DBTrek wrote:Lenders don’t survive by punishing borrowers. They survive on profit. Your kidney is lousy collateral. They have no immediate buyers and the fees for storing it are astronomical.
Why would they store it? They simply take it out and throw it in the trash. That scares the other borrowers into paying.
Hanarchy Montanarchy wrote:
What happened to 'there is more to life than what is best economically?'
Nothing happened to it, it’s still true.
In addition, kidneys make lousy collateral.
... because it is too risky, because it is illegal.
Good economic tools for the poor, all regulated up in their bodies, if you ask me.
Maybe.
If you’d let a poor father’s child die of cancer because you forbade him to sell a kidney to pay for their treatment, you might question whether existing legislation was serving the intended purpose.
DBTrek wrote:
Nothing happened to it, it’s still true.
In addition, kidneys make lousy collateral.
... because it is too risky, because it is illegal.
Good economic tools for the poor, all regulated up in their bodies, if you ask me.
Maybe.
If you’d let a poor father’s child die of cancer because you forbade him to sell a kidney to pay for their treatment, you might question whether existing legislation was serving the intended purpose.
For that matter, why would I want some poor fellow not to drive a sports car when he could leverage his kidney to get one. It ain't my kidney, and I am sure there is some poor schlub somewheres that would really like having a kidney.
HAIL!
Her needs America so they won't just take his shit away like in some pussy non gun totting countries can happen.
-Hwen
I’ve already said where I come down on that argument, but I freely admit my position on it is based on emotion, and fears of systemic abuse.
Economically, it might serve the poor well. I’d certainly allow a poor guy to hock a kidney to save his kid, so I’m obviously not a purist on organ sales.
Hanarchy Montanarchy wrote:It almost makes one think that emotions are a better guide to morality than reason.
I’m sure the people stoning burka-clad women to death for being raped agree.
I would bet dollars to donuts that they imagine they have very good reasons.
... and those reasons will have nothing to do with economics, and everything to do with their opinions on how society should behave (much like the anti-“gouging” arguments)
On another note, donuts cost a dollar so your bet is ridiculous. Just give me the dollars.
DBTrek wrote:
I’m sure the people stoning burka-clad women to death for being raped agree.
I would bet dollars to donuts that they imagine they have very good reasons.
... and those reasons will have nothing to do with economics, and everything to do with their opinions on how society should behave (much like the anti-“gouging” arguments)
On another note, donuts cost a dollar so your bet is ridiculous. Just give me the dollars.
Having a problem with gouging is rather like stoning an adulterer to death.
I'll pay you on Tuesday, I'm good for it... I just need to get a little advance.
HAIL!
Her needs America so they won't just take his shit away like in some pussy non gun totting countries can happen.
-Hwen
Hanarchy Montanarchy wrote:
I would bet dollars to donuts that they imagine they have very good reasons.
... and those reasons will have nothing to do with economics, and everything to do with their opinions on how society should behave (much like the anti-“gouging” arguments)
On another note, donuts cost a dollar so your bet is ridiculous. Just give me the dollars.
Having a problem with gouging is rather like stoning an adulterer to death.
I'll pay you on Tuesday, I'm good for it... I just need to get a little advance.
