Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Thomas Sowell :: Townhall.com Columnist
No Trade-Offs?
by Thomas Sowell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


A whole nation following the tragedy of a mine cave-in in Utah was struck by the further tragedy of another cave-in at the same mine, killing men who had gone underground to try to rescue the miners trapped there.

The second tragedy was avoidable -- but only if we were willing to talk about human life in terms of trade-offs. But our society has become too squeamish to do that.

As day after day went by, with no sign whatever that the trapped miners were still alive and with dwindling chances each day of their remaining alive, even if they had somehow survived the cave-in, at some point it makes no sense to risk more lives to try to save them.

"But what if it was your brother or your father down there?" some would say. "Would you want to stop looking if there was any chance at all that he might still be alive?"

The short answer is: What if it was your brother or your father who had to risk his life in a rescue attempt underground?

Trade-offs are inescapable in every aspect of life but anyone who talks about trade-offs when life is at stake is likely to be denounced as someone lacking in compassion, if not cruel.

Squeamishness is too often confused with humanity, but the consequence of squeamishness can be needless suffering and needless deaths.

Many a cold-blooded murderer has had his life spared because people squeamish about executions imagine that it is more moral or humane to lock him up for life -- or until he escapes or is pardoned someday when an even more squeamish governor is elected.

Additional people murdered by convicted murderers are part of the grim price paid for that squeamishness.

They can be murdered while in prison or on the outside, perhaps during one of those "furloughs" for prisoners so fashionable among those who flatter themselves as being more advanced thinkers than the rest of us.

The price of their vanity can be deaths more terrible than the executions they regard as too cruel to carry out.

Some of the victims of our squeamishness die unnoticed because their deaths are not considered to be as newsworthy as the deaths of victims of mine cave-ins or of murder.

Thousands of people die every year waiting for organ transplants that never come, and some of these deaths come at the end of months or years of debilitation and suffering.

In some countries, it is legal to purchase organs to be transplanted. Some people spend upwards of $100,000 to go to those countries for a transplant operation when they cannot get a kidney or a liver or other organ here.

Why is the selling of an organ illegal here? Because so many people are so squeamish about such a transaction.

Many of these squeamish people are in good health and will probably never need an organ transplant. But others who are not so fortunate must suffer and die because these physically healthy people would feel squeamish about organs being bought and sold.

No doubt people who are poor are more likely to sell a kidney than people who are rich, so opposition to such sales can be wrapped in the rhetoric of "social justice."

But what is just about denying some people an opportunity to get out of poverty and denying other people an opportunity to get out of debilitation and suffering that can only end in death?

Not all organ sales would have to be from living people, just as most organ transplants today are not from living people.

People could sell the right to have their organs removed after death or sell the rights to the organs of dead family members, if they chose.

Nothing is easier than to conjure up horrible scenarios that could result from sales of organs. But the very reason we have laws in the first place is because horrible things could happen otherwise in every aspect of life.

More organs to transplant are needed, and people tend to supply more of anything when they are paid more -- and especially when they are paid something instead of being paid nothing.

But, here as elsewhere, we must first overcome squeamishness. And the first step is to stop confusing it with being humane.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Thomas Sowell and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
I Disagree that
the second tragedy was unavoidable.

There are risks involved with just being in the mine in the first place, as obviously we've found out from the disasters there have been recently. There's additional risks in attempting a rescue.

Not being on the scene or knowing the first thing about mining, I'm in no position to judge whether or not those risks were acceptable.

So I have to presume that the folks on the scene looked at the risks, and used their expert judgment to decide if a rescue attempt should go forward, then decided to chance it. You'll note that they did *not* send in a third rescue attempt, despite the anger expressed by the friends and relatives.

Other than that, great article as usual.

Proofreading
Shoulda said, "I disagree that the second tragedy was avoidable." Not "un"avoidable.

THE RIGHT TO DECIDE
Hindsight is 20/20. In the this situation, the right to decide belongs to those directly effected.

Criiminal profilers tell us that serial murders are more likely to be committed by those who mame and torture animals. Which medical school or pharmaceutical company were they talking about?

Kill someone's spirit, their hope- that too is murder.

Nuclear Power
One way to reduce coal mine deaths would be generate more energy using nuclear power plants. Every year, it seems, we see tragic stories of people dying in coal mines. Nobody dies in nuclear power plants (except those constructed by communists). In addition, nuclear power plants put no carbon dioxide, no soot, and no radioactive material into the atmosphere. Coal-burning plants put tons of all three in the air. Dishonest politicians like Robert Byrd, who want to keep as many of West Virginia's dangerous coal mines as possible operating, will rant and rave about the "dangers" of nuclear power, knowing that many will believe them and fear the cleanest way to produce energy, without a clue about their true selfish motives. If more coal miners have to be crushed and suffocated for him to maintain his power, that's just fine with him.

Body Parts as a Commodity?
I think this may be the first time I have disagreed with Dr. Sowell. I just cannot see anything moral in making body parts a commodity item.

LinnieBeth
As a society, the "do-gooders" in the U.S. have made the understandable act of desiring to obtain needed organs for transplants into a "moral" issue. If you get one through the "system", you have acted "morally". When you are the one needing the organ, and none is available, finding such an organ becomes less a "moral" decision and more a way to continue living. The organs available in the current "wait and see" system are every bit as much "commodities" (and are treated as such!) as they would be in a more market oriented system as suggested by Dr. Sowell. I would not want someone like yourself deciding if it was "moral" of me to want to find an organ by whatever means I could if my wife needed one and one was not available in your "moral" system.

Selling Body Parts
Selling body parts was made illegal in this country because legislators did not wish to have a market in humane body parts created with the chance that unscrupulous people would then obtain those parts through nefarious means. In addition, many people think selling human body parts is immoral for religious reasons. So what do we wind up with? Laws that the donor (nor his family) can be compensated for body parts while others can. We even have federal laws, of course. See this obscene article about a funeral home that was receiving up to $7,000 per body for parts that were transferred to science operations.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/118517.html

OUR RISK AVERSE SOCIETY
Time was when most Americans were rugged individualists who accepted significant risks in pursuit of bigger goals as a part of life. They were the people who transformed America from a hostile wilderness to a major world power in less than two centuries.

Because of the leftist and liberal dominance of large sectors of American society, our society has become highly risk averse. Because of this, time has stood still in too many places.

In addition, science is too often poorly taught in government schools. American students lag behind backwater nations in science. Today, the nation's top scientific institutions are filled with foreign-born professors and students.

Today, America gets only a small percentage of its electricity from nuclear power. The American nuclear power plants in use today are mostly based on 1960s technology. By contrast, France and Japan are getting most of their electricity from nuclear power.

America ought to be the leader in developing cutting edge nuclear power plant technology that would be cleaner, safer, and more compact than the technology that went into the earlier nuclear power plants.

America also ought to be the leader also in developing coal mining robotics that would make it unnecessary to have teams of miners working underground on a daily basis at great risk to their health and lives. Bring on the robots!



Govt intervention = Misplaced compassion
I don't ascribe evil motives to most leftists of the do-gooder type. But their 'solutions' tend to exacerbate the problems that they were intended to solve.

Well intentioned leftists think that they can wish for a different form of human animal, and .. just make it so. By suspending the laws of cause and effect, they believe that if they wish for a particular effect, they can eliminate the need to understand the causes.

Not surprisingly, they dream up utopian schemes that are inconsistent with human predilections. When those schemes fail (e.g. Public Education), they blame the failures on those 'imperfect humans'.

In contrast, the strength of Capitalism - which is the basis of American values - is that it is NOT utopian. In fact, its success comes from the fact that it is consistent with human behavior.

All other systems rely on a species that is non-human. Communism relies on a perverse form of altruism. Monarchy relies on an omniscient, benevolent ruler. But capitalism harnesses our self-interest!

Dr. Sowell's example re:Body Parts is a case in point. Misplaced compassion (which Dr. Sowell refers to as 'squeamishness') leads to Govt intervention, which creates SHORTAGES.

The above pattern is repeated so many times that it seems obvious. Does anyone seriously doubt that there is a black-market for 'harvested' organs SOMEWHERE in the world?

"Dishonest politicians..."
Is that redundant?

a factor for doug
Doug, Uranium is also underground mined. It is far more toxic, and so is usually mined with remotes. There are more stages along the processing path where uranium is likely to kill than coal is. Replace the word "coal" with the word "uranium" in the actual story, and the question remains the same.

Also keep in mind that an estimated 6000 coal mine workers die every year in China. No, our system isn't perfect, but we try a lot harder to keep our people alive and safe.

Give organs first to organ donors
Thousands of lives would be saved every year if it was legal to buy and sell human organs. But it's not legal.

Fortunately, there is an already-legal non-financial incentive that can put a big dent in the organ shortage -- allocate donated organs first to people who have agreed to donate their own organs when they die.

Giving organs first to organ donors will convince more people to register as organ donors. It will also make the organ allocation system fairer. People who aren't willing to share the gift of life should go to the back of the waiting list as long as there is a shortage of organs.

Anyone who wants to donate their organs to others who have agreed to donate theirs can join LifeSharers. LifeSharers is a non-profit network of organ donors who agree to offer their organs first to other organ donors when they die. Membership is free at http://www.lifesharers.org or by calling 1-888-ORGAN88. There is no age limit, parents can enroll their minor children, and no one is excluded due to any pre-existing medical condition.

organ sales
Each of us has an inalienable right to liberty. That right says that I may do anything I wish with my property if, and only if, I don't thereby take away another's right to liberty.

My body and its organs are my property. If I want to sell one or more, it is my inalienable right. If you want to buy one, and we agree on a price (Your money is your property.), the transaction is moral, and should be legal.

I think ebay could help.

Interesting concept
Selling body parts of those who have passed is difficult to consider but is probably humane. One would think that such things could be tracked and regulated. After all, we can track packages fairly reliably.

Voice of Reason
"Does anyone seriously doubt that there is a black-market for 'harvested' organs SOMEWHERE in the world?"

This is such a good point. It goes to the heart of why Prohibition was such a miserable failure. When government outlaws what "the market" clearly wnats and supports, it does not prevent that market from operating. It simply pushes it underground. For this reason, I favor the legalization of so called "illegal" drugs, with regulation, and also prostitution. I am not really a Libertarian because I oppose mass immigration. I am, however, a realist. I think adults should decide for themselves what is best for them, as long as what they are doing does not infringe on the rights of someone else.

