| | Ted,
Per your post #10 - neat idea. Wonder if it'd work. We sort of have the reverse now where the president holds the veto power. That hasn't staved off much.
Steve,
Sure, clerks, colleges, and headhunters do sell licenses, diplomas, and jobs, respectively. But they don't have a right to use or possess what they are selling. We, who do have the right to possess or use those goods, may not sell them. (And this includes diplomas and licenses, which are not just pieces of paper.)
I agree that this leaves us with a smaller bundle of ownership rights, but precluding the sale of these goods makes sense. These goods are special. Their value is derived from the nature of their specific recipient/buyer. For instance, my diploma's value is derived from my education; my license, from my particular ability or relationship; my job, from my qualifications. Anyone who uses my diploma, license, or job committing fraud. Accordingly, if I attempt to sell these goods, I'm committing solicitation of and possible conspiracy to fraud.
Other goods, of course, don't work this way. Their value doesn't depend at all on the nature of a specific recipient/buyer. I daresay human body parts fall into this category. E.g., my kidney doesn't derive its value from my particular nature. So to this end, my comparison between diplomas and body parts is not useful.
*
I'm still trying to get a definitive answer here, but this link suggests that the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 did not ban the sale of human hair, sperm, or blood. According to the article, ". . .Congress was exceptionally concerned about the rise of an organ market and mindful of the potential inequities that could arise if destitute donors were coerced into selling their organs."
Jordan
|
|
