Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Father Terrence who wrote (44787)	7/10/1999 10:59:00 PM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Well, that is all interesting, Terrence. I don't agree with you about gambling--since we have state lotteries (definitely a regressive tax against the poor), and increased gambling in many states, and on the Internet, the number of American who are addicted to it and whose lives are ruined by it is increasing dramatically because of sheer availability. I think this is a valid area for the government to regulate. Why should we create larger societal problems by legalizing gambling? With alcohol, drugs, and frequent and compulsive sex pairings, I don't think these things should be illegal, but would spend vast sums for therapy on demand and early childhood identification of emotional problems, so that the incidence of abuse in all these areas would drop dramatically. We can see from the history of regulation of alcohol and drugs, that prohibition simply creates a vast criminal supply structure, which obviously is not the answer. I also think that children should be removed from abusive and neglectful homes far earlier than they tend to be. If you study psychological case histories of prostitutes, you will notice over and over again that they were abused and neglected children. I would like to make it so that girls were not so damaged that prostitution made sense as a career choice. In San Francisco, we have an organization called Coyote which helps prostitutes develop other careers and reclaim their lives, which I think is a very good idea. However, that is not particularly the question I was asking, which was specific to the question of corporate morality. In other words, is a large financial penalty justified when a company like GM callously disregards human pain and suffering and chooses not to fix a known defect?