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 : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (3994)	1/22/2003 5:21:05 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7720

"Who is offended if I want somebody who isn't licensed as a barber to cut my hair for me? And on and on. In all of your examples, I can imagine someone who felt an offense and so pushed for the law or ordinance and since society took their point of view the law was passed. In the case of the licenced barber, it would be barbers who spent money and time to go for training to aquire their skill and now have to make a business of their craft. They have to factor in there investments to make a living. They might be offended that some one can set up shop with no expense and the customer doesn't know they have never practiced. One barber pole looks like all the rest. So, when the customer walks out of the unlicenced barbars store looking like one of your hay bales he decides, "forget this, I'll cut my own dang hair from now on." So the licenced barbar is offended that 1) somebody can under cut them in price and there is no way to demonstrate that there is a difference in the service up front and 2) The industry loses business because of the practices of unlicenced barbars. And on and on...(I have been cutting my own hair for 40 years btw). You discount the concerns of your fellow human beings when you find it convenient. If no one had a problem with your hay bale buildings there would be no ordinance against it. Your logic is flawed. My statements about how laws are designed to deal with human offense is sound. "I agree with you that our major substantive laws--against murder, theft, rape, etc.--are of that kind. But we have gone far, far, far beyond that. In, I believe, error, but who in the government cares what I think?" I don't think the legal system is perfect or that there is not corruption with in. That is a separate issue.