C_Miner
But you are missing the fact that the quantities of Uranium mined is on a logarithmic scale lower thus making the accident rate that much smaller. Look up the statistics in mining deaths Uranium vs coal.

daveundis
Interesting idea; the problem is that in many cases, the conditions that render one a candidate for organ transplant - conditions that lead to kidney failure, for example - often render that person's organs undesirable for transplant. My wife has lupus; she may one day have great need for a kidney transplant. She used to donate blood regularly, but is now no longer eligible to do so; the same would hold true for her organs as well.

for M Sederoff's information
The Libertarian position is not supportive of "mass immigration" as you call it. Libertarians believe in the free flow of both capital and labor. The position is rational, capitalistic, and very American.

Doesn't make sense
"Many a cold-blooded murderer has had his life spared because people squeamish about executions imagine that it is more moral or humane to lock him up for life -- or until he escapes or is pardoned someday when an even more squeamish governor is elected"

The bad thing is criminals now have more rights than victims. Once they get in prison, they file frivilous lawsuits becuase their rights are being violated. No TV, file a lawsuit, no porn magazines, file a lawsuit...and the beat goes on.
And who the heck pays for all this...I'll give you three guesses the first two don't count.
My solution: Kill all people convicted of first degree murder no appeals no exceptions.

Trade-Offs/Risks
Most people really don't understand the risks for accidental death. Here are the actua;l;l government statistics given for 1996 (appears to be the last year that it was compliled). The individual who posted this was making a point concerning an anti-gun nut, but it applies to all.

http://www.anesi.com/accdeath.htm


More risks
You are also atb risk for death from diseases.

http://www.data360.org/graph_group.aspx?Graph_Group_Id=347


Linnie Beth
Understand your point, but making it a personal choice would enable you to opt out of selling your organs. Ya know? I wish I had more access to participate in clinical trials and make some extra money from those evil drug companies.

We can sell plasma and a lot of people do. Why isn't that illegal? If you really think about it, isn't sticking a 1/4 inch needle into somone kinda barbaric?

But even if these risky things were made legal, there would have to be a law to where you could not sue thus driving up the costs of insurance for the doctors except for gross negligence.

Legalities
The Lawyers, Judges, & Courts don't want Drugs Legalized and controlled. It would diminish their pay opportunities. The Same with Killing Hard Criminals. Our own Judicial system is one of our worst nightmares and we the Silent Majority have no clue, nor do we have any plans or discussions in play to fix a system that has gone overboard. Sheep Dog is right, Criminals have more rights. Consider This; A man walks in to a store and kills 20 people. The Judicial system will spend millions defending this man, when there is no question of his guilt. Tell me that this system doesn't need an immediate overhaul. A 22 calibre bullet to the head, and a cremation is merited. But no, we must spend millions to promote his welfare and rights. What a Joke. And People say and do nothing. Lawyers become Politicians & Judges and then make laws and decisions that further their own need for more lawyers. All in the name of Equal Rights. Yea right!

Giving, sharing?
Daveundis seems to make some sense, more than our 'lawmakers' do, at least.

I must have some problems in this area since I used to be a regular blood donor and gave up doing it as I felt I was being duped. I provided the product from which others benefited with increasd health and/or wealth and got NOTHING in return. I would have felt better if I or my family members would be entitled to a free pint for each gallon I donated. I wanted SOME reward, (cookies were not enough) altruism goes only so far.

As for organ donation, I stopped giving permission about eight years ago, maybe from the same reasoning/feeling. I don't know for certain.

Pay my survivors for the organs and I'll volunteer again.

Nuclear Power, not our Enemy
Nuclear Power has been tagged by Liberals as evil and excessively dangerous. The truth is that Nuclear Power can be made quite safe. The US Navy operates hundreds & thousands of Nuclear Reactors without any major incident. Nuclear Power is our answer to our Future Energy Needs. However, the Press and Liberals will not allow this too happen. They have lost touch with Reality and as long as they Control Congress and the Schools and Universities, America will decay into something much less. Eventually, the U.S.A. will become the U.S.S.N.A. (United Socialist States of North America). America's True Enemy is the Liberals within masquerading as Progressives. People like Hillary and the Demonratic Party.

Another kind of squeamishness...
perhaps readers would know - is part of the reason for escalating health care costs that more - and more expensive - treatments are now available for older persons and that our system is unwilling to consider the social trade offs of extending life for the elderly versus economic cost..?

Somebody had to say it.

This is the same old thing as people drowing trying to save other people. In the mine accident six people have died instead of three. All this stuff sounds noble but it is really foolish. In combat you also learn to keep your head down and not get youself killed trying to save a fallen brother. You need to stay alive and kill more of the enemy. People have gotten these ideas from stupied Hollywood movies. Reality needs to set in on the mind of the American people. Just because your nice to sombody dosen't mean they are going to be nice to you and getting yourself killed trying to save someone is just as dumb.

Incentivise the good
I agree with Dr Sowell (as usual). It's not a pleasant thing to donate an organ, but nor is being hooked up to a dialysis machine for years. And there is a huge shortage of organs for donation, so why not give incentives? Obviously there need to be laws and regulations to make sure it's done properly, but the alternatives are thousands of people suffering or having an opt out register rather than an opt in to donation - so you have to specify that you don't want to have your organs removed.

However, on the death penalty the trade off argument can work the other way. Are we prepared to witness dozens of innocent or mentally retarded people get executed so the politicians can look tough on crime? And isn't the trade off for the criminal that if they're likely to get executed, they may as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb, so once they've taken that road they'll do anything and kill anyone?

response to FergusMacLennan
FergusMacLennan wrote:
"Interesting idea; the problem is that in many cases, the conditions that render one a candidate for organ transplant - conditions that lead to kidney failure, for example - often render that person's organs undesirable for transplant."

No one knows today if your organs will be transplantable when you die. Surgeons are now transplanting lots of organs they would have rejected a few years ago. For example, they're transplanting organs from HIV patients into other patients with HIV.

So everybody can offer to donate. The surgeons can sort it out when the time comes.

LifeSharers doesn't exclude anyone due to any pre-existing medical condition. Membership is free at http://www.lifesharers.org or by calling 1-888-ORGAN88.

Dr Sowell seems to have
Dismissed the reality of the world we all live in.

Even in a world that continues making one law right after another, the improvements this brings is in prison construction details and emplyment opportunities.

Passing law is imagined morality and highly esteemed, honored men given voice to attack some inequity, as if that eliminates the problem and will heal mankind from his evil ways.

What a great opportunity for a criminal minded opportunist, sell body parts.

By the way Dr Sowell, what world you live in?

talent scout
What exactly are you on about? What is the specific problem you have with Dr. Sowell's column?

daveundis
Good info; thank you!

Just a point
The concern of many with having a market in human organs is that the market would be adjusted by ability to buy. Some people would be outbid by others, and for that reason not get organs.

2 x 4 to the head: I am not saying this IS a moral problem.

But it's the essence of the concern many people have. Their objection can be boiled down to this:

"Why should HE get the organ, just because he has more money than the other guy?"

I think Sowell would parse a whole "cosmic justice"-based worldview in that question -- and its implication that morality resides in being sure to decide who gets organs on some basis OTHER than market factors. Of course, this quickly breaks down as the "other factors" become things like age and overall health. Who the he** is any one of us to say that an otherwise healthy 50-year-old "should" get a heart, instead of a 70-year-old with more health problems?

The cosmic truth is that bureaucratic decisions about who gets organs are just as arbitrary as the workings of the market.

Slippery Slope
I agree with Mr. Sowell that society must make trade-offs. And, I agree that society is too squeamish when it comes to evaluating those trade-offs. But, I also think that society must be extremely careful when making utilitarian judgments that involve human life. The perverbial "slippery slope" looms large. Should we spend resources on the eldery? Chances are they will not contribute to society going forward. Should be spend resources on handicapped people? An argument can be made resources are best spent elsewhere. What about abortions? Out-of-wedlock children are likely to impose significant costs of society ... Uh oh, I am getting pretty squeamish.

It is a rare occurrence...
...that I ever take issue with a column from Dr. Sowell. However, one of the points he makes about the possibility of selling organs in the U.S. is:

"Nothing is easier than to conjure up horrible scenarios that could result from sales of organs. But the very reason we have laws in the first place is because horrible things could happen otherwise in every aspect of life."

Dr. Sowell, first among men, should know full well that this is no longer a country that puts any value in the law. There would, indeed, be abuses and "horrors" if this were allowed. Further, those who would abuse and facilitate the abuses and horrors would, undoubtedly, go unpunished. Such is America in the 21st century.

Cheers,

Ron Albright

http://www.ronalbright.com

No matter how hard I try
To be plain spoken, some still do not see what I do my absolute best to say.

And still get questioned as this.
Do we all still speak english with understanding of the words?

Or is english a way to describe something to cause questions as this?

-------------------

FergusMacLennan writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 12:29 PM
talent scout
What exactly are you on about? What is the specific problem you have with Dr. Sowell's column?
------------------


Creates a new market for the criminal mind and thought I had explained it well.

Imagine if you will selling body parts is from only people who willingly sell.

But the known world I have observed in my 64 years is we have a criminal element that just might see a money making opportunity to sell body parts.

And take body parts from an unwilling sellor.
Sorry this does not explain it well enough for you.
I suspect you hold Dr Sowell as flawless.

This not clear?
"What a great opportunity for a criminal minded opportunist, sell body parts."

Fergus
Just tried to post an explanation that went off into the cyber world someplace.

I thought this explained, using the plainest english I know how to use.

"What a great opportunity for a criminal minded opportunist, sell body parts."

The criminal is apt to act as a criminal and take a harvest of body parts from some unwilling sellor.
Criminals do exist, so I asked the good Dr Sowell why he does not consider this in this piece.

With:

What world you live in?

Yes we have laws in place
but the laws of unintended consequences are always in place also. Look at the article that I linked to in the 07:03 post. Sure, we wish to prevent people from abusing the sale of body parts. The law however wanted to maintain the ability of science and surgeons to still be abe to get body parts and does NOT stop science from paying for parts. Given that, what you see is criminal morticians and others selling body parts to intermediaries and profitting.

What I would like to see is some well thought out laws that allow post-humous sale of body parts to reputable organizations. At least that way it would cut the criminal element out of it. If we are worried about murders being done for profit on body parts then prohibit transfer of body parts for murdered people.

C'mon Vic


You say:

"If we are worried about murders being done for profit on body parts then prohibit transfer of body parts for murdered people."

