[samatman]

That’s the thing: it isn’t.

The amount of blood which could be donated is finite, yes. But it is also far, far greater than the amount which is donated.

Also, it is possible, if unproven, that the benefit to seniors is great, while it is known that the cost in health of donating blood is minimal, and may be beneficial. That, too, would be positive sum.

You want to call it creepy and vampiric? I admit, that’s how it strikes me as well.

But you didn’t say that, you said it was zero-sum. Not so.

[rscho]

And I assume that all the problems stemming from the increasing life expectancy are also positive sum? And planning to do so based upon no established scientific grounds by making the younger population contribute by submitting to a non-zero risk procedure.

You can look at it every way you want, maintaining the elderly population is certainly not a logically positive thing in a ressource-constrained environment. And by ressource, I don't mean blood. That we have morals (which is good) does not make it good from a general logical point of view disregarding social ties.

[ericd]

What’s wrong with keeping old people healthier? We already spend a huge amount of resources on it by way of the medical system, by the way.

Or are you just saying that there are too many people, and think we should have fewer?