An Economic Riddle: Who has Money but One Kidney

The objective of legalization is not to turn kidney selling into a commercial enterprise, but rather, to ensure that individuals who choose to donate their own kidneys have the right to receive profit. Noting that the legalization of kidney means regulating, and should not be confused with a free or unregulated market. Instead, be subject to market intervention and transparent frameworks.

Crucially, this regulation will not eliminate the existing transplant waiting list. Instead, it may expedite the list, as individuals who opt to buy a kidney transplant will be removed from it--- the waitlist will gradually shorten and eventually come to an end. 

(Exploitation, benefit, and net benefit for the poor: With donor compensation of $0 and $75,000, An empirical analysis Philip J. Held)

The effectiveness of the regulation is demonstrated in the graph above by Philip J. Held from Stanford, analyzing Americans' responsiveness to government financial incentives for kidney donors from 2018 to 2019. The 1st situation represents the current U.S. state, where financial compensation is illegal. The 2nd situation shows the government offering $75,000 to living kidney donors based on willingness to pay. The 3rd situation is a sensitivity analysis, assessing the 2nd Situation's findings of $75,000 with pessimistic assumptions concerning the well-being of lower-income individuals. 

In conclusion, the 2nd Situation has illustrated a greater benefit and net benefit of $12.4 Billion to the Gross Domestic Product. Hence, aside from economic welfare, economic growth eventually follows its impact. 

Ultimately, legalizing kidney sales can drive economic development by easing household medical expenses, minimizing financial burdens, raising disposable income, and stimulating healthcare industry growth. To a certain degree, the Human Poverty Index, and Human Development Index will improve through overall higher standards of living. Additionally, with no effect on one-kidney donors' lifespans, and by increasing kidney recipients' life expectancy up to 30 years may enhance overall life expectancy rates (Piedmont, 2018).

Yet other economists worry about fairness. In a market-based system, access to goods and services is influenced by income disparities. When kidney demand surpasses supply, prices will continue to inflate, making them unaffordable and discriminatory to those with lower incomes.

No doubt that issuing the legalization will be a complex and costly government intervention. With price control, implementing price ceilings in a legalized kidney market can be difficult to strike a balance between imposed price limits, with how much suppliers are willing to offer, and buyers are willing to pay. Altogether, market efficiency would be challenged due to price inefficiencies, and biased to income demographics.  

The Answer to the Riddle

The overall obstacle of humans' response towards the incentive to convince people that kidney selling should not be an easy way of making money---nor a jump-to-conclusion when money is needed. Theoretically, simply because a kidney's value equals a Lamborghini, doesn't make it rational for someone to trade their kidney for a car.

When the Economy said money is the biggest form of incentive--- is it possible that the nature of organ donation shifts from pure altruism to a mixed-motive--- or simply for the sake of money?