|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Should we be allowed to sell our own organs? |
| yes |
|
65% |
[ 13 ] |
| no |
|
35% |
[ 7 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 20 |
|
| Author |
Message |
cubanlord
Joined: 08 Jul 2005
Location: In Japan!
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:20 pm Post subject: Re: Selling Organs - Should we be allowed to? |
 |
|
| Fox wrote: |
The thing is, you can do what you want with your own body....it's simply illegal for other people to pay you for it. Give your kidney to whoever you want, you're just not going to get rich off of it. |
See, this is contradictory. You can do whatever you want with your body, but, you can't sell parts of it. Doesn't selling part of your body constitute doing whatever you want with it?
| Quote: |
| Further, as soon as you allow the actual outright sale of organs, the organ donation system is over and done with. No one would donate their organs if they could will them to their family members after their death to be sold. |
The system isn't entirely over and done with. I am sure those that die may still opt to give them away for free. What selling kidneys does is that it gives poorer people a chance to live and futher their family, when given absolutely no other choice. This current system favors the rich, by far.
| Quote: |
| In addition to that, many nations have government provided health care. Donating an organ almost invariably comes with a rise in health care requirements. Society having to pick up the tab on your rising health care costs just because you wanted to make some quick money doesn't seem reasonable to me. |
How do you figure?
| Quote: |
| If selling organs can negatively impact us at a societal level, I don't see any reason it should be allowed. Donate if you like, but not for money. |
Using your logic, if anything negatively impacts us at a societal level, then we shouldn't do it. In that case, we wouldn't have a society. Everything is like a balance, there are pros and cons to each and every situation. We can't just assume that because something ha a negative impact, however minute, that we shouldn't do it.
For example:
having children = negative income
Shaving = waste of water
Eating = usage of natural resources
etc.etc.etc.
Sorry man, but if I had a starving family, I'd want to sell off a kidney to support them, if that were my only means by which family support could be obtained. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:39 pm Post subject: Re: Selling Organs - Should we be allowed to? |
|
|
| cubanlord wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
The thing is, you can do what you want with your own body....it's simply illegal for other people to pay you for it. Give your kidney to whoever you want, you're just not going to get rich off of it. |
See, this is contradictory. You can do whatever you want with your body, but, you can't sell parts of it. Doesn't selling part of your body constitute doing whatever you want with it? |
No, it's not contradictory. There's no limitation on what you can do with your body in this regard. There's simply a limitation on what people can do with their money.
| cubanlord wrote: |
| Quote: |
| In addition to that, many nations have government provided health care. Donating an organ almost invariably comes with a rise in health care requirements. Society having to pick up the tab on your rising health care costs just because you wanted to make some quick money doesn't seem reasonable to me. |
How do you figure? |
Assuming donating a kidney actually comes with a noticable deterioration of health, post-donation you are going to require more health care. Because in a socialized medicine system everyone pools their resources, your additional health care needs will involve you drawing more from those shared resources. If, as Rusty suggests is possibly the case, no actual health deterioration occurs, I said I would surrender this objection.
| cubanlord wrote: |
| Quote: |
| If selling organs can negatively impact us at a societal level, I don't see any reason it should be allowed. Donate if you like, but not for money. |
Using your logic, if anything negatively impacts us at a societal level, then we shouldn't do it. |
If there's no reciprocal gain, then no, of course we shouldn't do it. If there is a reciprocal gain, perhaps you'd care to mention it? I certainly don't see desparate people occasionally getting a bit of extra money as a meaningful reciprocal gain.
| cubanlord wrote: |
For example:
having children = negative income |
With the reciprocal gain of society continuing onward.
| cubanlord wrote: |
| Shaving = waste of water |
With the reciprocal social gain of people being cleaner and more attractive (though, I'd happily surrender clean shaves if everyone else did).
| cubanlord wrote: |
| Eating = usage of natural resources |
With the reciprocal gain of our society continuing to survive rather than all dying of starvation.
