This blog contains posts and comments written by students in Dr. Tufte's economics classes at Southern Utah University.
9/28/2005
Free Abortions For Hurricane Evacuees
In Little Rock Ark. a doctor has offered to perform free abortions for hurricane evacuees. The doctor says it may be to dangerous if they wait until they can return home. Dr. Jerry Edwards says he has already performed six free abortions. I don't agree with abortion and I don't agree with this article. I think if anything, after being in the hurricane, these women should realize that life is so much more important, and that babies have a right to be born. If you don't want them at least have them and give them up for adoption. I think this doctor is just adding to the trauma that has already taken place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
-1 on Logan's comment for a spelling error.
-1 on Destiny's comment for inventing a new word.
-1 on Sara's comment for poor grammar.
-1 on Elijah's comment for not adding anything to the discussion (sorry you arrived late for it though).
What does this have to do with ManEc?
Abortion aside, what is interesting about the post and comments is that most of you have found a service whose price you don't think should change in response to a disaster.
So, let me see if I get this right. Food and shelter should be cheaper after a disaster (that's why we give this stuff away). Does this mean that their prices should be raised when there is no disaster? Our complaints about price gouging on gas and contracting services should follow similar logic.
But, in this case some of you are making a judgement that abortion should not be cheaper after a disaster. Then, should it be more expensive? If yes, does that mean it should go on sale when there is no disaster? Alternatively, if the price of an abortion should not be lowered in Little Rock because of Katrina, should it be lowered in Cedar City because Katrina didn't hit here? I'm sure that some of you have not thought this is through, but this is what you're saying, isn't it?
My point here is that things start to get very messy when you bring moral distinctions to pricing issues.
Dr. Tufte made a point about prices in disasters. Should something be cheaper just because the consumer has less money?
I don't think there's anything wrong with that, as long as it isn't being created artificially.
Post a Comment