Blood & organ donations

Why can’t people be compensated for giving blood, or a kidney, while alive or other organs upon their death? Are these not personal property? Of course, I’ve never been asked to donate an organ, but each time the Red Cross calls me to set up a blood donation, they tell me that blood, particularly my type, is in short supply. Why is that? Some people, not me though, are old enough to remember the long gas lines during the 1970’s. Just as there was a short supply of cheap gas back then (due to price controls), there are short supplies of free blood especially during times of crisis (natural disasters, 911, etc.). Would it still be in short supply if people were compensated for it? I realize that one of the main problems would be that bad-blood people (those infected w/ HIV, AIDS, etc.) would flock to blood donation centers and lie about their condition. Unfortunately, blood can’t be tested the same day it’s withdrawn, but it's tested before it’s transfused. Here’s what I propose. When the test confirms it so, compensate the good-blood donors, and possibly penalize (fines, jail time, etc.) the bad-blood donors. I’m sure there are many healthy, good-blood people in society who would give blood if they were compensated for it. The hospitals certainly charge people (or their insurance companies or Medicare) for the blood that is transfused into them, so why can’t the suppliers of it be compensated? There is a plasma center in town that compensates people. Why can't other personal property be treated likewise?

The morality of government charity

Is it moral to steal? Is it moral to take what belongs to someone else? Is it moral to take something from someone if you know they took it from someone else? The answers to these questions may seem pretty obvious, but I contend that it happens all the time in this country…and legally to boot.

No reasonable person would argue that you are not entitled to the fruits of your labor. Whether that is crops from your field, cattle from your pasture, oil from your well or money from your job, all hereafter called property, if you invested your time, energy and resources into that property, you are entitled to its increase in value. If someone were to take some or all of your property, you would expect that person to be punished and that property returned. Most people would not do it if not for conscious’ sake then for fear of punishment. However, what if someone gave you that property? Would you accept it knowing it was stolen? Again, I believe that most people would not accept stolen property either if not for conscious’ sake then for fear of punishment of being complicit in its theft.

Now, for the ultimate question…what if the government gave you that property? Would you accept it knowing it was stolen? Well, maybe that’s too harsh a word. What if I use the word taken? I believe that most people would and do accept property taken from someone else as long as the government is doing the taking and giving, hereafter called redistribution. Consider the following means by which you or others receive something for which you or others did not work.

Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
SCHIP
food stamps
WIC
farm aid
welfare
government pension
unemployment
mortgage relief
bankruptcy relief
tax rebates

If you are young, you have probably never benefited from any of these social programs. Unfortunately, though, you are probably funding these programs. If you are young and poor, you may be benefiting from them and obviously could not have funded them. If you are old, you are benefiting from them. I know what those of you in the last group are saying. "Hey, I funded these during my working years." I’ll definitely concede that point. I see the Social Security and Medicare withholdings from my paycheck. (I’m confident that they are safe and secure in the halls of the U.S. Treasury, or at least that’s what I have been told.) I plan to take a closer look at each of these programs in the future and describe how each is a system whereby property is redistributed.