What's the reciprocal gain of being able to sell organs?
| cubanlord wrote: |
| Sorry man, but if I had a starving family, I'd want to sell off a kidney to support them, if that were my only means by which family support could be obtained. |
If you had a starving family, and it was really true the only way you could possibly support them is by selling a kidney, I'd much rather the government just helped you with your basic needs. You being forced to sell a kidney to see to your family's needs is totally unacceptable, and I don't want you to have to do it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kabrams
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Location: your Dad's house
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| kabrams wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| kabrams wrote: |
No.
Because just like "selling babies" there are poor people the world over who will be taken advantage of.
A kidney here. A heart here. A lung there. You'll have mothers killing themselves for the $1,000 they MIGHT pay her to give up a kidney. |
This is patently ridiculous. No one is advocating live organ donation, except for kidneys. |
The discussion is about SELLING organs, yes? |
Did you read the article? It mentions kidneys only. I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone who advocates live organ donation. Most intelligent people see it as being able to receive money in order that WHEN YOU DIE your organs can be used. |
Yes, but the original question is about ORGANS, not just kidneys.
The people who are donating their kidneys do so alive. They are participating in live organ donation. So maybe I should ask you if you read the article?
Transplant tourism is a HUGE problem. If we make "selling" organs legal, you will most definitely see a rise in Western people or people from developed nations going into destitute parts of Africa, Asia, etc. and snatching up people who are desperate for money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kabrams wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| kabrams wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| kabrams wrote: |
No.
Because just like "selling babies" there are poor people the world over who will be taken advantage of.
A kidney here. A heart here. A lung there. You'll have mothers killing themselves for the $1,000 they MIGHT pay her to give up a kidney. |
This is patently ridiculous. No one is advocating live organ donation, except for kidneys. |
The discussion is about SELLING organs, yes? |
Did you read the article? It mentions kidneys only. I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone who advocates live organ donation. Most intelligent people see it as being able to receive money in order that WHEN YOU DIE your organs can be used. |
Yes, but the original question is about ORGANS, not just kidneys.
The people who are donating their kidneys do so alive. They are participating in live organ donation. So maybe I should ask you if you read the article?
Transplant tourism is a HUGE problem. If we make "selling" organs legal, you will most definitely see a rise in Western people or people from developed nations going into destitute parts of Africa, Asia, etc. and snatching up people who are desperate for money. |
The original question mentions organs, but the OP makes no allusion to either organs or kidneys. From my powers of deduction I can reason that the OP was in fact referring to kidneys and not live organs. I can tell this by the fact he posted an article that dealt specifically with kidneys and not live organs.
By the way, donating kidneys is slightly different to live organ donarship in that you can survive giving away one kidney. You aren't likely to survive giving away a lung or heart.
Transplant tourism is a SMALL problem. If we make "selling" organs legal, you will most definitely see a LOWERING in Western people or people from developed nations going into destitute parts of Africa, Asia, etc. and snatching up people who are desperate for money.
See what I did there? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:41 pm Post subject: Re: Selling Organs - Should we be allowed to? |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Fox wrote: |
Further, as soon as you allow the actual outright sale of organs, the organ donation system is over and done with. No one would donate their organs if they could will them to their family members after their death to be sold. Because of this, organ transplant procedures would both be more costly and be far less egalitarian. |
The opposite is actually true. If you can sell your organs after you die the price would fall to close to zero. So many organs would flood the market, hence driving down the cost. It's not as if every kidney would sell for $25,000 forever under a free market for organs. Econ 101. |
This doesn't interact with my point. An organ you have to buy is, of course, more expensive than a freely donated organ. As a result, you're now paying the exact same cost for the transplant, plus whatever price the sellers demanded for the organ. Even if they sell it fairly cheaply (and they wouldn't; prices wouldn't be sitting at $25,000, but they certainly would never drop to "close to zero" given how needed they are), it's still going to cost you more than a freely donated organ.[/quote]
Donated organs, are in fact, quite expensive. Given that there are only a few of them they are not really free. As there are still more people wanting a kidney at any given price level. In this case free. There are people who would have been willing to pay for those kidneys, the price of which is the value of the kidney. If people could sell there kidneys, they would be cheaper simply because there are more. Check an Econ 101 text book, it's all in there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kabrams
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Location: your Dad's house
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
The original question mentions organs, but the OP makes no allusion to either organs or kidneys. From my powers of deduction I can reason that the OP was in fact referring to kidneys and not live organs. I can tell this by the fact he posted an article that dealt specifically with kidneys and not live organs. |
What are you talking about. Kidney transplantation can be (and in the article IS) a live donation. In fact, MOST kidneys are from live donors.
