But others are more thoughtful and prudent. One approach is to make the federal government the sole purchaser of kidneys. Donor and recipient would never meet. Compensation would be fixed, haggling impossible. After the kidney is acquired, the transplant process would unfold in the typical manner.
Slightly less bad i guess but under capitalism it would essentially result in the poor selling their kidneys for what? $50k? maybe in a much more equal society i can see some state benefits to incentivize people but definitely not under the current system.
so is this really because elon and other billionaires are leading the trend in ketamine abuse so the rich need our organs to replace their deteriorating kidneys and bladders?
What happened to article heads pretending to care about futurist innovation? I vaguely remember some investment firm bragging about funding the creation of artificially grown organs. That was back during the venture capital, bullshit start up era though, so it was probably all lies, but still! What the fuck do these medical companies do all day besides get glowing write-ups in legacy papers?
People do understand that you like, need your organs, right? The only thing you can actually donate without fucking dying or being in permanent life support is your kidney. This literally just incentivizes/forces poor people to pressure each other into jumping into the meat grinder so they can take the money. The only people who will “take the offer” are people who are suicidal, people who are being forced into it, or people who are sacrificing themselves so their family or friends don’t starve.
We know organ growth is possible. Just fund that shit you fucking ghouls
Edit: Oh, this is only about kidney selling. Yeah, no, making it so poor people can sell their kidney for 50k in refundable tax credits is just harvesting the poor for organs shit.
Here's an excellent blog post by a kidney donor about the great difficulty involved in donating. There are a lot of barriers making it unnecessarily hard to donate.
"Ghoulish" is a little knee-jerk, don't you think?
The proposed method to incentivize kidney donations seems well thought-out and non-coercive. It is structured in a way that makes it impossible or at least very difficult to sell a kidney as a way to "get rich quick" (get out of debt quick). Because it's awarded as tax credits, impoverished people would have little incentive to sell.
Meanwhile, the kidneys will go disproportionately to the poor and to the disadvantaged, since rich and advantaged people apparently have much less trouble finding volunteer donors.
There is a huge need for kidneys. Kidney failure causes great suffering. Having a second kidney isn't very useful. Why not cautiously incentivize donation?
Edit: I think people aren't realizing these are tax credits. Impoverished people who can't afford necessities won't be able to get any money from this.
Edit (2): Okay so apparently these are refundable tax credits, which rather skews things. But there are apparently a number of other safeguards the proposal would put in place to prevent ghoulish kidney harvesting. I think this proposal should really be taken seriously and considered carefully rather than dismissing it outright as "ghoulish" because it has the potential to save a lot of lives, especially low-income and disadvantaged lives.
So Iran is the only country in the world that legalized the sale of kidneys, and as a result, they don't have any wait lists for kidneys. Regardless of how you feel about it, it's an interesting case study (from an anti-imperialist nation to boot) about the effectiveness of the system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidney_trade_in_Iran