If law itself worked.........the world would be the Garden of Eden

Law is no healer
It is vengence on evil doing.

Kicking in after an evil deed is done, it will not, nor has it ever stopped evil doing by a criminal minded person.

And America is now into importing criminals cause we do not have enough home grown.

If one could follow the present deeds instead of the words the "leaders" use.
"just coming to work"

None come to break the laws, ha.
Placing body parts on the market is an invitation for criminals to commit more crimes.

Ok is it is not you as their target I guess, is the way some seem to think

talent scout
That was MUCH clearer. Point well taken. But, as has been pointed out, there is a lot of money to be made in the tissue harvesting and supply business. The donor gets nothing except the mistaken belief that they are doing something good for sake of another. They are, but they are not informed fully on what will become of the tissue and how immense the profits on said tissue will be. If the family knew what the profits would be, they would certainly demand compensation.

dyerje -- good point, but
quoth dyerje: "The concern of many with having a market in human organs is that the market would be adjusted by ability to buy. Some people would be outbid by others, and for that reason not get organs."

That is a good point. My answer is that, like all other ideas that are Socialist in nature, it results in a "level playing field" where all of us are equally miserable.

In other words, in preventing "Those Rich B*tards" from being able to buy organs and "Those Poor Saps" being forced to go without, the law creates a situation where almost no one gets organs. For the "Poor Sap", the result is pretty much the same either way.

Now, we throw in this little "free market", and all sorts of avenues open up. E.g., like any other expensive item, people can get loans. Who can afford $300,000 for a house? Well, $2,000 month is more affordable. Who can afford $50,000 for a year of college? Well, there's $1500 a month, payable after you graduate.

Plus it can be optionally covered by health insurance. Or have charitable grants. Etc.

It's easier to get money out of people than a "pound of flesh," so we have every reason to let the market decide. Money will ultimately become a secondary issue, but more life-saving organs will become available, and that's the primary issue.

talent scout -- Law is No Healer, But --
-- it CAN stand in the way of those who DO heal.

Unca Alby
Apparently you didn't stay with my 2 x 4 to the head. I was reciting the point, not making an argument for it. You're not arguing against me by pointing out that the "organs shouldn't go to the highest bidder" premise is flawed.

I made the "2 x 4" comment to try and convey that. Guess it didn't work... :-)

Vic
Your point about the oral surgeon should be reviewed by all concerned. In this case, the harvested tissue business already exists and the profits are immense. This guy got caught actually stealing the body parts and forging the consents and medical histories. I think that the case may be made that there is no business enterprise that won't be perverted by the criminal mind. If this case has taken your attention, I can give you a lot of insider info as I was indirectly involved.

Sources of squeamishness
What are the sources of this squeamishness? What are the influences and choices in a person's life that lead him/her to become squeamish, as opposed to being truly humane? What's the correlation between a person's squeamishness and liberal thinking, if any?

Rest my case
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
Investigating a grim trade in stolen human tissue.

Courtesy of Kings County District Attorney
Prosecutors say the men replaced looted bones with plumbing pipes. Here, an X-ray shows the leg area of a deceased person with a pipe inserted where bones should have been.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11568879/site/newsweek/



Do a search on stolen body parts.
Horrible to think, let alone be its victim

talent scout
Thank you for the explanation, but save the snarkiness over my incomprehension of your original post.

You wrote:
"I thought this explained, using the plainest english I know how to use."

The plainest English (names of languages get capitalized in proper usage) you know how to use is neither very skillful nor very plain. Here's an example: the verb "explain" is, in this usage, a transitive verb, yet you decline to include the direct object to go with the verb. This is an omission that obscures meaning.

"This not clear?"

This sentence no verb.

"And still get questioned as this.
Do we all still speak english with understanding of the words?"

Nevermind the irony inherent in this question; the sentence preceding the question is poorly constructed. Instead of "as", did you perhaps mean "about"? You need to use correct prepositions if you wish to be understood.

There are quite a few more examples, but I believe those will suffice. I usually disdain the "you can't use grammar properly, therefore you are unintelligent, therefore your opinions are not to be taken seriously" vein of argumentation. In this case, however, you yourself instigated the snark with your "can't people understand plain English?" theme, and I am more than happy to respond in kind.

Until you learn how to write correctly, back off on the criticism of others' reading comprehension.

CVN65
I did that small amount of research because that was one of the topics of the column. I think that based on what I have seen of the laws and that article that the laws should be rewritten. They obviously don't do what they were intended to do.

Another great and thoughtful column
Thank you Dr. Sowell.

I agree with you, as usual.

The only person who does not make money in a bodypart transplant is the one who gives up the bodypart.

The doctors, the hospital and everyone else involved earns their usual fees. If not, a transplant would not cost $100,000 or more.

talent scout
Well, all of those "victims" were dead when the bones were stolen, usually with the knowledge of the funeral directors. The people to feel sorry for are those that received the stolen and potentially tainted tissues. Now, everything came back negative on all specimens but you do realize that bringing this case up shows just how unusual this type of crime is and how vigorously it has been prosecuted? And, I will add that grammar, spelling, and punctuation all matter.

Vic
The tissue harvest industry relies on an individual company's reputation. In this instance, the harvester in question operated legally for some time before crossing the line. He did this with the knowledge of the funeral directors and usually paid them to keep quiet. The money is huge in this business. He sold his bone to a purchaser who then sold it to a processor (an extremely solid, proven company with over a million safe tissue transplants and the best sterilization process in the industry) which then sold it to several different suppliers of finished product. 1/2 cc of this finished bon material costs just under $100. A 1.0 x 1.5 cm block costs over $700. This is part of the reason why medical care is so expensive- supplies are outrageously priced. This guy only got caught for stealing parts and forging the papers when he persisted in stealing parts from one particular funeral home. The place was sold and the new owner had to place a padlock on her own morgue to try to keep the guy out (her staff was being bribed behind her back). He still snuck in through an elevator shaft to purloin femurs. He was a total fraud and I can tell you that the supply chain is now very closely monitored and double-checked. But I am not sure which laws govern this and that involving the gummint will not make the products more expensive and harder to get. Nobody tested positive for anything in the end, by the way.

As usual I agree with Dr. Sowell
However, I would add that the likely outcome of a free market in healthy organs would be an increased supply of them, which inevitably would bring down the cost, making the operation cheaper for those needing the organs and reducing the likelihood of criminal outcomes for such a free market policy. I'd love to see it happen.

talent scout
you wrote:
"'snarkiness' is not found in any dictionary that I know of"

... and yet you knew instantly what I meant. This would be the difference between your use of the language and mine.

"How ever I do admit I "snorted" with "snarkiness" at your gift for bs."

"BS" generally means something made up or invented out of whole cloth; praytell, which principle of English standard usage did I invent?

It's not my fault that you are a whole lot more ignorant than you might wish to be, nor that you took me to task for my understanding "plain English" that was not terribly plain. And if I have embarassed you by pointing out your errors (as your obnoxious retort tends to suggest), then you might think twice in the future about whether or not to take someone to task for not understanding your meaning.

"Wanna grade "english" then go find yourself a classroom, this is not it."

I have a classroom, in which I teach nearly every single weekday. I just taught writing yesterday, to a group of students far more appreciative than you (and in far less dire need of my services, I might add).

True
CVN65 writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 3:58 PM
talent scout
Well, all of those "victims" were dead when the bones were stolen, usually with the knowledge of the funeral directors. The people to feel sorry for are those that received the stolen and potentially tainted tissues. Now, everything came back negative on all specimens but you do realize that bringing this case up shows just how unusual this type of crime is and how vigorously it has been prosecuted? And, I will add that grammar, spelling, and punctuation all matter.

------------------------------------

That was just the first site I came across on a body parts search, many others.


I do not think its wide spread, but an open market for body parts has yet to see how many it can recruit to the criminals either.

I intend to take all parts to the graveyard to the point of dying hungry, if needed.

Horrible idea in my opinion, ghoulish is a kind way to desribe any who promote it, in my view.

talent scout
Fergus isn't the only one who had trouble comprehending your post. Aside from the spelling and grammatical errors, the phrasing was awkward.

Wanna be taken seriously? Write like it.

talent scout: PS
1. Use of a neologism like "snark" or "snarky", even though said word might not yet have found its way into your particular dictionary, scarcely qualifies as poor use of the language.

2. As I noted in my second response to you, it was YOU who was rude and arrogant first, not me. My first response to you merely asked you to clarify your meaning, nothing more. In your first response to me, you set the tone of arrogance and rudeness with the following:

"Sorry this does not explain it well enough for you.
I suspect you hold Dr Sowell as flawless."

Don't blame me for something you set in motion.

3. "However" is one word, not two.

dyerje - - Point?
Did I say you were "wrong"?

I understood you to be "presenting a point", sort of being the "Devil's Advocate." Perhaps I read too much into it, but I thought perhaps you had heard the point, and wanted somebody to give you the arguments to refute it.

So, refute it I did. And you agreed with my arguments, yes? So we're on the same page.

Further: "The cosmic truth is that bureaucratic decisions about who gets organs are just as arbitrary as the workings of the market."

Well, not exactly. The cosmic truth is that the bureaucracy may indeed be just as arbitrary, but the market will provide more to work with.

I.e., one can kvetch about the "unfairness" in the particular way a bureaucrat allocates resources, and one can equally kvetch about the "unfairness" about the market; but it remains a "cosmic fact" that there will be orders of magnitude *more* resources to allocate with the market.

As I said, an egalitarian socialist state creates a world where everyone is equally miserable.

Urban legend
The majority of what has been posted I have found to be quite amusing. I am reminded of the old urban legend about the fellow who gets picked up by a gorgeous "lady" in a bar, who takes him back to her place, ostensibly for sex. She gives him a drink, which is drugged, and when he wakes up the next morning, he finds that one of his kidneys has been removed. It is at least a popular as the "bloody hook in the car door handle story.

Fergie and others
Who had a hard time reading this from my 1st post:


"What a great opportunity for a criminal minded opportunist, sell body parts."

To take your time patiently or otherwise to comment on my way of expression, I accept your comments have brought the issues this article raised into focus much better than I ever could.

And Fergie, if you think the internet is your classroom to teach english, be my guest but do not be surprised when it goes wide of the mark in anyone accepting your self appointed position as such.

I think you are full of bs

Urban Legend? I Suppose -- but --
Well, most such stories well may be urban legend.

But I will assume for the sake of argument that there are indeed some real, documented cases.