| Quote: |
| By the way, donating kidneys is slightly different to live organ donarship in that you can survive giving away one kidney. You aren't likely to survive giving away a lung or heart. |
I...know this.
| Quote: |
| Transplant tourism is a SMALL problem. |
Really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurgaon_kidney_scandal
http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/85/12/06-039370/en/
| Quote: |
| If we make "selling" organs legal, you will most definitely see a LOWERING in Western people or people from developed nations going into destitute parts of Africa, Asia, etc. and snatching up people who are desperate for money. |
I highly doubt that any businessperson who can make a larger profit off organs in the developing world would seriously consider keeping organ sales within the West or developed nations. That doesn't even make sense.
I mean, we still have child miners and factor workers right? If we can afford to pay children pennies a week to make our Gap pullovers, I'm pretty sure we could afford to pay Indian workers $1,000 for a kidney that could make tens of thousands of dollars more for the middleman.
| Quote: |
| See what I did there? |
Did you see what you did there? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 11:22 pm Post subject: Re: Selling Organs - Should we be allowed to? |
|
|
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Fox wrote: |
Further, as soon as you allow the actual outright sale of organs, the organ donation system is over and done with. No one would donate their organs if they could will them to their family members after their death to be sold. Because of this, organ transplant procedures would both be more costly and be far less egalitarian. |
The opposite is actually true. If you can sell your organs after you die the price would fall to close to zero. So many organs would flood the market, hence driving down the cost. It's not as if every kidney would sell for $25,000 forever under a free market for organs. Econ 101. |
This doesn't interact with my point. An organ you have to buy is, of course, more expensive than a freely donated organ. As a result, you're now paying the exact same cost for the transplant, plus whatever price the sellers demanded for the organ. Even if they sell it fairly cheaply (and they wouldn't; prices wouldn't be sitting at $25,000, but they certainly would never drop to "close to zero" given how needed they are), it's still going to cost you more than a freely donated organ. |
Donated organs, are in fact, quite expensive. Given that there are only a few of them they are not really free. As there are still more people wanting a kidney at any given price level. In this case free. There are people who would have been willing to pay for those kidneys, the price of which is the value of the kidney. If people could sell there kidneys, they would be cheaper simply because there are more. Check an Econ 101 text book, it's all in there. |
Data on current cost and availibility? Not of the transplant, and not of the cost of retrieving/transferring/maintaining that kidney, but of the kidney itself. How much does the patient pay on average for that kidney, independent of the cost of the surgery? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kabrams wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
The original question mentions organs, but the OP makes no allusion to either organs or kidneys. From my powers of deduction I can reason that the OP was in fact referring to kidneys and not live organs. I can tell this by the fact he posted an article that dealt specifically with kidneys and not live organs. |
What are you talking about. Kidney transplantation can be (and in the article IS) a live donation. In fact, MOST kidneys are from live donors.
| Quote: |
| By the way, donating kidneys is slightly different to live organ donarship in that you can survive giving away one kidney. You aren't likely to survive giving away a lung or heart. |
I...know this.
| Quote: |
| Transplant tourism is a SMALL problem. |
Really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurgaon_kidney_scandal
http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/85/12/06-039370/en/
| Quote: |
| If we make "selling" organs legal, you will most definitely see a LOWERING in Western people or people from developed nations going into destitute parts of Africa, Asia, etc. and snatching up people who are desperate for money. |
I highly doubt that any businessperson who can make a larger profit off organs in the developing world would seriously consider keeping organ sales within the West or developed nations. That doesn't even make sense.
