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 : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: I Am John Galt who wrote (420)	7/2/1998 10:18:00 AM
From: freeus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13060

re Drugs. A lot of good would be achieved by decriminalizing drugs. The excitement of taking something "forbidden" would be withdrawn.' The cost of drugs would be minimal, thus ending the Black Market with its attendant dealers to whoever (including children). The people who want to use drugs could afford them within their own budget. The asset forfeiture and break-down doors terrors of our govt would be repealed. The prisons would be 2/3 emptied, allowing violent (murder, rape,(not statuatory) and assault criminals to be locked up. Cost to society would dramatically decline: drug war costs us $16 billion at least a year. People would again be (at least in this area) free to live their own way. Freeus The bottom line is: do you want to live under a terrorist statist government that has power over your choices of how to live your life?

To: I Am John Galt who wrote (420)	7/2/1998 10:25:00 AM
From: MeDroogies	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13060

The essence of all government power is coercion. Coercion CAN have some positive side effects. By and large, coercion is usually used for improper and ineffective things. Coercion is misused and abused. The essential problem with coercion is that it is backed by force, and there is no real reason to force anyone to do anything. Many companies today are finding themselves energized and productive through empowerment (GE, for example), which allows employees to engage in large amounts of autonomy. The assumption being, the employee knows his job best, his boss doesn't. As a result, the management becomes a directional facility, as opposed to a coercive one (as it is in more centralized businesses and organizations). The essential problem with comment that coercion is useful in attaining common goals is - how do you define a common goal, and who is to say that it can't be achieved via private means? Underwriters Lab has provided outstanding oversight of electrical appliances throughout the years, without government intervention. NAUI and PADI have provided extraordinary training for scuba, privately, and also provide oversight, to some degree, for dive operations. DAN is a private organization that helps provide data to keep divers informed of new techniques and safety procedures and safety data. Both of these are "common" good items that one could argue would be "better" performed by the government. A second look would lead you to believe otherwise. NOAA is the one of the biggest examples of a "common good" mission gone bad. Ask anyone involved in a dive on the USS Monitor about the NOAA missteps and overspending on the Monitor site, and you will be rolling on the floor laughing. Hundreds of thousands of TAXPAYER dollars and several weeks spent on a robot retrieval of a lamp...when a $20 lift bag would have retrieved it in less than 3 minutes - with less intrusive activity. I could obviously go on and on...but having been familiar with this issue intimately, it sprang to mind first.