hazards
Post by Lupin on Feb 15th, 2016, 6:13pm
Statistically, what is the most hazardous job in the United States?
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by Grimbal on Feb 16th, 2016, 7:13am
Suicide bomber?
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by rmsgrey on Feb 16th, 2016, 9:35am
President?

4 out of 43 Presidents have been assassinated - and another 4 died of natural causes - an 18% mortality rate is pretty high (or 9% if you don't count the natural causes).
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by towr on Feb 18th, 2016, 11:01am
Hazardous to who? To the guy that does the job, or the people affected?
Lobbyist for the coal industry, or tobacco industry might rate very high in the latter case.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by alien2 on Feb 19th, 2016, 7:26am
Working at McDonald's? Its customers are cheap bastards who never leave a tip.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by Lupin on Feb 19th, 2016, 8:15pm
rmsgrey

President?

4 out of 43 Presidents have been assassinated - and another 4 died of natural causes - an 18% mortality rate is pretty high (or 9% if you don't count the natural causes).

Yes, being President of the United States is a very coveted position but it has its own inherent hazards. Think about this: Obama is the 44th President of the United States. Of these 44, four presidents have been assassinated so that makes it a 9.32% violent mortality incidence among presidents. (If we accept as true the strong rumors that the deaths of Zachary Taylor and Warren Harding were not due to natural causes, the mortality incidence climbs to 13.9%) But if we add to these six deaths the seventeen attempted presidential assassinations then the hazard incidence is 47.72%. This means that an American President has almost a 50-50 chance of being attacked with the intention of murder. Just ask Obama why he ordered his monster Cadillac Limo, fondly nicknamed, “The Beast”, to have the thickest glass and panels ever built into a vehicle.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by rmsgrey on Feb 20th, 2016, 9:24am

on 02/19/16 at 20:15:40, Lupin wrote:
Obama is the 44th President of the United States.


According to my research, Obama's is the 44th Presidency, but he's only the 43rd person to hold the office - one President had non-consecutive terms.

You could also break it down in terms of person-years (same numerically as years in this case) - I don't know the average number of years spent doing the same job - aside from anything else, it depends what you count as changing jobs - which could be anything from having your job description change slightly to only when you change fields - does someone who spends 30 years working for McDonalds, gradually accruing seniority and moving up to corporate management count as having changed jobs?
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by Grimbal on Feb 22nd, 2016, 3:30am
Senator of the Roman Empire is quite dangerous too.
100% of them died.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by rmsgrey on Feb 22nd, 2016, 8:52am

on 02/22/16 at 03:30:05, Grimbal wrote:
Senator of the Roman Empire is quite dangerous too.
100% of them died.

But not many of them were working in the US at the time...
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by towr on Feb 22nd, 2016, 10:26am
How about astronaut?
Especially if you consider on-mission hours, I bet it's pretty hazardous with two space-shuttles having blown up.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by alien2 on Feb 22nd, 2016, 10:33am

on 02/15/16 at 18:13:24, Lupin wrote:
Statistically, what is the most hazardous job in the United States?

I believe the most hazardous job is to be without a job.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by alien2 on Mar 2nd, 2016, 8:41am
Come to think of it, all jobs are most hazardous to lazy people. Then again, any job is most hazardous to crazy people as well. I myself prefer lazy people with no offense to crazy people.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by alien2 on Mar 12th, 2016, 5:39am

on 03/02/16 at 08:41:39, alien2 wrote:
I myself prefer lazy people with no offense to crazy people.

Unless you are crazy because you are lazy.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by Lupin on Mar 20th, 2016, 8:59pm
Astronauts?

"Depending on which statistic you use (i.e. whether sub-orbital flights count), either 426 or 433 people have flown into space in the American and Russian space programs. If you add those who died before they reached space, such as the 1986 crew of the Challenger shuttle, as well as the latest Columbia astronauts (who made it to space, but weren't in the stats I found), you get up to 450 or so, depending on how you count. As of the Columbia catastrophe, 24 astronauts have died in the American program, and 10 or more (possibly quite a bit more) in the Russian/Soviet ones (some Soviet deaths may still be kept secret). So, at the very lowest end of the range, with 34 deaths out of 450 spacefarers, we have a 7.5% death rate."

This was posted by Derek Miller in 2003 penmachine.com/  How many more deaths have been reported?

BTW the new International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) has the following codes W22.02XD: V95.43XS: Spacecraft collision injuring occupant.  I believe not too many doctors are going to use these codes.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by alien2 on Mar 21st, 2016, 7:02am
The riddle is solved. What?  
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by markr on Mar 21st, 2016, 11:39pm
Police Officer?
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by alien2 on Mar 21st, 2016, 11:46pm

on 03/21/16 at 23:39:48, markr wrote:
Police Officer?

Only if you are a thief.  
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by playful on Apr 24th, 2016, 1:23am

Quote:
The riddle is solved.


I don't think the riddle is solved. A death-on-the job rate of 9% is extremely low compared with many other jobs.

Huh?

