Philosophy
Confused, Maybe Not clued me in to this article about an atheist run company that contracts with Christians to take care of their beloved pets after they a raptured away. When the end times comes, who will be around to take care of Fido and Fluffy? For $110, they'll take care of it.
I had a similar idea about fifteen years ago when reading an article about people who were having themselves cryogenically frozen when close to death in order to be thawed out when their diseases could be cured. My idea is that they could be cured if they had the money to afford the operation, but since everyone they know would be dead and since they would be considered legally dead and therefore could own no property, they would need a source of ready cash. They would have no cash, but they would have plenty of time before that, so why not use the power of compound interest? I would set up an account such that as soon as they are unfrozen , they would get the cash meaning that they would not only be healthy, but also rich. I would only take a small percentage of the interest as a management fee.
In both cases, neither I nor the post-apocalyptic dog walkers expect to have to pay up. We see it as free money, as taking a rube. But those buying the pet insurance or the post-mortem mutual fund see it as perfectly rational, indeed as desirable. They enter into the contract willingly, thinking it to their advantage.
The ethicist in the article sees this as identical to any sort of insurance arrangement. Those who sell auto insurance expect not to have to pay. That's how they make money. She sees nothing unusual, and therefore nothing wrong.
But surely this is a flawed analogy. In the case of health or auto insurance, they have actuaries who figure out the risk and adjust the price in their favor. It is an odds game that we play in case we hit the lotto of bad fortune. But this is a case where the insurer thinks there is absolutely no chance, that those who are their customers are just plain missing the boat. They think they are scamming them. Isn't there a problem there morally? Does the intent to scam mean that this is wrong or is it o.k. if the people you think you are scamming are hip to the scam and still do not think they are being taken? Is there something ethically problematic with this arrangement or is it like a Jewish publisher selling the New Testament, just business?
- Goldline, Glenn Beck, And The Ethics Of The Hard Sell: Autonomy Or Psychology?
The company Goldline, sponsor of Glenn Beck's program as well as a number of other conservative talk shows, has been accused of running an illegal bait and switch operation. The charge brings up a fascinating and ironic question connected with the...
- Of Magnums
If I want to legally operate a Dodge magnum, I need a license that requires a training class and an exam. The same is true in many states -- to the chagrin of gun advocates -- to legally operate a Colt magnum. When I take my Dodge magnum for a drive,...
- Disentangling Healthcare Debates
With the passing of Ted Kennedy, it seems only appropriate to discuss health care today. I watched Jim Moran's town hall meeting with Howard Dean last night and it is certainly true that not everyone on the political spectrum is interested in actual...
- A Health Care Question: Is The System Intentionally Set Up For Errors?
There are many things to complain about with our health care system, but there's one aspect that doesn't get as much discussion that I've been thinking about recently. Based on purely anecdotal evidence, it seems to me that an unexpectedly...
- Ethical Dilemma And An Errant Atm Machine
I love these ethical situations. As long as it didn't effect my account, I would keep the extra. "What should you do if a cash machine overpays?" by Tom Geoghegan March 4th, 2011 BBC News Dozens of cash machines in Sydney, Australia, were accidentally...
Philosophy
The Ethics of the Scam
Confused, Maybe Not clued me in to this article about an atheist run company that contracts with Christians to take care of their beloved pets after they a raptured away. When the end times comes, who will be around to take care of Fido and Fluffy? For $110, they'll take care of it.
I had a similar idea about fifteen years ago when reading an article about people who were having themselves cryogenically frozen when close to death in order to be thawed out when their diseases could be cured. My idea is that they could be cured if they had the money to afford the operation, but since everyone they know would be dead and since they would be considered legally dead and therefore could own no property, they would need a source of ready cash. They would have no cash, but they would have plenty of time before that, so why not use the power of compound interest? I would set up an account such that as soon as they are unfrozen , they would get the cash meaning that they would not only be healthy, but also rich. I would only take a small percentage of the interest as a management fee.
In both cases, neither I nor the post-apocalyptic dog walkers expect to have to pay up. We see it as free money, as taking a rube. But those buying the pet insurance or the post-mortem mutual fund see it as perfectly rational, indeed as desirable. They enter into the contract willingly, thinking it to their advantage.
The ethicist in the article sees this as identical to any sort of insurance arrangement. Those who sell auto insurance expect not to have to pay. That's how they make money. She sees nothing unusual, and therefore nothing wrong.
But surely this is a flawed analogy. In the case of health or auto insurance, they have actuaries who figure out the risk and adjust the price in their favor. It is an odds game that we play in case we hit the lotto of bad fortune. But this is a case where the insurer thinks there is absolutely no chance, that those who are their customers are just plain missing the boat. They think they are scamming them. Isn't there a problem there morally? Does the intent to scam mean that this is wrong or is it o.k. if the people you think you are scamming are hip to the scam and still do not think they are being taken? Is there something ethically problematic with this arrangement or is it like a Jewish publisher selling the New Testament, just business?
- Goldline, Glenn Beck, And The Ethics Of The Hard Sell: Autonomy Or Psychology?
The company Goldline, sponsor of Glenn Beck's program as well as a number of other conservative talk shows, has been accused of running an illegal bait and switch operation. The charge brings up a fascinating and ironic question connected with the...
- Of Magnums
If I want to legally operate a Dodge magnum, I need a license that requires a training class and an exam. The same is true in many states -- to the chagrin of gun advocates -- to legally operate a Colt magnum. When I take my Dodge magnum for a drive,...
- Disentangling Healthcare Debates
With the passing of Ted Kennedy, it seems only appropriate to discuss health care today. I watched Jim Moran's town hall meeting with Howard Dean last night and it is certainly true that not everyone on the political spectrum is interested in actual...
- A Health Care Question: Is The System Intentionally Set Up For Errors?
There are many things to complain about with our health care system, but there's one aspect that doesn't get as much discussion that I've been thinking about recently. Based on purely anecdotal evidence, it seems to me that an unexpectedly...
- Ethical Dilemma And An Errant Atm Machine
I love these ethical situations. As long as it didn't effect my account, I would keep the extra. "What should you do if a cash machine overpays?" by Tom Geoghegan March 4th, 2011 BBC News Dozens of cash machines in Sydney, Australia, were accidentally...