X-Message-Number: 29637
References: <>
From: David Stodolsky <>
Subject: Re: More on marketing 
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 19:26:12 +0200

On 2 Jul 2007, at 12:37, John de Rivaz wrote:

>> What I am talking about is [a church] servicing those not yet  
>> signed-up.
>> Another
>> difference is that it is a service to individuals, while the group
>> aspect is inherent in the idea I am proposing.
>
> Most if not all "group orientated" people are content with the idea  
> of the
> group surviving, and are not concerned with individuals within it.

You are confusing two issues. I am not talking about individualism  
vs. collectivism. The point here is to benefit the individual by  
group action. This is exactly why cryonics organizations have been  
formed.


>
>> You are still thinking in individual terms. People are perfectly
>> happy to part with 1/10 of their income to churches that promise them
>> eternal life and provide a social environment that reinforces the
>> approach.
>
> Really? Why is their such an "industry" of accountants and lawyers  
> around
> avoiding taxes legally?

A lot of the people who avoid taxes legally do so by making  
contributions to charitable (church) organizations.


>
>> There has to be a enough support to get a group going and self-
>> financing. Once there is a model that works, it can be duplicated
>> indefinitely.
>
> Clearly this has not happened for cryonics.

And it will not, until a full service solution is offered.


>
> Yes, the economic advantages of offering cryopreservation for  
> elderly or
> sick people with no chance of recovery and a poor quality of life  
> are clear.
> However I cannot see it being acceptable ethically, however  
> illogical this
> is.

This is precisely why large numbers of members are needed. When  
politicians see that there is a sizeable group of highly organized  
voters for the cryo option, they will allow it.


dss


David Stodolsky    Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=29637