X-Message-Number: 30688
References: <>
From: Kennita Watson <>
Subject: Re: cost as disincentive
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2008 11:10:34 -0700

On Apr 6, 2008, at 2:00 AM, CryoNet wrote:
> From: 
> DSS wrote in part:
>
>> If  the cost consideration was
>> eliminated, however, then we could  expect about a third of the
>> population to choose cryonics (over  a trip to Hawaii, as the Omni  
>> mag.
>> contest  showed).
>
> This does not square with the very low  number of recruits among the
> wealthy. After all, there are hundreds of thousands, if not  
> millions, of
> millionaires in this country.

One problem is that the statement on Badger's survey
(and thus on mine as well) is specifically "The cost
of having my body frozen is far too expensive for me.".
For one thing, something can be "far too expensive"
for you even if you can easily afford it, if you don't
think it's worth the money.

Also, just because I have a million dollars doesn't
mean I want to spend more than ten percent of them on
some charlatan's get-rich scheme (which is what many
people think of cryonics as) or hopeless dream (which
covers many of the rest).  But if it were only the
cost of a lottery ticket or dinner out, sure, a third
or so might give it a shot.

Live long and prosper,
Kennita

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30688