I mean, we still have child miners and factor workers right? If we can afford to pay children pennies a week to make our Gap pullovers, I'm pretty sure we could afford to pay Indian workers $1,000 for a kidney that could make tens of thousands of dollars more for the middleman.
| Quote: |
| See what I did there? |
Did you see what you did there? |
Fine, a kidney is live donarship. BUT LITERALLY NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT LIVE DONARSHIP OF ANY ORGAN EXCEPT KIDNEYS!!!!!!!!!!!! Literally no one advocates live donarship of hearts, livers, lungs, brains etc. The OP should have worded his question better.
The rest of your post pretty much boils down to "OH won't somebody think of the children!!!!!!!!!" Yes, let's think of the children but let's not get tripped over by something that may or may not happen when we could be doing a lot of good.
Sweat shops are not great but if you ask the person in the sweat shop where they would rather be they will say the sweat shop.
As for procuring kidneys from the poor there is no reason to suggest a free market in kidneys would increase this. If kidneys are cheaper (which they would be without price controls) why would you travel half way across the world for a low quality item when you have them piling up on your door from just down the street. And besides, the licenses required to sell kidneys would be heavily regulated by the govt anyway.
I am talking about kidney donation only. I in no way, shape or form endorse the live transplant of any other organ for human beings. But then who does? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 11:28 pm Post subject: Re: Selling Organs - Should we be allowed to? |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Fox wrote: |
Further, as soon as you allow the actual outright sale of organs, the organ donation system is over and done with. No one would donate their organs if they could will them to their family members after their death to be sold. Because of this, organ transplant procedures would both be more costly and be far less egalitarian. |
The opposite is actually true. If you can sell your organs after you die the price would fall to close to zero. So many organs would flood the market, hence driving down the cost. It's not as if every kidney would sell for $25,000 forever under a free market for organs. Econ 101. |
This doesn't interact with my point. An organ you have to buy is, of course, more expensive than a freely donated organ. As a result, you're now paying the exact same cost for the transplant, plus whatever price the sellers demanded for the organ. Even if they sell it fairly cheaply (and they wouldn't; prices wouldn't be sitting at $25,000, but they certainly would never drop to "close to zero" given how needed they are), it's still going to cost you more than a freely donated organ. |
Donated organs, are in fact, quite expensive. Given that there are only a few of them they are not really free. As there are still more people wanting a kidney at any given price level. In this case free. There are people who would have been willing to pay for those kidneys, the price of which is the value of the kidney. If people could sell there kidneys, they would be cheaper simply because there are more. Check an Econ 101 text book, it's all in there. |
Data on current cost and availibility? Not of the transplant, and not of the cost of retrieving/transferring/maintaining that kidney, but of the kidney itself. How much does the patient pay on average for that kidney, independent of the cost of the surgery? |
I would assume nothing. But how many people miss out on a kidney, who would happily have paid for the privilege of obtaining one? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kabrams
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Location: your Dad's house
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 11:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Fine, a kidney is live donarship. BUT LITERALLY NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT LIVE DONARSHIP OF ANY ORGAN EXCEPT KIDNEYS!!!!!!!!!!!! Literally no one advocates live donarship of hearts, livers, lungs, brains etc. The OP should have worded his question better. |
Okay, I see now what you're saying. I was thinking selling ALL organs. If it's kidneys, it changes the equation somewhat but I still foresee major problems.
| Quote: |
The rest of your post pretty much boils down to "OH won't somebody think of the children!!!!!!!!!" Yes, let's think of the children but let's not get tripped over by something that may or may not happen when we could be doing a lot of good. |
Actually, it's not about 'let's think of the children'. I'm saying, child labor is illegal and labor laws in the United States are more strict than many places around the world, so businesses were moved with lax laws and cheap labor.