As I see it, the task is to find one job that has been held by exactly one person in the States, one person who has died in the exercise of that job. Therefore, statistically (as per the problem definition), the job has a 100% mortality rate.

There should be many candidates for this answer.

Here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_industrial_disasters)'s a good place to start looking.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by riddler358 on Apr 24th, 2016, 6:26am
i have to agree with alien2 on this one, most fatal accidents happen in home

i think that close second would be taxi driver
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by alien2 on Apr 27th, 2016, 2:51am

on 04/24/16 at 06:26:14, riddler358 wrote:
i have to agree with alien2 on this one, most fatal accidents happen in home

Some women did mutilate their husbands after emancipation. It sounds logical that accidents are more likely to occur at work. However, majority of people spend most of their time at home and e.g. keeping children safe from accidents isn’t a simple task.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by playful on Apr 27th, 2016, 1:44pm
I still think that acceptable answers to "Statistically, what is the most hazardous job in the United States?" must be jobs with a 100% fatality rate, because such jobs exist. For instance:

- crew member on Challenger mission
- ... your ideas here
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by alien2 on Apr 27th, 2016, 3:24pm
How about army jobs then? The army can make life taker and heart breaker out of you. I know not all the circumstances but all defenders were killed at the Battle of the Alamo.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by playful on Apr 27th, 2016, 3:54pm

Quote:
How about army jobs then?


If there is one army job title that's had a 100% casualty rate, then definitely. I'm sure there have been jobs like that -- a position that's only been held a handful of times, always tragically.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by Grimbal on Apr 28th, 2016, 7:34am
Kamikaze.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by towr on Apr 28th, 2016, 9:00am

on 04/27/16 at 13:44:45, playful wrote:
- crew member on Challenger mission
I think that's cheating, because the job they signed up for was "astronaut".
It's similar to calling "being president of the united states on April 14th, 1865" a job.
Same goes for Kamikaze pilot. And arguably even suicide bombers (their "job" is terrorist, blowing themselves up is just one way that job may play out).
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by playful on Apr 28th, 2016, 1:58pm

Quote:
the job they signed up for was "astronaut".


Do you know this for a fact?

I do get your point and was sensitive to it when choosing that example, as it seemed like a chance for one-of-a-kind job titles. My point is that there was probably one guy on that crew who had a job title that was used only once.

The fatality rate for the guy who had that job title is 100%.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by towr on Apr 28th, 2016, 10:58pm
Do I know it for a fact? No. Is it a lot more likely than the alternative? Yes.

And in any case, if you approach the danger of a job in that way, then a job that has only been filled once has an infinite variance associated with it, so you can't rightly say anything about how dangerous it is.
It's a pretty poor way to try to evaluate the danger of a job anyway. If two job titles entail doing exactly the same thing, but one had 100% fatality and the other 0, then they're still equally dangerous, because they're the exact same job even though the title is different. (Unless you can explain how the title suddenly makes it dangerous; but then, it's still the title, and not really the job, that's dangerous.)

I'd also be surprised if there are many jobs that can really be consider to be so narrow as to cover no more than what a given person on the job actually does (vs could do). If a "job" is playing Russian roulette once (assuming a standard 6-chamber revolver), then it's fatality rate is 1 in 6, regardless of whether the job has only ever been filled by one person that had the poor luck of blowing his brains out. The alternative ways the job could have played out, even though they weren't realized, do influence the statistics of the job. (I wouldn't take the job if he hadn't blown his brains out, because 100% survival rate says nothing with N=1.)
Applying this to the Challenger disaster, we have to consider the likelihood of that accident happening, not just that historically it did happen. Only in very large samples of events can you safely assume that rare events are fairly represented in the statistics.

So, yeah. In summary, I, personally, won't consider any job as an answer anymore that doesn't have either a sufficient number of samples or appropriate proxy statistics for what characterizes that job.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by alien2 on Apr 29th, 2016, 3:49am

on 04/28/16 at 22:58:21, towr wrote:
In summary, I, personally, won't consider any job as an answer anymore that doesn't have either a sufficient number of samples or appropriate proxy statistics for what characterizes that job.

Ergo there is no such thing as the most hazardous job in the United States. Unless of course I was right.


on 04/28/16 at 07:34:37, Grimbal wrote:
Kamikaze.

Japanese kamikaze pilots are still attacking US warships?
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by towr on Apr 29th, 2016, 1:04pm

on 04/29/16 at 03:49:25, alien2 wrote:
Ergo there is no such thing as the most hazardous job in the United States. Unless of course I was right.
As long as there are jobs in the US, one or several should be the most hazardous. "Hazardousness" is just a way to rank items, and something has to be on top of a (non-empty) ranking
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by anglia on Apr 29th, 2016, 10:52pm
It must be Police Officer.
Title: Re: Job Hazards
Post by alien2 on Apr 30th, 2016, 1:02am

on 04/29/16 at 22:52:11, anglia wrote:
It must be Police Officer.

Not necessarily. When I see a parking ticket I am out of my gourd.


Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.4!
Forum software copyright © 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board