The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
It's become apparent that NYE and Shane favour all sorts of arbitrary rules governing trade in order that the trade satisfies their concepts of fairness. Because they know better than the parties to the trade what's best for them.
Are you seriously too stupid to recall what you said 20 minutes ago?
If the debt that developing countries owed to developed countries was wiped out, it would do much much more than any international organ trade. Oh, but that would hurt KH's buddies.
What is it, ****? Are you suggesting that the evil bankers be made whole or that their debts be repudiated? You can't have both.
Yeah, you're right. It did sound like I was advocating for the debts to be repudiated. I was meaning for the debts to be assumed by developed countries.
It's become apparent that NYE and Shane favour all sorts of arbitrary rules governing trade in order that the trade satisfies their concepts of fairness. Because they know better than the parties to the trade what's best for them.
Haven't I already said twice that my opinion doesn't matter, but rather the opinion of those people in developing countries matters?
Plenty of jobs face risks. Road workers risk getting hit by cars every day. Cops and soldiers risk getting shot. Third world factory workers probably have safety risks too. Why are some people allowed to decide acceptable risk in commercial transactions while others aren't? Why are the risks of organ transplants sufficiently different from other risks that we will PROHIBIT people from ever taking them?
It's not a job.
We don't allow you to sell yourself into slavery either.
In short, the rich ****er buying a kidney is purchasing years off of someone else's life.
Or the rich ****er could be buying extra years for the other person's life too, by giving him a HUGE windfall that could even lift him up from poverty and certainly save him from starvation etc.
I have not heard of widespread starvation in India lately, have you?
There seems to be some sort of agreement that this is not a commercial transaction that is acceptable to civilised people.
Articulate why you think this is unacceptable, apart from "all the other civilized people think so".
I have.
The risks to the donors, who are desperate to undergo the procedure and make the donation, are not warranted to keep your useless ass alive for five more minutes than your own body will carry you, no matter how many quatloos you have to bid.
If your useless life were worth so much, you could get the organ without purchasing it from someone so desperate for cash that they would risk death to sell it.
Oh, really? That's why there aren't people who die waiting for organ transplants?
There is always a "pressing" need for organs as long as someone needs one and can't get it because none are [legally] available.
There are solutions to organ shortages in the developed world that do not involve immoral expolitation of desperate people. Such as assumed donation rather than voluntary donation.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.
It's become apparent that NYE and Shane favour all sorts of arbitrary rules governing trade in order that the trade satisfies their concepts of fairness. Because they know better than the parties to the trade what's best for them.
Let us know how much you enjoy working for $1 an hour.
Oh wait, you imagine you will always be at the employing end of that.
****.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.
Shane, you're basically arguing for global medical rationing on a country-level basis, but with each country limited to whatever medical resources it can produce domestically.
Why?
Well, as far as organs go, I don't believe that (if a closed domestic market existed) the price for organs would ever be even close to the price for surgery. In fact, it'd probably be a mere fraction of it. So, if kidney surgery costs say $40,000 in the USA, and with a functioning domestic market for kidneys, a kidney costs $4,000, that extra cost for a kidney won't rule out very many (if anybody) from getting a kidney transplant. What it will do is encourage more people to become organ donors (imagine, when you die you can add to your estate by selling your organs. I believe many people would be all for that. It'd be like a life insurance policy you never have to pay a premium for).
Now the same principle may apply to a state like Botswana. Maybe surgery costs $3,000 there for a kidney transplant. Maybe if they were to have a functioning domestic organ market, maybe a kidney costs $300 there. Certainly it wouldn't be as expensive as it is in the USA. Unless you have an international market. Then just about nobody in Botswana would be able to afford to ever get an organ transplant.
We don't allow you to sell yourself into slavery either.
And it's possible to provide strong, specific reasons why we don't. So give reasons why no one should be allowed to sell an organ.
Stop saying "hey, we don't allow this other thing!" Explain, step by step, why ORGAN SALES specifically should be forbidden.
Not "we find them uncivilized"; that's a circular answer.
I have not heard of widespread starvation in India lately, have you?
Point out to me where you stated you only think organ sales should be forbidden in India?
I have.
The risks to the donors, who are desperate to undergo the procedure and make the donation, are not warranted to keep your useless ass alive for five more minutes than your own body will carry you, no matter how many quatloos you have to bid.
1) This has taken a truly bizarre turn; apparently, anyone in the first world that needs an organ transplant is a "useless ass", whereas the life of anyone in the third world is sacred. Huh?
2) Why do you think you get to decide what risks this other person should get to take?
