C} Calculus of negligence We have previously discussed this situation. Hockey pucks are dangerous when they fly outside the arena, and plexiglass is often used to protect fans from injury. An injury inflicted by a hockey puck causes harm equivalent to $100,000. The height ofthe plexiglass and the corresponding costs and risks of injuries are described in this table: Height of Plexiglass Risk of Injury High 10.3% Medium 12.3% Low 15.5% None 21% We have seen that the expected ha rm of the accidents, or p{x}A, was as follows: When precaution level is high: 0.103 {100000) = 510,300 When precaution level is medium: 0.123 {100000} = 512,300 When precaution level is low: 0.155 {100000} 2 515,500 When precaution level is zero: 0.21 100000] = $21,000 17. We novllI ask: what is the reduction in expected harm {that is, the marginal benefit of preca uticn] in the following cases: When precaution level increases from medium to high: When precaution level increases from low to medium: When precaution level increases from zero to low: 18. What is the additional cost {that is, the marginal cost of precaution): When precaution level increases from medium to high: When precaution level increases from low to medium: When precaution level increases from zero to low: 19. What level of precaution is required bythe Hand Rule (High, Medium, low or None}? Explain