im jwust an editow at a smow bean pubwication normawizing detewiowating conditions under bourgeois rule while sitting by my poowl 
Puppy.jpg, Sunshine.webp, GentleBreeze.wav
Headline: The government is getting in the way of your path to personal fortune by making it illegal to sell your children for some quick cash
Rich people need poor people, for their kidneys.
“If the rich could hire other people to die for them - the poor could make a wonderful living.” - Yiddish proverb
Let poor people guillotine billionaires. It will save lives.
A Modest Proposal in Defense of Vampires
wot if we fed the poor to vampires?
Reminder that A Modest Proposal was a work of satire/ sarcasm suggesting that the british simply eat starving irish people as a method of convenient nutrition that enforced social values
Huh, I didn’t know that. When people miss it’s satire, do you know if that’s why they call Swift a misanthrope?
Corporate Memphis art style is demonic. When I see art like this I don’t think “friendly” I think “antichrist”
The “art” embodiment of the moment an honest sneer morphs into a fake smile. So powerfully does it radiate saccharine contempt, thick and black like candy coated tar, that to look at it for more than a few seconds is to hear the nightmare chittering of a trillion hateful insects presenting their best human face. Corporate Memphis is the closest thing the real world has to 40K’s chaos sigils, in that putting any up on a wall drives people to insanity and is an invitation to ruinous powers.
SAVE WHOSE LIVES
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.
there is already a blood donation market in the U.S. and its as ‘problematic’ as you would expect
“After the kidney is acquired” might be the coldest shit I’ve ever read outside of outright fighting words or hate speech Holy shit lol
Imagine living in a world where Canadian MAID is a thing and you can look at it and your takeaway is “yeah but what if they were allowed to do more than just euthanize themselves?”
Forcing people to live is kinda iffy too. The only ethical thing is to tear down everything making people want to end things.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
“Let people sell their children. It will save lives.”
Murray Rothbard: “This but unironically.”
Should we uplift people, or let them debase themselves in desperation?
Is that a trick question?
From ghoul rag straight to
sell kidney. afford kidney shaped pool. American dream.
This message paid for by your friendly neighborhood human trafficker
or we could make make organ donation opt-out instead of opt in you dumb fuck
That would create perverse incentives, unlike creating an open organ market and compelling poor people to sell parts of themselves to survive
According to the ModifyNOTA website, fewer than 1% of registered organ donors die in such a way that enables their kidneys to be harvested. Also, a living-donor kidney lasts twice as long on average as a deceased-donor kidney.
Yes it would definitely help to make organ donation opt-out, and we should totally do that, but they’re saying this still wouldn’t be enough.
your first sentence has nothing to do with what i said because those people already registered. the stat you want is people who are not donors dying in a way that we could’ve used their organs but didn’t.
that would presumably also be <1%, wouldn’t it?
i wouldn’t make that kind of assumption about the behavior of the two groups
I would make this assumption in this case.
You think people who would opt-in register for organ donation would be less likely to die in a way compatible with kidney harvesting than others?
I think it’s somewhat unlikely that whether or not someone registers to be an organ donor would affect how they are likely to die, but if it did, I would wager that registered organ donors are more likely to die in a way that enables their kidneys to be harvested than others. In any case, I doubt the difference is more than, say, a factor of 2.
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?
I have no doubt that billionaires will find kidneys one way or another if they need them.
This proposal claims to be designed to disproportionately benefit the lower class.
It disproportionately benefits the upper middle class that don’t need 50k at all and can just reap the benefits of all the poors sacrificing their kidneys without doing it themselves.
How do you know this? Are you certain? Have you carefully considered both sides? What probability do you think this system would have of helping the lower class as described by their mission statement? What probability would you ascribe to the notion that there is any ethical way to monetarily incentivize kidney donation?
Poor people sell their kidneys and get the money because they’re homeless otherwise, and have a slightly less shitty life for a bit, unless their other kidney has any sort of issue, which is probably made more likely by only having one, in which case the costs of being hospitalized would probably outweigh the benefit of selling it in the first place. Net result is that a lot of poor people would have only one kidney and kidney issues would probably become more rampant overall among poor people.
Upper middle class people can reap the benefits of higher kidney availability, and since they’re economically secure enough to never even consider going through with an invasive surgery for what is likely for them a relatively low amount of money, they never sell. There would be no reason to- The safety net of the extra kidney is worth AT LEAST 50k if not more. Net result for richer people is therefore safety from kidney issues for no cost.
Over time this creates a class disparity where most poor people can’t afford to have more than one kidney and can die very easily from kidney problems, while richer people have consistently healthier kidneys the higher up the chain you go. Maybe kidney health among poor people would technically be higher on average than current day, but it’s still obvious this would be pushed because it benefits more economically entrenched people.
Let rabid racoons eat Dylan Walsh’s face. It will save braincells.
