Trump replies to letter from 8 year old

#102
#102
LouderVol said:
so reading up on this. the law in place didn't even come into effect until 94, it also made it so upon death you are presumed to opt-out of donation. From the numbers Wikipedia was quoting they are thinking that at best there could be at most double the number of viable organs out there. As finding matches/people who can donate at all is apparently pretty low. so it doesn't sound like we could fix the problem, but we could definitely make it better.

the one thing I have seen in favor of our current system is that rejection is much lower than anywhere else. not sure on how the rates balance out. but they were saying a rejection rate of 1/4 is common elsewhere (not Europe) but here it is around 1/20.

also just thinking it thru I would imagine there would be a spike, and then a drop of actual donations if you did a monetary system. Its not like you can donate more than once for most organs. so you may "out farm" the population.

I had no idea so few people can actually donate.

I have no problem going with a rewards system but the payment thing is interesting. unless you create a company that harvests the kidneys, pays the donor, and then waits for repayment from insurance/whatever I am not sure how a system could work that would be any better. Kidneys can only last 3 days outside of a donor. idk maybe there could be a sign up system or something, they test you and put you on a list, and when its needed then they call you in, remove and pay you then?
Click to expand...

But Iran fixed it.

I assume people wouldn't have their kidney harvested until there was a recipient ready for it. I think that's how the current system works.

Economists have been working on this a long time. They can't get any traction with policy changes, so they've tried other interesting solutions...one that improved the system a lot is they created a kidney matching database so you can trade kidneys. For example, say your brother needs a kidney and you're not a match for him....you're a match for somebodies and one of those somebodies knows a match for your brother. So the databases matches them up and they trade. It's not fixing the problem, but it is saving some lives.
 
Last edited:
#103
#103
ClearwaterVol said:
The poor always get exploited. Ready to shutter those coal mines?

10%? The total cost of the surgery is roughly 500k. I am pretty sure you could buy a kidney for less.
Click to expand...
I’ve never argued for those coal mines. Go check the other thread let’s get on the nuke train baby!

So no you can’t prove it you just made it up. Ok.
 
#104
#104
So as a basis how about those of us lucky enough to have it check out your AD&D benefits. That’s about the only price schedule I know of for organs or limbs that would apply to our society. And the values ain’t cheap.
 
#107
#107
n_huffhines said:
So the perception that I'm arrogant merits his trolling moreso than ND40 outright calling my arguments "dumbass".
Click to expand...
If the shoe fits...

Couple the arrogant tone as DO mentioned with what I think are fairly weak ass arguments a lot of the time and yeah, you get that reply from me I guess!

For the record I don’t think your stupid, quite the opposite in fact. But if you bring the tough guy tone don’t cry about tough guy replies huff.
 
#108
#108
midnight orange said:
Govt granted monopolies are desirable?
Click to expand...
never said that. just because thing 1 is bad doesn't mean that thing 2 can't also be bad.

the way governments typically work is there is a problem. donations of organs. they try to get involved to fix it but make it worse, where we are now. but usually when they correct they way over correct and continue making the problem worse, complete removal.

there should be a balance somewhere, doing something just to try and fix the problem is not admirable. doing something that actually fixes the problem is.
 
#109
#109
LouderVol said:
never said that. just because thing 1 is bad doesn't mean that thing 2 can't also be bad.

the way governments typically work is there is a problem. donations of organs. they try to get involved to fix it but make it worse, where we are now. but usually when they correct they way over correct and continue making the problem worse, complete removal.

there should be a balance somewhere, doing something just to try and fix the problem is not admirable. doing something that actually fixes the problem is.
Click to expand...
I agree with your first paragraph, however I believe it contradicts your second paragraph.
 
#110
#110
n_huffhines said:
But Iran fixed it.

I assume people wouldn't have their kidney harvested until there was a recipient ready for it. I think that's how the current system works.

Economists have been working on this a long time. They can't get any traction with policy changes, so they've tried other interesting solutions...one that improved the system a lot is they created a kidney matching database so you can trade kidneys. For example, say your brother needs a kidney and you're not a match for him....you're a match for somebodies and one of those somebodies knows a match for you. So the databases matches them up and they trade. It's not fixing the problem, but it is saving some lives.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen any number for the cases in Iran. But I doubt their problem is as severe as our own.

one every fourteen minutes is a stupefying rate. our generally poor health and diet probably makes our rates worse than anyone else.

again I am for your system, no real reason not to. I just believe it is being oversold.

they are selling 1400 kidney a year. BBC NEWS | Programmes | This World | Iran's desperate kidney traders

that's a day of added names in America. hold up math is off. ok, its 14 days of added names in America.
 
Last edited:
#111
#111
ClearwaterVol said:
The person having the surgery either through insurance or whatever means they choose.

Right now it is $260,000 per year plus about 17k per year for anti rejection drugs post transplant. $5,000.00 would not even be noticed.
Click to expand...

This is America. It’ll be way more than 5k. So you think insurance will pay it?
 
