[S]o big is counter-terrorism spending and so limited is terrorism's economic impact that, even if 30 attacks like the London bombings of July 2005 were prevented each year, the benefits would still be lower than the costs.So, if I've got this right, the Economist is suggesting that there are enormous benefits to be gained from reducing spending on counter-terrorism even if this were to result in thousands of deaths from terrorist attacks.
Of course, as Norm points out, the Economist's figures only hold up if you assume that a human life has no value.
