This argument proves too much. A lot of people die of HIV, and more money would be spent curing it if more people had it. Therefore, it’s a moral imperative to infect as many people with HIV as possible.
I think this is similar to the broken window economic argument because you’re saying we should make something worse to redirect resources, but you’re ignoring the value of the resources’ current use. Ignoring the fact that there’s already enough people dying of kidney disease to create a huge market, the money society doesn’t spend on kidney disease is being used for other things that people value more. Creating an emergency to force those resources to be used differently is bad.
(I still upvoted this post for the section on risks)
This argument proves too much. A lot of people die of HIV, and more money would be spent curing it if more people had it. Therefore, it’s a moral imperative to infect as many people with HIV as possible.
I think this is similar to the broken window economic argument because you’re saying we should make something worse to redirect resources, but you’re ignoring the value of the resources’ current use. Ignoring the fact that there’s already enough people dying of kidney disease to create a huge market, the money society doesn’t spend on kidney disease is being used for other things that people value more. Creating an emergency to force those resources to be used differently is bad.
(I still upvoted this post for the section on risks)