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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (9803)	3/26/2001 8:43:55 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Until we get there, or somewhere similar, we're stuck with societal costs of individal decisions. And if society is paying the bill, society has a right, IMO, to regulate the risks people take. If society has no right to tell the individual that he must wear a helmet then it does not gain such a right by paying for any damage. In this case by society you are talking about the government. I don't see the government as having a privileged moral position. If it is wrong (in principle not just wrong because it goes to far in this case) for me to lock you in a padded room so that you wont take risks with your life then it wrong for government to control us to reduce the risks we take with ourselves as well. Of course you may disagree and think that the government does have a privileged moral position. Also while I am certain about the general principle there can be practical consequences of applying a general principle in a specific situation that are bad enough to cause me to support actions that do not comply with my principles. (For example I support the idea of taxes even if I want them lower). Tim