#112
#112
LouderVol said:
I haven't seen any number for the cases in Iran. But I doubt their problem is as severe as our own.

one every fourteen minutes is a stupefying rate. our generally poor health and diet probably makes our rates worse than anyone else.

again I am for your system, no real reason not to. I just believe it is being oversold.

they are selling 1400 kidney a year. BBC NEWS | Programmes | This World | Iran's desperate kidney traders

that's a day of added names in America.
Click to expand...

Food for thought: Iran has no waiting list and they have a price ceiling on kidneys. $4,500 is very cheap. They are dramatically reducing the pool for donors and they're still getting enough.
 
#113
#113
n_huffhines said:
Food for thought: Iran has no waiting list and they have a price ceiling on kidneys. $4,500 is very cheap. They are dramatically reducing the pool for donors and they're still getting enough.
Click to expand...
You think it’ll only be $4,500 here?

Who will pay the donor?
 
#115
#115
n_huffhines said:
Food for thought: Iran has no waiting list and they have a price ceiling on kidneys. $4,500 is very cheap. They are dramatically reducing the pool for donors and they're still getting enough.
Click to expand...
I doubt 4500 over there is that cheap.

again 1400 a year for 81 million is a rate of 0.000017
our 60k a year for 330 million 0.00014

our rate is more 10x higher than theirs, 10 times. and I am betting with a more homogeneous population they have a lot more possible matches from possible donors than we do.

I don't think their model is sustainable over here. worth doing, but its not the silver bullet you seem to want it to be.
 
#117
#117
tumscalcium said:
You think it’ll only be $4,500 here?

Who will pay the donor?
Click to expand...

How many times does this question have to be answered? Yes, insurance will pay. Insurance cannot refuse to pay for a surgery due to an additional cost unless the policy specifically excludes paying for organs. Who cares who pays? Free market solves it all, right?
 
#119
#119
ClearwaterVol said:
How many times does this question have to be answered? Yes, insurance will pay. Insurance cannot refuse to pay for a surgery due to an additional cost unless the policy specifically excludes paying for organs. Who cares who pays? Free market solves it all, right?
Click to expand...
You’re the only person who has answered. It’s been answered once, only now. The other dumb ***** is too scared to answer.

We pay people for organs now? You know for an absolute fact insurance pays? You’re actually saying that you want insurance to pay.

I care about paying if it means I’m paying.

If Bob offers up his kidney to Tom I sure as hell don’t want to have to pay Bob for that.
 
#120
#120
tumscalcium said:
You’re the only person who has answered. It’s been answered once, only now. The other dumb ***** is too scared to answer.

We pay people for organs now? You know for an absolute fact insurance pays? You’re actually saying that you want insurance to pay.

I care about paying if it means I’m paying.

If Bob offers up his kidney to Tom I sure as hell don’t want to have to pay Bob for that.
Click to expand...
^— !!
 
#122
#122
LouderVol said:
I doubt 4500 over there is that cheap.

again 1400 a year for 81 million is a rate of 0.000017
our 60k a year for 330 million 0.00014

our rate is more 10x higher than theirs, 10 times. and I am betting with a more homogeneous population they have a lot more possible matches from possible donors than we do.

I don't think their model is sustainable over here. worth doing, but its not the silver bullet you seem to want it to be.
Click to expand...

Where do you get that it's 60k? The link below says 17k transplants per year, and 3k monthly added to wait lists, so that's somewhere in between 36k and 53k per year.

Fewer people would mean it's harder to find matches. We have more people, thus more potential matches.

The market is great at matching sellers with buyers. If the supply doesn't match demand, then price goes up and more donors enter the market. This very simple mechanism works in every industry across time, so why wouldn't it work here?

As I said, I have a price. Almost everybody has a price.

Organ Donation and Transplantation Statistics
 
#123
#123
tumscalcium said:
You’re the only person who has answered. It’s been answered once, only now. The other dumb ***** is too scared to answer.

We pay people for organs now? You know for an absolute fact insurance pays? You’re actually saying that you want insurance to pay.

I care about paying if it means I’m paying.

If Bob offers up his kidney to Tom I sure as hell don’t want to have to pay Bob for that.
Click to expand...

Unless there is an exclusion, the insurance company must pay. You have a contract with them.

I imagine that you view would change considerably were you to need a transplant and had no familial matches (or your family was just rooting for your early demise ;))

Why should an entire industry be built upon a system which prohibits them from paying for their own inventory? It goes against everything you say you stand for.
 
#125
#125
ClearwaterVol said:
Unless there is an exclusion, the insurance company must pay. You have a contract with them.

I imagine that you view would change considerably were you to need a transplant and had no familial matches (or your family was just rooting for your early demise ;))

Why should an entire industry be built upon a system which prohibits them from paying for their own inventory? It goes against everything you say you stand for.
Click to expand...
So insurance companies have to pay people to donate their organs right now?

I don’t expect Bob to pay me.

What do I say I stand for?
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top