It occurs to me, that if more organs were available, thanks to the donors getting a "piece of the action" for their "pound of flesh", then the supply would increase -- which, as everybody knows (or is supposed to anyway), reduces the prices -- and simultaneously *reduces* the perceived need to *steal* organs.

That is to say, the biggest reason organs are so "bloody" expensive (pun intended) is that they are so difficult to get. With this difficulty, it's obvious that someone would be tempted to "cut corners" on the "permission process." That's just human nature -- something Socialists never take proper accounting for.

But when people are allowed to sell their organs at market prices; suddenly there will be an increase in the supply. Plenty of people would be willing get paid for use of their extra kidney. Easy money for zero skills. Assuming the demand remains constant and all other things being equal, the price *HAS* to come down. That's just Econ 101.

Why risk a prison sentence for something that's become so much cheaper to acquire legally?

talent scout
"I think you are full of bs"

Thank you for clarifying that. I think you are bringing a knife to a gunfight, then whining and puling when you get spanked (to mix metaphors just a bit).

That's just my opinion, of course.

Nothing of concern here
Stolen body parts case may involve hundreds of victims

By Tom Hays
ASSOCIATED PRESS

December 24, 2005

NEW YORK – Michael Bruno's life had been uncomplicated: He was an immigrant who worked hard, spoke his mind and succumbed to kidney cancer two years ago at 75.

"Typical Italian cab driver," recalled his son, Vito. "He had an opinion about everything."



It's only after death that his story became ghoulish.
Authorities believe his body and those of hundreds of other people, including famed British broadcaster Alistair Cooke, were secretly carved up in the back rooms of several funeral parlors citywide to remove human bone, skin and tendons without required permission from their families. Authorities allege the body parts were then sold for a profit.

Worse, health officials fear some of the stolen body parts were diseased and could infect patients who received them in skin grafts, dental implants or other orthopedic procedures – a risk concealed by paperwork doctored with forged signatures and false information.

"It's not just disrespectful to my father," said Vito Bruno, who has sued one of the funeral homes. "It's an absolutely hideous crime against other people."

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051224/news_1n24parts.html

Sowell is wrong, for once
Sowell begins his article by questioning the wisdom of risking more lives trying to reach trapped miners who were very likely dead. After all, the "economic" calculations were not good; the risks were high, and the possibility of payoff was low. And in the end, the original victims were not found, and some of the would-be rescuers died. BUT...

When the Marines were forced to withdraw from the Chosin Reservoir in subzero cold during the Korean War, they took great risk to get out not only their healthy troops, but all of their wounded, and even their dead -- and their stuff. The "economic" calculation there was just as bad. By taking out everything in their "attack in another direction," they put the still-fighting Marines in far greater risk.

They did it because of the "band of brothers" attitude that is such a big part of the Marines famous esprit de corps. The idea is: I'll do anything to get you out, because I know you'd do anything to get me out. Would I risk my life to get you out? Of course!

This esprit de corps is what makes the Marines so d*mned hard to beat. But the "band of brothers" attitude is a spiritual value ("esprit" is French for "spirit"). It doesn't appear in the cold green-eyeshade calculations of the economists. But it makes the Marines unbeatable.

May I suggest that the reason they tried so hard to get to the trapped miners was due to the same kind of esprit de corps -- among miners? No, it doesn't make sense from the point of view of coldly weighing trade-offs. But I would bet any miner would understand.

I really like Thomas Sowell and own several of his books; but I think he misses the point on this one -- although I agree with him on the issue of selling body parts, particularly of those who have died.

Unca Alby
Well said; that's just exactly what I would have said had I not been distracted by a mental midget. Leftists have yet to revoke the Law of Supply and Demand, try as they might.

Green Communism
Environmental law, the new power base for the Left, is full of this uncompromising, blinkered, idealist, take-no-prisoners, cost-no-object-so-long-as-you're-paying attitude. Any policy that is designated doctrine will be implemented in a blinkered narrow fashion regardless of its larger ramifications.

Envirodogma generally attacks private property, free enterprise, technology, and freedom. That is its larger purpose in the leftist worldview. The actual alternatives to any particular envirodogma, e.g. the likely long-term large-scale results of eliminating a given technology, are not considered. If any comparison is made, it is to some perfect fantasy world where there are no economic consequences, and food, shelter, & medicine miraculously continue to appear.

The example of DDT has been cited repeatedly. People die of malaria for the sake of very questionable environmental hazards alleged of DDT when used as directed.

The Endangered Species Act has been used as a stalking-horse against almost any activity leftie activists don't like. One can always find critters slightly different from other critters on a plot of ground, & find a biologist to declare them a rare species whose 'habitat' (someone else' property) must be 'protected.'

No matter what levels of pollutants are permitted to be emitted at one point in time, an argument for reducing those permitted levels can always be made. The cost of cutting emissions to a tenth or a hundredth of previous levels might be several thousands of times as great, & may result in lack of electricity and employment, lacks which are generally detrimental to health.

Of course the ultimate big prize will be arbitrary limits and rationing of energy when the unproven hypothesis of anthrogenic carbon dioxide-induced "cliamte change" is made dogma. To ostensibly keep summers from being so hot, we'll be deprived of air conditioning.

Having been in a gun fight
FergusMacLennan writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 5:46 PM
talent scout
"I think you are full of bs"

Thank you for clarifying that. I think you are bringing a knife to a gunfight, then whining and puling when you get spanked (to mix metaphors just a bit).

That's just my opinion, of course.
-------------------------

I can positively discount such rubbish as this comparison.

But see yourself anyway you like Fergie, and imagine this is either your classroom or a gunfight iffen ye wish.
Just more bs in my opinion of course.



To: Greg
Your comment about not trying to save a fallen soldier is just ridiculously at variance with human experience in war from day one. It has nothing to do with Hollywood, etc. Julius Caesar, I believe, wrote of two Roman legionnaires who were continuously quarreling. Yet, when one was inadvertently left behind in a retreat, his rival rashly charged the entire enemy line in an attempt to rescue him.

I suspect you were never in the ground forces. In the madness of a firefight, rationalized and intellectualized decisions of the sort you describe go out the window. Fear, "esprit de corps", team loyalty, and drilled-in discipline rule the day. Sometimes one wins out, sometimes another.

Do wanna thank you Fergie
For some light hearted entertainment, as this sort of humor shows up in your pure english.

lol
---------------

FergusMacLennan writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 5:48 PM
Unca Alby
Well said; that's just exactly what I would have said had I not been distracted by a mental midget. .

--------------------------

Mental midget is a step up for you Fergie.


The entire article is stained
With the idea of making all decisions based in some monetary value.

As if that is the highest value one can obtain.

The idea of selling body parts is as putrid as Fergies arrogance, .......ok its even worse than poor Fergies self importance.

talent scout
The fact that you have not specifically refuted anything I have said, and have merely resorted to insults and lame combacks, speaks volumes for the solidity of intellectual ground you stand on - or rather, the intellectual swamp you are sinking into.

Again, you started this by being rude and obnoxious first. If you don't wish to be criticized for your writing ability, then don't crow about how plain your English is.

You will note, by the way, that I am not the only one to take you to task for your lack of articulation. You yourself, in your first response to me, lamented being often misunderstood; clearly I am not the first to make this observation. If I made the point in somewhat more pointed fashion that you are accustomed to, well, once again you have only yourself to blame for starting THAT particular fire.

If you can't be bothered to learn how to write clearly, it's no skin off my nose. Moreover, if someone of such glaringly obvious intellectual paucity finds me arrogant, I think I will still manage to sleep at night.

talent scout
you wrote:
"The entire article is stained
With the idea of making all decisions based in some monetary value."

Spoken like a standard-issue Leftist with no earthly idea how Economics works.

The entire article is so "stained", as you put it, because monetary value is simply a measure of scarcity. The self-evident fact of the scarcity of human donor organs is most clearly demonstrated by the fact that every year, thousands of people die for want of a transplant.

Pray, enlighten us: absent monetary value as a system of measure, how would YOU measure the scarcity of donor organs?

Can't you see how
Your obession for bs is worthless, yet! Fergie?
You actually think I am going to come here to take english lessons from you?
If you want to keep bouncing this back and forth, ok.

But as I said it is bs simply because asking me to sit and be instructed by you in how to express myself is as dumb as it gets, not happening Fergie.
-------------------


FergusMacLennan writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 6:20 PM
talent scout
The fact that you have not specifically refuted anything I have said, and have merely resorted to insults and lame combacks, speaks volumes for the solidity of intellectual ground you stand on - or rather, the intellectual swamp you are sinking into.

Again, you started this by being rude and obnoxious first. If you don't wish to be criticized for your writing ability, then don't crow about how plain your English is.

-------------------------------

Then rewrite this for me Fergie in how it can and should be said using your own "superior" and vastly knowledgable use of english.
I did in fact address your silly post directly and named it for what it is, bs.

Rewrite this for me and let me see what you are talking about,ok.

"What a great opportunity for a criminal minded opportunist, sell body parts."





Fergie continues selling himself
With silly posts and....
-------------


Fergie says:
You will note, by the way, that I am not the only one to take you to task for your lack of articulation. You yourself, in your first response to me, lamented being often misunderstood; clearly I am not the first to make this observation. If I made the point in somewhat more pointed fashion that you are accustomed to, well, once again you have only yourself to blame for starting THAT particular fire.
-------------

Internet can be like gang warfare over ideas instead of turf, that is all I see.

One gang member backing another, lol.

All who agree with this article are ideological combatants, and will use blanks as one other did, even two others, so what.

You got my point right away and decided to take this present course, and is bs, smile.

----------------------
Fergie says:
If you can't be bothered to learn how to write clearly, it's no skin off my nose. Moreover, if someone of such glaringly obvious intellectual paucity finds me arrogant, I think I will still manage to sleep at night.
--------------

When I check in to your classroom and sign up for a class, then we can talk about whats proper english.

There is nothing intellectual about bowing to your smugness, thinking you are above it all and just here to lend a hand to those you see as less educated in writing skills.

I cannot help but call it as I see it, hypocrites make such arguments as you do.

Sleep well

As a life long conservative
Fergie shows how he is too arrogant to ask what ones politics is so he can assume what he desires things to be says:

--------------------------

talent scout
you wrote:
"The entire article is stained
With the idea of making all decisions based in some monetary value."


FergusMacLennan writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 6:24 PM

Spoken like a standard-issue Leftist with no earthly idea how Economics works.
--------------

Spoken like a complete moron who has no such thing as a curtesy to ask ones politics before he labels them according to his own little midget mind.

