Re: Summary of Arguments on Wealth Preservation Trusts

FD: Melody presented two points, so did Edward. One of each is the same, so we have 3 arguments against wealth preservation trusts:
1) The money should be used instead for research and other activities of current cryonics companies.

Who said anything about funding the current cryonics companies???


FD 2) The creation of wealth preservation trusts will stimulate further public outrage related to cryonics...
...On #2, Charles mentioned in the other thread that individual trusts have already been done in one cryonics organization (I presume CryoCare?) and there was no public outrage. The Wall Street Journal's article about wealthy cryonicists doing so produced no public outrage.

I'm not so sure the response would be outrage, I think it's more of a credibility issue. Perhaps the reason there was no outrage was due to the fact that people don't take cryonics seriously. Why would people be "outraged" about "crazy cryonicists" saving their money after they're legally dead? It's my guess there was a lot more laughter, than outrage. Hell, I'm an "insider," of sorts, in cryonics...someone who understands the medical procedures involved, and knows many of the people "working" in cryonics, and it makes me laugh. (Edit: "It" being "wealth preservation," for people who are going to undergo whole body perfusion, and other medical procedures, at the hands of unqualified personnel, who may not care about cryonics as much as they care about their income.)