[epmaybe]

It's also condemned by the World Health Organization unless totally altruistic because organ trafficking and human trafficking are intertwined with the politics of organ transplantation.

Living donor programs already exist in many states and hospitals - If you want to help reduce medicare spending by donating your organs, go for it! But don't expect to get paid for it any time soon.

[JoeAltmaier]

It has negative externalities as well. The poor cannot afford to donate kidneys - the time out of work, the lifetime extra health maintenance and checkups. So it becomes a rich person's prerogative.

And it remove a source of cash from an entire population, with all that entails.

[epmaybe]

I'm not surprised - you probably didn't even look into the living donor programs available in the US.

Many hospitals will cover most if not all of these costs, including your wages, health maintenance, checkups, etc. If the hospital near you won't cover these things, the National Living Donor Assistance Program will help.

> And it remove a source of cash from an entire population, with all that entails

There's something like 100,000 people on the kidney donor list right now (UNOS). Maybe 20,000 of these get a kidney donation per year. It's not really that much of lost productivity, and as we have already explained these costs are usually covered by programs for living donors.

You're acting like this isn't a solved problem, when it is except that people are attached to their own body parts. I for one don't really want to give my kidney away unless I'm already dead. Maybe we should argue for opt-out deceased organ donation programs nationally, instead of this asinine idea that we should allow poor people to sell their kidneys.

[JoeAltmaier]

That 'asinine' comment seemed out of place. 80,000 people die, and the problems with 'poor people having a source of cash' is the bigger issue? I honestly don't understand the emotion surrounding this.

I can sell my life (ok, 8 hours of every day) and no problem.