I explained in "plainest english" I know how to use, there exists the criminal mind that would see body parts as another avenue to make money, if it were on the market as Dr Sowell seems to be for.

And you have problems with capitol "E"s as with english.


NOT YOUR CONCERN
As a FREE man I would be able to put anything IN my body, take OUT anything, or have sex without government or society permission. The only ones concerned are those involved in the transaction.

MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS, and let others mind theirs.

And here comes one
Recommending all live as animals.


---------

As a FREE man I would be able to put anything IN my body, take OUT anything, or have sex without government or society permission. The only ones concerned are those involved in the transaction.
-------------

Prison materiel and cannot be trusted in an open society


talent scout - Part 1
you wrote:

"Rewrite this for me and let me see what you are talking about,ok.

'What a great opportunity for a criminal minded opportunist, sell body parts.'"

1. This would be clearer with some adjustments:

'What a great opportunity for a criminal-minded opportunist: selling body parts!"

There could be variations, of course, but those minor changes do a great deal to clean up that sentence.

2. It is, however, disingenuous of you to pretend as though that was all you wrote. In point of fact, that one line was couched in the middle of several others that were far more obscure and confusing.

"But as I said it is bs simply because asking me to sit and be instructed by you in how to express myself is as dumb as it gets, not happening Fergie."

3. In point of fact, no, this is the first time you have identified exactly where you thought the so-called "BS" in my posts lay.

4. That you refuse to listen to educated instruction on how to improve your writing is obvious; no need to restate it.



talent scout - Part 2
you wrote:
"You got my point right away..."

5. No, in point of fact, I did not. Hence my initially polite request for clarification.

"> Spoken like a standard-issue Leftist with no
> earthly idea how Economics works.

Spoken like a complete moron who has no such thing as a curtesy to ask ones politics before he labels them according to his own little midget mind."

6. That would be "courtesy," genius.

7. You have been entirely lacking in courtesy toward me from your first post in my direction; what on earth gives you the gall to think you are owed any in return?

8. Whatever your personal politics might or might not be, it remains true that the quoted bit WAS, in fact, spoken like a "standard-issue Leftist." To contemptuously characterize what is a simple matter of scarcity (and the measure thereof) as "putrid" is entirely consistent with Leftist attitudes toward the free market, and entirely inconsistent with what are generally considered to be the fundamentals of conservative economic thinking.

9. [gratuitous slam] Of course, in ascribing any sort of thinking to you, I might well be giving too much credit where none is due. [/gratuitous slam]

10. You haven't answered my question: in lieu of monetary value, what system of measure would YOU suggest using, in regards to donor organ scarcity?

Thanks for nothing Fergie
Except for fact you are so easily distracted by midget minds, makes you a bore.

Here is my 1st post, I read it again and like it as it is, even if you do not, its immateriel to your obession.

----------------------

talent scout writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 12:18 PM
Dr Sowell seems to have
Dismissed the reality of the world we all live in.

Even in a world that continues making one law right after another, the improvements this brings is in prison construction details and emplyment opportunities.

Passing law is imagined morality and highly esteemed, honored men given voice to attack some inequity, as if that eliminates the problem and will heal mankind from his evil ways.

What a great opportunity for a criminal(-) minded opportunist, sell(ing) body parts.

By the way Dr Sowell, what world you live in?


This should make Fergie happy
"What a great opportunity for a criminal(-) minded opportunist, sell(ing) body parts"

Repeated with his corrections, smirk.

talent scout
Thank you. But you STILL haven't answered the question I have posed to you twice. Here's a third iteration, hoping against hope that three is, indeed, a charm:

Since you are contemptuous of monetary value - of the price mechanism - as an adequate measure of the scarcity of donated transplant organs, what alternate system of measure would you then suggest?

Well let's try a Clean Start
original talent scout posting, where the parts I can make sense of are addressed:

>Dr Sowell seems to have
>Dismissed the reality of the
>world we all live in.

I disagree. Dr. Sowell describes reality quite accurately.

>Even in a world that continues making one law
>right after another,

This is an unfortunate aspect of this reality, but completely irrelevant to Dr. Sowell's column.

>the improvements this brings is in prison
>construction details and employment opportunities.

Again, irrelevant. If anything, the increased availability of organs via a system of monetary reimbursement would *reduce* the amount crime that occurs with stolen body parts.

Any sort of law-breaking comes with risks. People very often break the law, and accept those risks, in order to obtain things that they can not get legally. Hence, black markets.

Make it easier to obtain these things legally, and the motivation to steal is reduced. Suddenly the risks associated with the black market is more than it's worth. The black market dries up.

>Passing law is imagined morality and highly
>esteemed, honored men given voice to attack
>some inequity, as if that eliminates the problem
>and will heal mankind from his evil ways.

This paragraph does not parse at all, so I will ignore it.

>What a great opportunity for a criminal minded
>opportunist, sell body parts.

This is actually a great opportunity under the CURRENT system. The improved system being proposed would REDUCE that opportunity.

Again, breaking the law has inherent risks. People will not break the law if better options are available. What we're talking about is creating a system where better options *are* available, thus drastically reducing the incentive to break the law.

>By the way Dr Sowell, what world you live in?

The real one, as opposed to some socialist fantasyland.

Talent Scout/Fergus
I'm going with Fergus in this long running soap opera. The original post by Talent Scout was absolutely brutal. I read it three times and still had no idea what point he was trying to make. Unfortunately, every post after the original did little to clarify his position.

Give it up Talent Scout, you're in over your head.
Sorry!

luvs2000
Oooo! Another member of my Internet "gang" jumps in on behalf of the homies!

'sup, mah brutha? Word!

;-)

Trade Offs
Dear Dr. Sowell,

I completely agree with your thoughts about considering trade-offs in most of our lives' activities. In that connection it would sure be interesting to learn the size of the cell-phone bills of those "too poor" to afford health insurance.

Could it be that they don't feel they have to consider a trade off because with politicians' help they can have the rest of us pay for the life insurance??

Forgot how dumbed down
One has to become to talk over subjects today, at least on the internet.

-----------------
Unca Alby writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 9:07 PM
Well let's try a Clean Start
original talent scout posting, where the parts I can make sense of are addressed:

>Dr Sowell seems to have
>Dismissed the reality of the
>world we all live in.

I disagree. Dr. Sowell describes reality quite accurately.
------------------------

talent scout :
Fine, I disagree with you too.
He does not even include the possiblity of a black market for body parts, and is an unreality based article.

--------------


>Even in a world that continues making one law
>right after another,

Unca Alby writes:
This is an unfortunate aspect of this reality, but completely irrelevant to Dr. Sowell's column.
---------------------------

talent scout:
It is to point out how even if its illegal a black market would operate anyway.
May be one now, but this would give it lots more inspiration.

------------

>the improvements this brings is in prison
>construction details and employment opportunities.
-----------------
Unca Alby writes:

Again, irrelevant. If anything, the increased availability of organs via a system of monetary reimbursement would *reduce* the amount crime that occurs with stolen body parts.
--------------
talent scout

Relevant to my point though.
Passing laws do not stop crime.
But it does increase prison population and gives architects new challenges.

My point, Dr Sowell can make his own.
---------------------


When I have a point to make
And know its right, my ankle is chained to the ground and I run from no man, or woman.

-------------------------

Talent Scout was absolutely brutal. I read it three times and still had no idea what point he was trying to make. Unfortunately, every post after the original did little to clarify his position.

Give it up Talent Scout, you're in over your head.
Sorry!
--------------------------

I will try and remember how dumbed down todays education has become for reading comprehension, and slow down some for you.

Placing body parts on an open market invites criminals to get involved.

That too hard to grasp?
No need to feel sorrow, unless it is the state of mind you prefer.
Pat Fergie on the back, he probably needs some stroking.

talent scout
I note with some amusement that you still fail to answer my very simple question. Or is it direct avoidance? Either way, may we assume that you have no answer to offer?

Your assumption that Dr. Sowell's failure to mention the possibility of a black market indicates an ignorance of the possibility is laughable. The man is an economist by training; he probably didn't mention it for the same reason that he would neglect to describe the color of the sky on a sunny day.

In the meantime, you demonstrate a remarkable (if not actively laughable) lack of comprehension of what a black market is and how it works, with the following statement:

"May be one now, but this would give it lots more inspiration."

A black market scarcely needs the presence of a legalized market for inspiration; quite the opposite, in fact. A black market derives its appeal and its existence almost entirely from the LACK of a legal market.

For evidence, we can point to the black market in bootlegged liquor BEFORE Prohibition, vs. its almost entire disappearance following Repeal (with the exception, of course, of states which maintained their own laws prohibiting liquor). We can also point to the THRIVING black market in illegal drugs. There are scads more historical examples, but those two will suffice for the present.

In the meantime, can you point to any historical examples of a LEGAL market for a commodity engendering a black market where none existed (or even where a much smaller, more limited example existed) prior?

Because you are so long winded Fergie
Part 1.



Makes more work for me to explain all the angles, and boring too.

I will respond slowly and explain what you should already understand.
Cutting it down in piece meal so to spoon feed you.

-----------------

FergusMacLennan writes:

talent scout
I note with some amusement that you still fail to answer my very simple question. Or is it direct avoidance? Either way, may we assume that you have no answer to offer?
--------------

talent scout:
Sure Fergie, assumptions is your best quality, why stop now?
-----------------
FergusMacLennan writes:

Your assumption that Dr. Sowell's failure to mention the possibility of a black market indicates an ignorance of the possibility is laughable.
---------------
talent scout:

I like Dr Sowell and have took time to correspond with him over another issue.
I never came close to either thinking or saying he is dumb.

I said the article is lacking the reality of the criminal element that would be delighted to use this for money making opportunities.
And is not addressed.

The problem is you making assumptions and accusations, distracting from that point to smugly teach english.
----------------------


FergusMacLennan writes:
The man is an economist by training; he probably didn't mention it for the same reason that he would neglect to describe the color of the sky on a sunny day.
------------------------
talent scout:

I know, and you are an english teacher.
Now you assume he would talk about the color of the sky comparing it to the revelency of stolen body parts from unwilling donee's.
Sadly lacks credibilty, for me anyway.






Part 2
Fergie says:


In the meantime, you demonstrate a remarkable (if not actively laughable) lack of comprehension of what a black market is and how it works, with the following statement:

"May be one now, but this would give it lots more inspiration."
-------------------------------------

talent scout:
Cackle and giggle if you like, and as you love to mock, you show you argue like a child with dumb statements.

