CMV: Blackwater evacuating people from Afghanistan for $6,500 a head is a good thing.

[u/MJtheRealKing]

There are a lot of people in an uproar because Blackwater is evacuating Afghan refugees who are willing and able to pay $6,500. I understand that this seems like evil profiteering by Blackwater, and maybe it is, but the truth is the world is a better place for them doing this. They are not going to do it for free, and this way more people who want to leave, can. If Blackwater did not evacuate these people, some of them will end up stuck and some of them will even end up on free flights, taking the seat of others. Who is worse off for Blackwater doing this? The constraint on evacuations is a lack of planes, not a lack of runway time (to be clear, some flights did have to divert, but it was because no one could land because refugees had taken over the runways). Blackwater is solving that problem, albeit it a profit.

EDIT: Several commenters have made great points that ultimately boil down to how one defines "good," which is a very nebulous concept. So let me briefly define good as I used it in my title: Good is the absence of bad. We should stop people from doing bad things. We should not stop Blackwater from evacuating people for a price, so long as the constraint on evacuations is planes and not runway time. Blackwater is doing a good thing under my (admittedly binary) definition of good and bad.

Second EDIT: Lots of people trying to convince me that Blackwater is evil. I agree (and always did). That does not mean what they are doing is evil. Lots of people focusing on the idea that Blackwater could do it for free, which, of course would be "more good" if one departs from my clunky, binary definition of good and bad. But even then, what they are doing is "more good" than doing nothing, even if their reasons for doing so are utterly self-serving. Lots of people calling me names, accusing me of moving the goal posts in my first edit, or arguing that because the primary beneficiaries of the policy are wealth, the policy is evil even though it does not harm anyone. I did not find any of this convincing. A few people made the argument that evacuating Afghanis is not inherently a good thing, and hence attacked the basic premise of my argument. After the 12 US deaths today, these were by far the most compelling arguments...

[u/hotsauce7890]

They wouldn’t be able to save anyone if they did it for free.