One of the fundamental drivers of economic growth is the increase in productivity. Higher productivity allows the same population to produce more goods and services, leading to greater consumption and, consequently, higher levels of welfare. In this regard, renowned economist Paul Krugman famously emphasized the significance of productivity with his well-known statement:"Productivity isn't everything, but in the long run, it is almost everything. A country's ability to improve its standard of living over time depends almost entirely on its ability to raise output per worker."However, when efforts to enhance productivity and drive economic growth are rushed or poorly executed, or when productivity and growth cease to be mere tools and instead become ultimate goals, human life is often pushed into the background, leading to tragic consequences. The Kartalkaya fire disaster and the events preceding it serve as the latest example of this phenomenon.In the 1970s, disabled individuals in the United States gained equal access rights to federally funded services, including public transportation. However, despite these legal advancements, New York City’s subway system and many others failed to provide necessary accessibility measures for disabled passengers. Economists close to President Jimmy Carter dismissed such investments as unnecessary, arguing that cost-benefit analysis showed that the costs of these accommodations far outweighed the benefits (1).Although cost-benefit analysis is a widely used tool in economics to improve efficiency, it can sometimes evolve into a perspective that prioritizes costs over human well-being. In today’s world, the focus on productivity growth has shifted from producing more with the same cost to producing the same output at a lower cost, placing greater emphasis on cost minimization. While cost minimization contributes significantly to efficiency, it also gradually leads to the neglect of intangible and unquantifiable costs.At extreme levels, this perspective can even relegate human life to a secondary concern—because protecting human life also incurs monetary costs. From a purely financial standpoint, avoiding these costs can lead to cheaper production. Furthermore, the likelihood of a disaster occurring due to neglected safety measures is often perceived as low, meaning the benefit of preventative action is seen as insignificant or nonexistent.This mindset is encapsulated perfectly in a scene from the documentary American Factory, where a Chinese businessman opening a factory in the US is asked whether an outdoor opening ceremony is a good idea, given the possibility of rain. His response?"It won’t rain."In an economy where increasing production and economic growth are prioritized, cost-benefit analysis naturally finds its place. When governments adopt and focus on this economic approach, they tend to overestimate the benefits of growth while viewing the protection of human life as a cost that needs to be minimized. As a result, they introduce regulations that prioritize economic growth.Within this framework, the modern state, which holds the authority to inspect companies, regulates—or rather, neglects—these inspections in a way that promotes growth. Meanwhile, the public, which has delegated the duty of oversight to the state, naturally assumes that the goods and services they receive do not require additional scrutiny. However, this combination of cost minimization, delegation of oversight, and growth-focused policies ultimately invites disasters.The recent death of a citizen poisoned by a baked potato, the previous week's fatal case of food poisoning from chicken, and the Kartalkaya hotel fire that claimed 79 lives are all tragic examples of how prioritizing cost and efficiency over safety leads to loss of life. Similarly, the climate crisis—the most pressing global Issue of our era—is exacerbated by factories that pollute the environment while society at large bears the cost, and they alone reap the benefits. This is yet another consequence of combining cost-benefit analysis with a lack of regulation.From this perspective, when the market system fails to function properly, regulatory institutions are expected to intervene and oversee companies. However, the obsession with economic growth weakens regulatory oversight in an effort to facilitate expansion. This short-term profit-driven approach, shared by both businesses and policymakers, jeopardizes long-term stability and public safety, leading to tragedies like those we have witnessed.While skepticism toward market regulations and the argument that many regulations are unnecessary are valid, and while economic growth remains essential for increasing prosperity, deregulation should not come at the expense of fundamental rights—especially the right to life and safety.* Dr. Caner Gerek<hr fr-original-style="" style="height: 0px; overflow: visible; border-bottom: none; clear: both; user-select: none; break-after: page; box-sizing: border-box;"> 1 Berman, Elizabeth P. (2022). Thinking Like an Economist: How Efficiency Replaced Equality in US Public Policy, 2023.

The Freedom Observer

From this perspective, when the market system fails to function properly, regulatory institutions are expected to intervene and oversee companies. However, the obsession with economic growth weakens regulatory oversight in an effort to facilitate expansion. This short-term profit-driven approach, shared by both businesses and policymakers, jeopardizes long-term stability and public safety, leading to tragedies like those we have witnessed.

analysis ile ilgili hikayeler