Legalizing the sale of body parts would indeed create a much larger market and opportunities for crime.
----------------------------

Fergie says:
A black market scarcely needs the presence of a legalized market for inspiration; quite the opposite, in fact. A black market derives its appeal and its existence almost entirely from the LACK of a legal market.
----------------------------

talent scout:
Seeing how obtuse you are to the growth in opportunities for harvesting body parts from unwilling donors, I will just let you flounder with the idea.
Much to slow for my patience tonight to deal with.


Part 3

Fergie says:
For evidence, we can point to the black market in bootlegged liquor BEFORE Prohibition, vs. its almost entire disappearance following Repeal (with the exception, of course, of states which maintained their own laws prohibiting liquor). We can also point to the THRIVING black market in illegal drugs. There are scads more historical examples, but those two will suffice for the present.
-----------------------------

talent scout:
EXCEPT FOR
Liquer and drugs have willing participants where this open market for body parts creates a climate for criminals to just take them anyway.

Willing or not
-----------------
Fergie says:
In the meantime, can you point to any historical examples of a LEGAL market for a commodity engendering a black market where none existed (or even where a much smaller, more limited example existed) prior?

-----------------------------------------
talent scout
Shylocking
Counterfeiting
Massive clothing and entertainment articles being copied on the black market.

talent scout - Correct about Wrong Thing
ts: [Dr. Sowell] does not even include the possiblity of a black market for body parts, and is an unreality based article.

Unca Alby:
Article is of limited space.

Maybe you want him to cover all the bases including a few you don't think of. Instead reading 700 word space-limited column, you should pick up one of his 700 page books.

Given limited space, Dr. Sowell describes reality exceedingly well.

=====

ts:
>Even in a world that continues making one law
>right after another,

UA:
This is an unfortunate aspect of this reality, but completely irrelevant to Dr. Sowell's column.

ts: It is to point out how even if its illegal a black market would operate anyway.
May be one now, but this would give it lots more inspiration.

Unca Alby:
You don't understand the dynamics of the situation. According to your own reports, yes, IS black market in human organs, no "may be" about it.

Black markets exist where free market made illegal for high demand items. Guns, drugs, prostitution, gambling, etc., all exist in a black market BECAUSE against law.

Is NO black market for gambling in Nevada.

Black market in human organs exists today BECAUSE illegal to pay money to donors.

Remove that law -- Poof, black market disappears.

=====

ts:
>the improvements this brings is in prison
>construction details and employment opportunities.

UA: ... irrelevant. ...

ts: Relevant to my point though.
Passing laws do not stop crime.

Unca Alby:
You are correct. But. We are NOT talking about passing MORE laws.

Laws ALREADY passed make it illegal to receive monetary remuneration for your own personal body parts. This what create problem. Solution to problem is REPEAL those laws.

Your point, while make sense, is NOT relevant to THIS discussion. You are correct about the wrong thing.

Legalization
"Legalizing the sale of body parts would indeed create a much larger market and opportunities for crime."

Making an item legal instead of illegal does NOT create more opportunities for crime.

What creates crime is making high demand item illegal. Is basic economics.

Crime is HIGH RISK activity. No matter how careful, criminals get caught, criminals go to jail. Why bother steal organ and chance jail when can just buy for cheap? Criminal steal because can NOT buy.

Hummmm
Fergie says:
In the meantime, can you point to any historical examples of a LEGAL market for a commodity engendering a black market where none existed (or even where a much smaller, more limited example existed) prior?

-----------------------------------------
talent scout
Shylocking
Counterfeiting
Massive clothing and entertainment articles being copied on the black market.

Unca Alby:
Uh, Exsqueeze me

-- since when is counterfeiting LEGAL?
-- since when is copying patented and copyrighted material LEGAL?

-- and what the hell is "Shylocking"?

Uncle Alby, I will start here first

Fergie says:
In the meantime, can you point to any historical examples of a LEGAL market for a commodity engendering a black market where none existed (or even where a much smaller, more limited example existed) prior?

-----------------------------------------
talent scout
Shylocking
Counterfeiting
Massive clothing and entertainment articles being copied on the black market.
------------


Unca Alby:
Uh, Exsqueeze me

-- since when is counterfeiting LEGAL?

-----------------------
talent scout:
Never said it was legal, made the point of how a legal commodity(paper money) is copied and is from existing legal activity, printing Federal Reserve Notes.

-----------



Unca Alby writes: -- since when is copying patented and copyrighted material LEGAL?

-- and what the hell is "Shylocking"?

-------------------

I believe you misread Fergies question to me Uncle Alby.


quote:

Fergie says:
In the meantime, can you point to any historical examples of a LEGAL market for a commodity engendering a black market where none existed (or even where a much smaller, more limited example existed) prior?
----------------

Without the legal entertainment and clothing article and the Name they sell under for higher prices, no black market could exist for those things.


You also misunderstand why I say legalizing body parts would create a blackmarket.

A blackmarket of body parts that come off the body of UNWILLING SELLERS.


Shylocking
Is a street name for loan sharking.

An illegal loan based in a legal activity.


talent scout - - Black Market
"A blackmarket of body parts that come off the body of UNWILLING SELLERS."

Well, DUH.

Does not address issue. Taking parts without seller's OK contains RISK OF JAIL. Jail is very unpleasant.

WHY BOTHER when you can buy from WILLING seller for comparatively little money and NO risk?

Shylocking
ts: "Shylocking Is a street name for loan sharking.

An illegal loan based in a legal activity."

Ah. Learn something new every week.

An illegal activity because we have LAWS that make it ILLEGAL to charge over a certain interest rate.

Some people large credit risk. Got FICO score in four digit negative numbers. Legal lenders will not touch with ten foot pole, or seven foot chek. High risk means high interest rate to cover risk, or no loan. High interest rate deemed "usury" by law. Only people who will lend to high risk borrower at "usury" rates must work OUTside law.

Repeal law -- shylocking cease to exist. Get usury interest loan from regular bank.

talent scout
Nope. You are the one who misread my question; Unca Alby nailed it.

Let's just take your example of counterfeiting: you assume that because legal tender is, in fact, legal, satisfies my criterion of a legal market for an item.

The problem is, by definition a "market" for an item must comprise multiple sellers offering competing wares. With currency, there is NO market because the government maintains a monopoly. Hence, counterfeiting.

Now you STILL have not answered the following question:

Given your contempt for monetary value as a system of measure, what alternative system of measure would you suggest to measure the scarcity of donor organs?

I can keep asking all week, especially since your failure to answer points up the poverty of your position.

talent scout: Just curious
Yesterday you posted a reply to me, with the following subject heading: "As a life long conservative."

I assumed you meant that YOU are a lifelong conservative, but I went back and looked, and it seems that it is equally likely that you were saying that *I* am a lifelong conservative. Which would be true.

But so, that then raises the question: DO you claim to be a conservative?

Let's have it out on the table.

Does not work "unc"
Unca Alby writes: talent scout - - Black Market
"A blackmarket of body parts that come off the body of UNWILLING SELLERS."

Well, DUH.
------------------------------------
talent scout:
Then why YOU been arguing about it if it's DUH?

Huh?
--------------------
Unca says:
Does not address issue. Taking parts without seller's OK contains RISK OF JAIL. Jail is very unpleasant.
---------------------------------
talent scout:
I see you finally caught up with what I said in my 1st POST.
Took you long enough.

--------------------



unca says:

WHY BOTHER when you can buy from WILLING seller for comparatively little money and NO risk?
----------------------------------------

That is like saying why buy a fake name brand watch,piece of apparell, entertainment article when one can buy the real thing.

Too dumb to have to explain over and over again for you and Fergie.

Like a mule
Unca Alby writes: Wednesday, August, 29, 2007 3:16 AM
Shylocking
ts: "Shylocking Is a street name for loan sharking.

An illegal loan based in a legal activity."

Ah. Learn something new every week.

An illegal activity because we have LAWS that make it ILLEGAL to charge over a certain interest rate.

Some people large credit risk. Got FICO score in four digit negative numbers. Legal lenders will not touch with ten foot pole, or seven foot chek. High risk means high interest rate to cover risk, or no loan. High interest rate deemed "usury" by law. Only people who will lend to high risk borrower at "usury" rates must work OUTside law.

Repeal law -- shylocking cease to exist. Get usury interest loan from regular bank.
----------------------------

Go for it

Now dishonesty comes into play
Seen clearly with Fergies backtracking to cover his steps.

------------------------

FergusMacLennan writes: Wednesday, August, 29, 2007 7:35 AM
talent scout
Nope. You are the one who misread my question; Unca Alby nailed it.
-----------------


I nailed you both and now you lie.

Here is your question and I anmswered it as you worded it.

Fergie says:
In the meantime, can you point to any historical examples of a LEGAL market for a commodity engendering a black market where none existed (or even where a much smaller, more limited example existed) prior?
-------------------------------------------


I showed you three examples and never came close to exhausting the subject.

Here is what you said skinned down and now you lie about.

"can you point to any historical examples of a LEGAL market for a commodity engendering a black market where none existed "

I pointed it out as it exists right now today.
There is a legal market for clothing and entertainment, movies, CD's etc.

And without this legal market there could NOT be a black market for faked copies.

Not only are you an arrogant person, but now you lie.


Believe as you wish, I care not
FergusMacLennan writes: Wednesday, August, 29, 2007 8:03 AM
talent scout: Just curious
Yesterday you posted a reply to me, with the following subject heading: "As a life long conservative."

I assumed you meant that YOU are a lifelong conservative, but I went back and looked, and it seems that it is equally likely that you were saying that *I* am a lifelong conservative. Which would be true.

But so, that then raises the question: DO you claim to be a conservative?

Let's have it out on the table.
-------------------

I could not care less in what you believe and owe you nothing.

I do not need to prove a single thing to you Fergie, as what you think means nothing to me.
Call me a liberal if it makes you happy.

I am here to point out the fact that Dr Sowell is wrong about legalizing body parts for market entrepenuers.

We already have a black market for body parts and his idea would just increase the underworlds crimes in this.


You refuse to accept this reality, its your problem not mine.

quote just one story:

UCLA suspends its Willed Body Program
Johnson & Johnson admits buying tissue samples
Tuesday, March 9, 2004 Posted: 9:40 PM EST (0240 GMT)



Henry Reid, the director of UCLA's Willed Body Program, was arrested Saturday.