If your useless life were worth so much, you could get the organ without purchasing it from someone so desperate for cash that they would risk death to sell it.
Really? No one dies because there isn't an available organ transplant anymore? If I need an organ sufficiently much, then life will just hand one to me based on my dire need?
There are solutions to organ shortages in the developed world that do not involve immoral expolitation of desperate people. Such as assumed donation rather than voluntary donation.
Okay, so if we go with that, no one will die because they need an organ transplant and none are available?
Well, as far as organs go, I don't believe that (if a closed domestic market existed) the price for organs would ever be even close to the price for surgery. In fact, it'd probably be a mere fraction of it. So, if kidney surgery costs say $40,000 in the USA, and with a functioning domestic market for kidneys, a kidney costs $4,000, that extra cost for a kidney won't rule out very many (if anybody) from getting a kidney transplant. What it will do is encourage more people to become organ donors (imagine, when you die you can add to your estate by selling your organs. I believe many people would be all for that. It'd be like a life insurance policy you never have to pay a premium for).
Now the same principle may apply to a state like Botswana. Maybe surgery costs $3,000 there for a kidney transplant. Maybe if they were to have a functioning domestic organ market, maybe a kidney costs $300 there. Certainly it wouldn't be as expensive as it is in the USA. Unless you have an international market. Then just about nobody in Botswana would be able to afford to ever get an organ transplant.
Given that Botswana is actually poorer than USA, rather than just a country where they always leave off one of the zeros, don't you think maybe surgery would be an even greater proportional cost of the procedure? (Supply of organs is the same, supply of highly trained physicians is not.) Therefore, far fewer people will be able to pay for transplants in the first place? So, why not allow Botswana to sell its excess organs to USA? In fact, the cash received could fund additional surgeries - resulting in more organ transplants in both countries.
You said "The point of having more money is that it lets you get more stuff." and you asked if I thought we should force doctors from Canada to go to work in Botswana, which really has no relevence to the question of an international organ market. I'm not saying Canadian organs should be shipped to Botswana to make up for some medical infrastructure differential. I'm just saying I don't think Botswanan organs should be shipped to Canada.
Why should the organ availability in a given country be restricted to those provided by its citizens? Why is that the correct ration?
Your suggested policy on organs isn't analogous to "not specifically recruiting doctors from Zimbabwe", it's equivalent to "not letting doctors from Zimbabwe emigrate to Canada in the first place, so that we don't deprive the Zimbabwean people".
Let us know how much you enjoy working for $1 an hour.
Oh wait, you imagine you will always be at the employing end of that.
****.
Why would I work for 1$ an hour? I'm lucky enough to have been born one of the smartest people you'll ever meet, in a country where almost everybody gets a shot at education. Right now I hold something like 2-5 million in human capital at a guess. Working at a job worth 1$ an hour would be a terrible waste of resources.
On the other hand, there are lots of people in this world whose labour is only worth 1$ an hour to other people. This isn't because they're bad, or lazy, or necessarily even stupid. They were born poor, they weren't given a shot at accumulating human capital, they speak the wrong language yadda yadda yadda. Telling some industrialist that he has to pay 5$ an hour to his Malaysian workers whose marginal product is only 1$ an hour doesn't mean that all those workers will become 5 times richer; it means that they'll all be out of a job and my sneakers will cost more because they're going to move the factory to Regina and pay Shane 20$ an hour to turn out 10X as many sneakers per hour as the Malaysians could. The Malaysians will go back to dirt farming and everybody will be worse off (with the possible but not necessary exception of Shane).
Why would I work for 1$ an hour? I'm lucky enough to have been born one of the smartest people you'll ever meet, in a country where almost everybody gets a shot at education. Right now I hold something like 2-5 million in human capital at a guess. Working at a job worth 1$ an hour would be a terrible waste of resources.
On the other hand, there are lots of people in this world whose labour is only worth 1$ an hour to other people. This isn't because they're bad, or lazy, or necessarily even stupid. They were born poor, they weren't given a shot at accumulating human capital, they speak the wrong language yadda yadda yadda. Telling some industrialist that he has to pay 5$ an hour to his Malaysian workers whose marginal product is only 1$ an hour doesn't mean that all those workers will become 5 times richer; it means that they'll all be out of a job and my sneakers will cost more because they're going to move the factory to Regina and pay Shane 20$ an hour to turn out 10X as many sneakers per hour as the Malaysians could. The Malaysians will go back to dirt farming and everybody will be worse off (with the possible but not necessary exception of Shane).
Tweet
Comment