With the same breath, if you made kidney transplants legal in the United States, this does not mean more kidneys will be available in the United States or even be favorable.
| Quote: |
Sweat shops are not great but if you ask the person in the sweat shop where they would rather be they will say the sweat shop. |
No...you're kidding me. You do realize that many people in sweat shops are slaves, right?
| Quote: |
As for procuring kidneys from the poor there is no reason to suggest a free market in kidneys would increase this. If kidneys are cheaper (which they would be without price controls) why would you travel half way across the world for a low quality item when you have them piling up on your door from just down the street. And besides, the licenses required to sell kidneys would be heavily regulated by the govt anyway.
|
Regulated where? In the United States?
As I said before, jobs, industry, labor go where it's cheapest. Yes, we still have jobs in the United States, but there are many businesses who make huge profits by sending jobs to countries where they have lax or nonexistent labor laws and cheap wages.
American import cheap materials from other countries all the time. Why would kidneys be any different? I would suspect at first suspicion of the practice, but with time, it would become a full-fledged industry.
| Quote: |
I am talking about kidney donation only. I in no way, shape or form endorse the live transplant of any other organ for human beings. But then who does? |
This was speculation based on the OP's question "Should selling organs be made legal". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kabrams wrote: |
| Quote: |
The rest of your post pretty much boils down to "OH won't somebody think of the children!!!!!!!!!" Yes, let's think of the children but let's not get tripped over by something that may or may not happen when we could be doing a lot of good. |
1.Actually, it's not about 'let's think of the children'. I'm saying, child labor is illegal and labor laws in the United States are more strict than many places around the world, so businesses were moved with lax laws and cheap labor.
2.With the same breath, if you made kidney transplants legal in the United States, this does not mean more kidneys will be available in the United States or even be favorable.
| Quote: |
Sweat shops are not great but if you ask the person in the sweat shop where they would rather be they will say the sweat shop. |
3. No...you're kidding me. You do realize that many people in sweat shops are slaves, right?
| Quote: |
As for procuring kidneys from the poor there is no reason to suggest a free market in kidneys would increase this. If kidneys are cheaper (which they would be without price controls) why would you travel half way across the world for a low quality item when you have them piling up on your door from just down the street. And besides, the licenses required to sell kidneys would be heavily regulated by the govt anyway.
|
4. Regulated where? In the United States?
5. As I said before, jobs, industry, labor go where it's cheapest. Yes, we still have jobs in the United States, but there are many businesses who make huge profits by sending jobs to countries where they have lax or nonexistent labor laws and cheap wages.
6.American import cheap materials from other countries all the time. Why would kidneys be any different? I would suspect at first suspicion of the practice, but with time, it would become a full-fledged industry.
|
1. Nobody is saying "Let's get our kidneys from children.
2. First, kidney transplant are legal. Secondly, if you had taken even one economics class, you would know that increasing the quantity of an item pretty much lowers its price by definition.
3. Where did you pick up that clap trap? Would you rather sew sneakers for 50c an hour and have something to eat and some leisure time or work 18 hours a day back in the village just to put food on the table? With no guarantee even of that. The majority of people in sweat shops aren't being held there against their will. And if you suggested to them you could get them out of there, they would fight you vehemently.
4. Notice I said "would be" hypothethtical situation. Everything else is regulated, why wouldn't the sale of kidneys be also? In other words, you couldn't sell kidneys in the states, without a license.
5. Don't lecture me on economics as you don't seem to know the first thing about it. Businesses go where their capital will be most productive. The US is still the biggest producer in the world because it's workers are the most productive by a long way. Just because labor is cheap, does not mean it is more productive.