VIDEO
Director of UCLA program arrested




RELATED
• UCLA apologizes for scandal

RELATED
Anyone concerned that parts of a family member's donated body were sold should contact UCLA by phone at 866-317-6374 or by email at access@mednet.ucla.edu.

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Top officials at UCLA Tuesday voluntarily suspended the university's Willed Body Program after accusations that its director and others sold body parts for profit, a lawyer for the school said.



http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/03/09/ucla.cadaver.suit/index.html

Works Great, Scout
"That is like saying why buy a fake name brand watch, piece of apparell, entertainment article when one can buy the real thing."

If, when buy fake watch, is risk of doing jail time, yah, you betcha.

Today, buy fake watch has no risk to buyer, and not much risk to seller. Nobody care much about fake watch.

Buy organ from donor without permission has GREAT risk. Jail not pleasant. Not worth it when can buy.

Furthermore: IF there is great risk of jail when buy fake watch, can buy CHEAP watch instead. Is because LEGAL to SELL and BUY WATCHES.

See, watch market LEGAL.

Suppose can not buy ANY watch, real, cheap, fake or otherwise. Is not legal to SELL watch, law say must GIVE away. Who you think is going to MAKE watch, if can't sell? NOBODY that's who.

Then, if have watch, people will STEAL it, fake, real, cheap, whatever, just to have watch. Nobody can sell, can not buy, steal only way to get watch.

That's organ market today. Can not BUY organ. Nobody SELLING. So people STEAL.

This basic high school economics. Not rocket science.

Scout - - -
"I could not care less in what you believe and owe you nothing."

I still send you bill for economics education I giving you, Payable on Demand.

I give you phone number for shylock if you can't afford.

Scout --
"I am here to point out the fact that Dr Sowell is wrong about legalizing body parts for market entrepenuers."

But you have no rationale to prove WHY legalizing would INCREASE black market instead of DECREASE it.

"We already have a black market for body parts"

BECAUSE ILLEGAL TO SELL BODY PARTS. Creates SCARCITY. Makes PRICE go UP. Makes crime PROFITABLE.

Make legal -- remove scarcity -- lower price -- crime profit evaporates -- crime evaporates --

I send you another bill for more economics education. You credit-worthy, yes?

What a crock of bull....

Part 1a



FergusMacLennan writes: Wednesday, August, 29, 2007 7:35 AM
talent scout
Nope. You are the one who misread my question; Unca Alby nailed it.

Let's just take your example of counterfeiting: you assume that because legal tender is, in fact, legal, satisfies my criterion of a legal market for an item.

----------------------------------

talent scout:
You have no such power and just imagine you do, to set any thing.
Counterfeiting could not possibly exist without the legal tender we all pass around for trade.
Exactly answering your own question to me.

And now your pride comes into play with bs.
Just cannot admit you lack substance or credibilty, lying, and thinking you have some power to pass a final grade, ha ha.


--------------------

Fergie says:

The problem is, by definition a "market" for an item must comprise multiple sellers offering competing wares. With currency, there is NO market because the government maintains a monopoly. Hence, counterfeiting.
------------

talent scout
Only a dunce would make such an argument.
Not only is there a money market, there is a market for stocks and bonds, all of which can be counterfeited.

"The money market is a sector of the capital market where short-term obligations such as Treasury bills, commercial paper and bankers' acceptances are bought and sold."
-------------------

Part 2a of bull....

Fergie says:

Now you STILL have not answered the following question:

Given your contempt for monetary value as a system of measure, what alternative system of measure would you suggest to measure the scarcity of donor organs?
--------------------------------


talent scout
What a feeble attempt this is to paint me showing you the answer to your own boneheaded question.

Contempt?
For monetary value?
Arguments of a quibbling old dunce.

------------------------
Fergie says:
I can keep asking all week, especially since your failure to answer points up the poverty of your position.
--------------------------

talent scout:
Being rich in both wisdom and knowledge and knowing a jerk-off argument when I see it, I hold the high ground here and intend to keep it.

Econ 101
"Being rich in both wisdom and knowledge"

But ignorant of basic economics.

Send the bill unca Alby
So I can sue you for using false credentials and giving no service for payment.

You will not allow for the taking of body parts from unwilling victims, and offer insincere advice.

Send the bill so I can sue you for fraud.

Dipping into his fraudulent claims
Unca Alby is a candidate for being sued.(if he sends a bill)
-------------------------

Unca Alby writes: Wednesday, August, 29, 2007 11:42 AM
Econ 101
"Being rich in both wisdom and knowledge"

But ignorant of basic economics.
-------------------------------------

talent scout
Basics of law are about crime, both civil and criminal, and many of them are concerned with scams.

As you profess yourself a teacher, I find you a fraud, send the bill and we can test your claims here.

Scout -- Lawsuit?
talent scout writes: "Send the bill unca Alby
So I can sue you for using false credentials and giving no service for payment."

I never gave you any credentials. Is not my fault you failed to learn the lessons.

Even gave homework assignments. Not turned in. Can't give good grades with no homework.


"You will not allow for the taking of body parts from unwilling victims, and offer insincere advice."

Part correct. Will not allow taking body parts from unwilling victims. Is against law, as should be. But advice is very sincere.


"Send the bill so I can sue you for fraud."

You'll have trouble proving fraud. Lawyer expensive, too. Sure you don't want shylock number? Is pretty cheap for crook.

Here in the real world
The legal markets create an open invitation for criminals to make a fast buck.
Seeing as how Unca Alby is so fascinated with watches, he should get an education how the legal market for watches creates opportunity for the underword too.

-----------------

Legal Ramifications of
Selling Fake Watches


18 U.S.C. Section 2320: Criminal Penalties for Counterfeiting
The maximum penalties provided are 10 years imprisonment and/or a $2 million fine in the case of an individual, and a $5 million fine in the case of a business. The law includes an additional provision stipulating increased penalties for recidivists. In the case of a second conviction, the person convicted, if an individual, faces a maximum potential fine of $5 million and prison sentence of 20 years. The maximum fine for a repeat offender other than an individual rises to $15 million.

http://www.timezone.com/library/archives/archives0059

Gone is reasonable arguments
For gibberish.

Unca Alby says:

Part correct. Will not allow taking body parts from unwilling victims. Is against law, as should be. But advice is very sincere.
-------------------------------------

Very informative, you fraud, lol.

That is exactly what I pointed out in my very first post.
Happens anyway and just creates more prison population and work for buiding prisons.

Black market already exists, you want to see it a growth industry.

Sane and moral people do not.

Scout - - -
Dipping into his fraudulent claims Unca Alby is a candidate for being sued.(if he sends a bill)

Oh, I send you bill alright. I send another bill for happily accepting threats without sending counter-threats. I send one more bill for listing to insults without sending insults back. You end up owing big-time. We have an easy-payment plan you might be interested in. Maybe 40, 50 years, you'll be all paid off.


-------------------------


ts: "Being rich in both wisdom and knowledge"

UA: But ignorant of basic economics.

One thing I have to say in all seriousness, and I probably should have said this earlier, when I said you were ignorant it was not intended to be an insult.

It does not mean you're "stupid". It just means there's some knowledge you do not possess.

We are all ignorant of something. I am ignorant of quantum mechanics. You are ignorant of economics. Your ignorance shows like a beacon in the night. Serious. No offense, but serious.

Again, please don't take offense. You're not alone in your ignorance. *Most* people are ignorant of economics. People can grow old and learn the Wisdom of the Ages and still think Socialism can "work" if only we could just get the "right people" in charge. Anyone with a smattering of economic knowledge knows this to be plain silly.

I do happen to have a smattering of economic knowledge, having made it my business to learn. I probably don't know enough to qualify as a college teacher in the subject, but I know more than your average Joe on the Street.

And you can take that to the bank. Probably good for half of next bill. Paid off in only 20 years.

Still Wrong
"That is exactly what I pointed out in my very first post."

How commendable of you.

"Black market already exists, you want to see it a growth industry."

You're still wrong. Legalizing will REDUCE crime. Have already outlined all the reasons WHY. You have yet to produce a SINGLE rationale that would indicate an increase in crime due to legalization.

Watch
"Here in the real world
The legal markets create an open invitation for criminals to make a fast buck.
Seeing as how Unca Alby is so fascinated with watches, he should get an education how the legal market for watches creates opportunity for the underword too."

Well then, let's follow your logic and make all watches illegal.

If your logic holds, then the black market in fake watches should go DOWN, right?

Hell, let's just make EVERYTHING illegal. If NOTHING is legal, then there shouldn't be ANY black market in ANYTHING, right? There won't be anything to have a black market for, coz there just won't be anything.

That makes PERFECT sense.

Serious Off-Topic Question for Scout
You said "shylock" was street name for loan shark.

Which streets are you talking about?

I have some experience in the streets and I've never heard that term before. But my streets are different from yours (I'll bet you've never heard of the Slauson Street Gang). So I'm curious.

The position
Unca Alby and Fergie are taking is saying, no one will ever be a victim of losing a body part, or his/her life to a criminal cause its against the law to do that.


And the good it does of placing body parts on an open market cancels out any concern for a victim who may not want to give up and arm or a leg, or something essential for life, like a heart.

Its against the law to do that, so nothing to worry about.

Your position
Saying to place body parts on the open market would cause the elimination of a black market for body parts.

The law is against taking a body part from anyone who does not want to give part of their body up, so it would never happen.


So once again.
"What world you live in?"

I have offered no post but a serious one
Unca Alby writes: Wednesday, August, 29, 2007 12:36 PM
Serious Off-Topic Question for Scout
You said "shylock" was street name for loan shark.

Which streets are you talking about?

I have some experience in the streets and I've never heard that term before. But my streets are different from yours (I'll bet you've never heard of the Slauson Street Gang). So I'm curious.
-------------------------

I first heard this word while in the Army, serving with some guys from the Northeast, Boston etc.

LA?

Sure have
I grew up in California.

Send you bill to:

Chief Investigating Officer for Internet Fraud, FBI.
(now that was funning ya)

Ah! Lost Bet!
UA: "(I'll bet you've never heard of the Slauson Street Gang)"

ts: "Sure have
I grew up in California."

AH! Lost bet!

You lucky, reduces amount on invoice. Probably pay off now in only 5 years.

Keep this up and I'll owe YOU money.

(Good luck collecting!)

My Position
Missionary, thank you very much.

ts: "Saying to place body parts on the open market would cause the elimination of a black market for body parts."

Eliminate or at least reduce, yes. Have explained rationale clearly and frequently.

ts: "The law is against taking a body part from anyone who does not want to give part of their body up, so it would never happen."

