Question

please check my assignment for punctuation and grammatical errors. I really struggle with that. please copy and paste it and do the corrections for me.

Currently, there are chronic shortages of transplantable human organs. Waiting lists are long, and many of those waiting die before an organ becomes available.

1. Would it be more efficient than current arrangements if we were to allow an open market for buying and selling of human organs to develop? Be sure to consider

• how scarce human organs are currently rationed among people who want them
• the current arrangements for eliciting a supply of human organs and
• the economic definition of efficiency

2. Would a market for human organs increase social welfare or reduce it?   Explain, using the course concepts of producer and consumer surplus.

If there would be an open market for selling and buying of organs to develop then it will definitely be more efficient than the current situation we have where there aren’t nearly as many organs as needed available to patients. Because there is a limited number of organs, people do not get chance of buying it, they have to wait alot for the organ. Sometimes people are on a waiting list so long that by the time they are able to get an organ its too late and they have passed.

The scarce organs currently are being given to people on a first come first serve basis. They have to be on a waiting list. Depending on how far down the list the patient is they'll most times have to wait for the another donor to donate his organ. Human organs are scarce, and many are people are in dire need for it.

Currently, there are very few people who donate today. The current arrangement of getting an organ is to wait for the donor to give an organ and then get the transplant. Some are fortunate enough to have a family member donate if they are a match.

Efficiency is defined as a peak level of performance by a person that uses the least amount of inputs to achieve the highest amount of output. In terms of only economic efficiency, Yes, it would be more efficient to have an open market. An open and free market brings the outcome towards an efficient equilibrium, where both consumer and producer surplus are maximized, and there is no deadweight loss. However legalising open markets in human organs might come with the risk of the black market of human organs becoming more prevalent. Human trafficking is already such a huge issue and an open market might lead to it becoming even bigger. If and open market for human organs were to happen there would need to be heavy regulation.

The market for human organs will surely increase the social welfare as large number of organs will be available to the people who need it in emergency and they can buy it, otherwise the situation of waiting for the organ and eventually dying was very disappointing. This will improve the producer surplus as well because the seller will be able to sell the organ at a cost which is profitable to him and also consumer surplus will be there because the price of an organ in the market will be low as compared to the hospital where there are limited organs available and you have to pay for it.

Answer 1

If there would be an open market for selling and buying of organs then it will definitely be more efficient than the current situation wherein there aren’t nearly as many organs as needed, available to the patients. Since, there is a limited number of organs, people do not get a chance of buying it, they have to wait a lot for the organ. Sometimes people are on the waiting list for so long that by the time they are able to get an organ, it's too late and they unfortunately die.

The scarce organs currently are being given to people on a first come first serve basis. They have to be on a waiting list. Depending on how far down the list the patient is they mostly have to wait for the another donor to donate his organ. Human organs are scarce, and many people are in dire need of it.

Currently, there are a very few people who donate. The current arrangement of getting an organ is to wait for the donor to give an organ and then get the transplant. Only some are fortunate enough to have a family member donate provided there's a match.

Efficiency is defined as the peak level of performance by a person that uses the least amount of inputs to achieve the highest amount of output. In terms of only economic efficiency, Yes, it would be more efficient to have an open market. An open and free market brings the outcome towards an efficient equilibrium, where both consumer and producer surplus are maximized, and there is no deadweight loss. However legalising open markets in human organs might come with the risk of the black market of human organs becoming more prevalent. Human trafficking is already such a huge issue and an open market might lead to it becoming even bigger. If any open market for human organs were to happen there would be a need of strict regulation.

The market for human organs will surely increase the social welfare as large number of organs will be available to the people who need it in emergency and can buy it, otherwise the disappointing situation of waiting till you die will continue.

Moreover, this will improve the producer surplus as well because the seller will be able to sell the organ at a cost which is profitable to him and also consumer surplus will be there because the price of an organ in the market will be low as compared to the hospital where there are limited organs available and you have to pay more for it.