6.Why would kidneys being cheap be a bad thing? Poor people could sell them, for no long term harm to themselves and massive gain for both parties. That's pretty much the definition of free trade. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kabrams
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Location: your Dad's house
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
1. Nobody is saying "Let's get our kidneys from children.
|
I wasn't, either.
| Quote: |
2. First, kidney transplant are legal. Secondly, if you had taken even one economics class, you would know that increasing the quantity of an item pretty much lowers its price by definition. |
First, I meant selling kidneys for a kidney transplant. Second, what does your second sentence have to do with anything I wrote in that paragraph?
| Quote: |
3. Where did you pick up that clap trap? Would you rather sew sneakers for 50c an hour and have something to eat and some leisure time or work 18 hours a day back in the village just to put food on the table? With no guarantee even of that. The majority of people in sweat shops aren't being held there against their will. And if you suggested to them you could get them out of there, they would fight you vehemently.
|
If you suggested to people working in sweatshops that you could guarantee them a good job with fair wages, decent hours and safe conditions, they would LEAVE.
Making people choose between sweatshops and street hustling/prostitution/grinding stone/crime and then saying they choose sweatshops because they "want" to is insane. They don't choose to work in the sweatshop because they want to, they go there because they have to.
And this is NOT counting the people who are in sweatshops because of debt bondage (we'll get you this job but it will cost you XX amount to get started) or kidnapping/trafficking.
| Quote: |
4. Notice I said "would be" hypothethtical situation. Everything else is regulated, why wouldn't the sale of kidneys be also? In other words, you couldn't sell kidneys in the states, without a license. |
Uh, this was a question leading into the next paragraph. As in, regulated where? In the United States? But what about THE REST OF THE WORLD?
| Quote: |
| 5. Don't lecture me on economics as you don't seem to know the first thing about it. Businesses go where their capital will be most productive. The US is still the biggest producer in the world because it's workers are the most productive by a long way. Just because labor is cheap, does not mean it is more productive. |
We weren't talking about just across the board production. We were talking about a specific product (kidneys) being produced in a place where labor is cheap.
China has become the largest exporter in the world, and the largest number of imports TO the United States are from China. You mean to tell me that for some reason, kidneys would be exempt from this trend?
| Quote: |
6.Why would kidneys being cheap be a bad thing? Poor people could sell them, for no long term harm to themselves and massive gain for both parties. That's pretty much the definition of free trade. |
Do you know how many people die giving kidneys in poor conditions? How about the people who are not properly compensated? How about the people who are tricked into giving away their kidneys?
You think this "free market" is okay, even when desperate poor people are forced to do something they otherwise would probably never do?
And, just as labor conditions are mostly poor and dangerous in sweatshops and factories, you really think they would 1. get fair compensation for said kidney and 2. receive adequate care after the kidney transplant? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:37 am Post subject: Re: Selling Organs - Should we be allowed to? |
|
|
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Fox wrote: |
Further, as soon as you allow the actual outright sale of organs, the organ donation system is over and done with. No one would donate their organs if they could will them to their family members after their death to be sold. Because of this, organ transplant procedures would both be more costly and be far less egalitarian. |
The opposite is actually true. If you can sell your organs after you die the price would fall to close to zero. So many organs would flood the market, hence driving down the cost. It's not as if every kidney would sell for $25,000 forever under a free market for organs. Econ 101. |
This doesn't interact with my point. An organ you have to buy is, of course, more expensive than a freely donated organ. As a result, you're now paying the exact same cost for the transplant, plus whatever price the sellers demanded for the organ. Even if they sell it fairly cheaply (and they wouldn't; prices wouldn't be sitting at $25,000, but they certainly would never drop to "close to zero" given how needed they are), it's still going to cost you more than a freely donated organ. |
Donated organs, are in fact, quite expensive. Given that there are only a few of them they are not really free. As there are still more people wanting a kidney at any given price level. In this case free. There are people who would have been willing to pay for those kidneys, the price of which is the value of the kidney. If people could sell there kidneys, they would be cheaper simply because there are more. Check an Econ 101 text book, it's all in there. |
Data on current cost and availibility? Not of the transplant, and not of the cost of retrieving/transferring/maintaining that kidney, but of the kidney itself. How much does the patient pay on average for that kidney, independent of the cost of the surgery? |
I would assume nothing. But how many people miss out on a kidney, who would happily have paid for the privilege of obtaining one? |
I'd be very interested to know. Regardless of one's stance on this issue, it would certainly be useful data to have.