Laws can not eliminate strong market. That is WHY market goes black.


ts: "So once again.
"What world you live in?""

Real world, with real economics.

Fantasyland, people think can make law and people follow law, despite huge economic incentives to break law.

Real world, people know incentives are there whether legal or not. Crimp legal ways to get stuff, and people STILL get stuff, even if use illegal ways. Let people get stuff legal, and MOST people will get stuff legal.

When legal ways available, illegal ways too risky.

Right now is ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE to get stuff legal. People in fantasyland think this should be no problem, everybody altruistic and holy and want to help their neighbor with no compensation, and should be HAPPY to give away body parts for free. People in real world know this is stupid. Nobody gives nothing for free. TANSTAAFL.

Noting that talent scout merely ASSERTS that legalized open market would create more crime, but has no REASONS for this beyond ad homenim.

Hard head
Nothing penetrates
Cement unpliable
Brains scambled in many pieces.
Like tiny rocks

Go see surgeon and buy a brain off the open market Unca Alby
Smile if ya can.

----------------

Unca Alby cannot reason and says:
Noting that talent scout merely ASSERTS that legalized open market would create more crime, but has no REASONS for this beyond ad homenim.

--------------

Lost topic
Now makes personal accusations caused I nailed him with sanity.
Cannot face real world, and harbors deep resentment for truth.

He say no one break law
Never take body part
Just sell own

Not buying kemosabe, you sell to circus, ok.

Hard Head
That's what happens to a head when filled with knowledge. Becomes hard. Requires LOGIC and REASON to change mind, not mere assertions.

Scout should try it some time.

ts: "Unca Alby cannot reason and says:"

Reasoning fine. Not making bald-face assertions without logic.

Still waiting for Scout logic. For Scout reasons behind assertions. Waiting for Scout to turn in homework assignment.


ua: "Noting that talent scout merely ASSERTS that legalized open market would create more crime, but has no REASONS for this beyond ad homenim."

AND continues to do so.


ts: "Lost topic
Now makes personal accusations caused I nailed him with sanity."

"Sanity"?

You stand accused of making assertions without providing reasons for those assertions.

How do you plead? Guilty or Not Guilty?


ts: "He say no one break law"

Made NO such statement.

Said FEWER people break law when LEGAL avenue is available for market. Today, legal avenue is NOT available. Breaking law is sometimes ONLY way to get organs.


You stand accused of giving false testimony regarding statements made by the witness.

How do you plead? Guilty or Not Guilty?

FYI: "Shylock"
The term "shylock" for a loan shark comes from the play "The Merchant of Venice" by William Shakespeare; in it, the merchant Shylock, a Jew, is a money lender who promises to extract his payment in a pound of flesh - literally.

It's generally considered to be an extremely anti-Semitic work, and the term "shylock" is thus generally tainted by association.

Just in case you were curious.

You can keep
Your self approved reasoning Unca Alby, I will not follow you into deniel.

You do say no one would break the law if there was an open market for body parts by your arguments.

I am not buying your circus logic.

Wow
This post got out of hand and mean and, at times, absurd pretty quickly! I am a huge advocate for economic reasoning with trade-offs and everything. However, when one overlooks the possibility that the device being used to serve those up to the economical outcome is flawed, I am concerned. How many innocent lives may get caught up in this zero-sum "if he's convicted then kill him immediately" system? How many innocent people killed are enough before the machine needs to be analyzed? I am not at all against the death penalty. I do believe that at times when it is open and shut, appeals and all that are a waste of time and the dollars should not be spent. However, understanding that we live in flawed world with a flawed justice system whose outcome may come about by flawed reasoning or flawed facts and everything isn't clean-cut, one has to take many, if not all, cases and look at them unique from this zero-sum game. Life has many uncertainties and black swans that can't be rationalized to fit into one of the boxes. While open market organs may increase the number on the market, that is only assuming that most people would if financial incentive was present. I don't doubt that is true. However, I don't want to contribute out of fear that I would be pronounced dead prematurely to help someone else or because I may need my other kidney later if asked while alive! What if this were the majority fear? Then economics has very little to do with the outcome. I am wit tgwWhale on the band of brothers thing. The bond between brothers can't be measured in the realms of economic theory. Not everything can be measured and fit into a theory. Life is too vast to fit in a box!

Have no need
To declare a plea, so will not.

Only shows the lameness of your obfuscations Unca Alby

Happily I remain opposed to the insanity of selling body parts.
And above recriminations by feeble attempts from imaginations to intimidate. What a joke that is, like your "bill" lol.

Thanks for the laughs Unc, been fun but useless.

Furthermore
I usually agree with Dr. Sowell but to say the second tragedy doesn't sit well. Especially knowing that had the three miners who went in actually rescued the other miners, they would be hailed as heroes and the economics of their decision would not have came into question. I have to think that if the deaths of more miners were considered a high probability at the time, they wouldn't have been allowed to go back in. With many situations there may be some probability of harm. If 2 fireman goes into a burning building searching for one person and they find them, should they be criticized for taking that risk? Even if they died, to them it may have been worth the risk and who is anyone to question the economics of their decision. Now if they are sent in without the situation having been assessed, or having been lied to about the true state of it, then criticism can be leveled. Otherwise, it is a dangerous thing to speak on an issue from afar based off of models and theory when experts on the scene may no much better than we do!

Furthermore
I usually agree with Dr. Sowell but to say the second tragedy was avoidable doesn't sit well with me. Especially knowing that had the three miners who went in actually rescued the other miners, they would be hailed as heroes and the economics of their decision would not have came into question. I have to think that if the deaths of more miners were considered a high probability at the time, they wouldn't have been allowed to go back in. With many situations there may be some probability of harm. If 2 fireman goes into a burning building searching for one person and they find them, should they be criticized for taking that risk? Even if they died, to them it may have been worth the risk and who is anyone to question the economics of their decision. Now if they are sent in without the situation having been assessed, or having been lied to about the true state of it, then criticism can be leveled. Otherwise, it is a dangerous thing to speak on an issue from afar based off of models and theory when experts on the scene may no much better than we do!

oops
Guess I didn't proofread my post too well! TS and Furgus, please don't jump on me! hahaha!

No problem my friend
jaesoreal writes: Wednesday, August, 29, 2007 4:01 PM
oops
Guess I didn't proofread my post too well! TS and Furgus, please don't jump on me! hahaha!
-------------------

I never comment on typos or honest mistakes, or bad spelling or use of english.

Thats Fergies realm.

I am a horrible typist myself.

Scout - -
ts: "You can keep Your self approved reasoning Unca Alby, I will not follow you into deniel."

Thank you I shall.

Since, at least, I DO have reasoning. Something you sorely lack.

ts: "You do say no one would break the law if there was an open market for body parts by your arguments."

Nope. Wrong again. Or rather I should say, *still* wrong.


ts: "I am not buying your circus logic."

Ah logic, that pinnacle of rational thinking and reasoning.

Don't knock it until you've tried it.

Thinking I mean.

yuk yuk yuk
Ah logic, that pinnacle of rational thinking and reasoning.

Don't knock it until you've tried it.

Thinking I mean.

----------------------------
No use trying with you ole buddy, you are committed to not thinking and must enjoy your circus rational.

What sort of thinking do you do(?) to believe the open market erases crime?
Heh?
Do you not have ears and eyes to see nothing could be further from the truth?

You are being silly my friend, so I will just take it as the joke you obviously are trying to make.

NO SELLING BODY PARTS, period.

Deatths
16,900 murders last year in the USA

40,000 DUI deaths on the haighway.

Perspective/................

Question for Scout
"NO SELLING BODY PARTS, period."

So what will you tell people who will die because they can not get donor organs?

Wow
This thread degenerated pretty far before petering out. I rarely care about the grammar/spelling, as I'm no expert, but it does seem to me that dropping whole words is a bit much.

It seems like TS is either young - and therefore accustomed to using single letters to replace whole words, or a person for whom English is a second language. Frankly, most of the later posts To and From TS seem to have left words out. (Seemingly as a mocking mechanism, but still, tough to read and follow.)

Anyway, On the subject of this article, I would tend to favor legalizing selling organs, for all the stated reasons, but keep the laws on the books that require a direct trace of where the organs came from - with only the donor being able to accept the payment. Personally, I intend to inspect the body, and watch the incineration of my family's bodies, to ensure they're not pulling any funny business down at the funeral parlor.

Also, as to sending in ever more rescuers, I have long been against that kind of stuff. I strongly believe that rescuers should be all volunteer, and paid handsomely by the persons needing rescue. ALL costs relative to rescuing people should be borne by the people who engage in the risky behavior, regardless of if it is part of their job, or rock climbing in the mountains. NO One forces people to do these things, for work or fun, and if you decide to do them, then it is a risk YOU took, and not the job of any other person to risk their life to rescue your butt from the very easily foreseeable consequences.

I feel sad for the miners, and their families, but you need not be from mining country to know this is an all too frequent aspect of that job, and perhaps instead of howling that ever more rescuers go in after their men, they should howl at their men to stop going down into the mines.

Nuclear power renders all this death unnecessary, and the sooner, the better.

KM - wow
"talent scout" demonstrates a knowledge of an LA gang which has not been prominent for many years, and claims to have served in the Army.

So, unless he "Googled" the LA gang, he's been in this country long enough to know English.

Therefore, there can only a couple of possible reasons for his lack of English skills -- he is either lazy or incompetent. Considering how he answered all challenges with ad homenim (which I did my best to ignore), I'm inclined towards believing the latter.

I'm not the one who will argue over minor mistakes in spelling and grammar, so long as I can get the point being put across. But when the words are strung together so poorly until no one can get the point, then that's worse than mere bad grammar; that's a complete failure to communicate. A number of people have complained at not being able to figure out "ts"'s poorly strung words, so I know it's not just me and Fergus.

It is not the reader's responsibility to struggle to decipher what the writer must have been trying to say. It is incumbent upon the writer to organize his thoughts and lay them out in such a manner so as to make himself clear.

Probably 9 out of 10 instances of miscommunication are the writer's fault.

I am sorry to have wasted so much time on the issue. I should have known better. It should have been clear early on that "ts" needed no rationale beyond simple assertions.

talent scout is an idiot
By now, I everyone probably feels the same way.
I've never read so much nonsense as I have from talent scout.
Avoids direct questions and lacks logic to a sad degree.
And, I've never seen any one use so many ad hominem attacks.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.