• jsomae
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    You’re making a slippery slope argument? I think?

    This proposal is well-researched and is attempting to make donation financially neutral, so there is no reason somebody would sell their kidney for financial gain.

    You’re just imagining a different, ghoulish system being proposed and attacking that rather than actually considering the proposal mentioned, which could save many lives and end a lot of suffering – and would not exploit the lower class to ghoulishly take their kidneys.

    • queermunist she/her
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      How is a $50,000 refundable tax credit supposed to be financially neutral? That’s very clearly a financial gain! A refundable tax credit means that the donor will receive either a credit on federal taxes for five years of $10,000 per year if they pay federal taxes, or a check from the government for $10,000 for five years if they do not pay federal taxes. That would be a life-changing amount of money for a lot of people.

      • jsomae
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Absolutely not. Ad hominem would be if I attacked the character of whatup without addressing their argument, like if I said “in your post history you advocate for genocide, so why should I listen to you?” (not that they did this ofc.)