However, I don't know. Do you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="kabrams"]
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
Where did you pick up that clap trap? Would you rather sew sneakers for 50c an hour and have something to eat and some leisure time or work 18 hours a day back in the village just to put food on the table? With no guarantee even of that. The majority of people in sweat shops aren't being held there against their will. And if you suggested to them you could get them out of there, they would fight you vehemently.
|
1. If you suggested to people working in sweatshops that you could guarantee them a good job with fair wages, decent hours and safe conditions, they would LEAVE.
2. Making people choose between sweatshops and street hustling/prostitution/grinding stone/crime and then saying they choose sweatshops because they "want" to is insane. They don't choose to work in the sweatshop because they want to, they go there because they have to.
3. And this is NOT counting the people who are in sweatshops because of debt bondage (we'll get you this job but it will cost you XX amount to get started) or kidnapping/trafficking.
| Quote: |
Notice I said "would be" hypothethtical situation. Everything else is regulated, why wouldn't the sale of kidneys be also? In other words, you couldn't sell kidneys in the states, without a license. |
4. Uh, this was a question leading into the next paragraph. As in, regulated where? In the United States? But what about THE REST OF THE WORLD?
| Quote: |
| Don't lecture me on economics as you don't seem to know the first thing about it. Businesses go where their capital will be most productive. The US is still the biggest producer in the world because it's workers are the most productive by a long way. Just because labor is cheap, does not mean it is more productive. |
5. We weren't talking about just across the board production. We were talking about a specific product (kidneys) being produced in a place where labor is cheap.
China has become the largest exporter in the world, and the largest number of imports TO the United States are from China. You mean to tell me that for some reason, kidneys would be exempt from this trend?
| Quote: |
Why would kidneys being cheap be a bad thing? Poor people could sell them, for no long term harm to themselves and massive gain for both parties. That's pretty much the definition of free trade. |
6. Do you know how many people die giving kidneys in poor conditions? How about the people who are not properly compensated? How about the people who are tricked into giving away their kidneys?
7. You think this "free market" is okay, even when desperate poor people are forced to do something they otherwise would probably never do?
8. And, just as labor conditions are mostly poor and dangerous in sweatshops and factories, you really think they would 1. get fair compensation for said kidney and 2. receive adequate care after the kidney transplant? |
1. What are you going to do? Wave a magic wand and give every body a paper pushing job for $12 an hour at the DMV? Economic development doesn'nt work that way. Societies have to start at a low level in order to get to a higher level. The same thing happened in Japan, Korea, Taiwan etc.
2. Don't get me wrong, I would hate to work in a sweat shop. But what can you do? It is the best course of action. Undoubtedly the kids of sweat shop workers will live better lives than their parents. That is how it has played out in the countries I mentioned, as well as our own countries.
3. I'm sure this happens but I will bet it is not as wide spread as you think.
4. You can't tell the rest of the world what to do. The legality of selling kidneys in the US doesn't automatically lead to what you posit. Legal kidneys will be cheaper, therefore less likely for unscrupulous actions in the third world. What you propose is actually MORE likely now than under a legal free market system.
5. I don't see kidney imports as a bad thing.
6. I know the answer to none of those questions. Do you?
7. How is that the fault of de-regulated markets? It would happen regardless.
8. I'm not convinced a legal market in kidneys would necessarily lead to a huge influx of black market kidneys. Besides, isn't there more incentive under the current system to harvest organs illegally.
You characterize all poor people as helpless chumps, who need to be protected by the benevolent western liberal progressive. Do you really think they would appreciate being infantilised in that way? I'm sure, though I would never presume to speak for them, that they would much rather use their own voice and determine their own path. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
