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: Neocon who wrote (2813)	5/12/1999 2:59:00 PM
From: Richard Babusek	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13056

There is some truth to what you say, but to go from the general to the specific in a prescriptive way I can't accept. A society has tools beyond the laws and policies of the federal government to declare what it thinks is important, what it will tolerate, and what it will not. I believe there was an erroneous correlation (in a recent post) between chaos and anarchy. The simple individual's life is pretty chaotic, and the complexity grows geometrically as you add family, friends, etc. To predict the unintended consequences of regulations Is largely beyond our capability. This is not intended to promote anarchy, but caution. The stigma of unwed motherhood is gone. Many consider this a good thing. There was a time when we were expected to control our sexual behavior, even more so as children. Because a few wouldn't is hardly a reason to forfeit the ideal, and turn unwed mothers into heroines, holding them up to their classmates as pillars of nobility to protect their self esteem. The self esteem proponents are dealing in a counterfeit cause. Our society regularly ignores costs of giving accolades, apartments, money and other “esteem building” benefits to children having children. This seems to belie the ability or willingness of the enlightened to determine the true costs of policy from on high. If there were any credible evidence that it would be possible, much less probable, that a faulty policy, regulation, or law would be corrected or eliminated based on negative results, then I would be less antagonistic to attempts to perfect society from the top. Ricardo

To: Neocon who wrote (2813)	5/26/1999 12:29:00 AM
From: MeDroogies	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13056

Criminalization imposes costs to the consumers, but also to the non-users. Who do you think pays to "fight" these so-called crimes? It is a net negative effect. Everyone loses here. The correlation between teen pregnancy and widespread birth control is indicative of only one thing: poor education. Clearly, if birth control were so widespread, then pregnancies would likely be reduced. Obviously, people have been poorly schooled in the uses of birth control. As for creating new strains of gonorrhea and syphilis, you're wrong to point to the Sexual Revolution. What is now known is that it was improper use of antibiotics that led to the resistant strains, not the amount of syphilis or gonorrhea out there. If the antibiotic cycle isn't completed properly, the likelyhood of a resistant strain developing increases exponentially. Unfortunately, this information was unavailable at the time of widespread antibiotic use. To say the Sexual Revolution caused these is to imply that widespread unsanitary conditions have created antibiotic resistant staph. Which is simply not true.