Cross your fingers to be born rich!

I'm always confused. The NWO conspiracy people say that gene editing will be prohibitively expensive (like owning a yacht is), but the real life examples I see don't seem that way. What are some good examples of services that could be done cheaply but are intentionally made expensive for the sake of exclusion?

> but the real life examples I see don't seem that way.

In what situation would removing an egg, fertilizing it, altering its genetic sequence, and them implanting the embryo into a person be consider cheap?

Looks like IVF costs around $12,000 today. Considering that this is for your own child, I bet it would be one of the least expensive parts of raising them. I also expect it would become very cheap after it went mainstream.

> The Human Genome Project was the international research effort to determine the DNA sequence of the entire human genome. It took 13 years and was published in 2003, with an estimated cost of over $300 million. Today, a whole human genome can be sequenced in one day for under $1000.

https://frontlinegenomics.com/a-history-of-sequencing/

$12,000 is more than the average yearly income for a person on this planet. The USA has only 300 million or so people in it. What are the chances you are born in a place where $12,000 is considered 'the least expensive parts of raising a child'?

Would you have made the same argument for mobile phones back when they costed $12,000? I'm assuming that many people will want to use this technology.

A mobile phone can be mass produced based on one design. This is not the case with removing eggs and doing custom gene work on them, incubating them, and implanting them in a person. You are making an invalid comparison. There are no 'economies of scale' with individual procedures.

It doesn't seem like you're addressing the HGP example, which at the time, would have been an "individual procedure" as well.

Many species have already slid to the bottom of that slope. The phenomenon is called Fisherian Runaway, and it's not pretty.

> and it's not pretty.

It feels somewhat ironic that when I looked up "Fisherian Runaway" the first thing I saw was an image of a peacock.

Evolution by "persistent, directional female choice" seems like exactly what our species needs to unfuck itself.