Liberal Media Greater threat than terrorism

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Post by GIThruster »

MSimon wrote:On the right side of the aisle I see the right being able to do excellent economic analysis of almost any economic situation EXCEPT illegal drugs.
That's because we don't consider the drug legalization issue a primarily economic issue. Obviously, legalizing drugs has all the economic benefits you point out. These points are not in contention. The points of contention are the social consequences of having such a vast number of people walking around severely impaired, having them impaired with true psychotropics, fantastically addictive drugs, and drugs that cause heart failure, etc.

For instance, if you use hallucinogens like pot, the odds of having a psychotic break with reality increase 5,000%. Now you can argue that most people use pot and don't suffer this sort of psychosis, but that doesn't justify producing psychotics in vastly increased numbers.

There is plenty of history to look at as to why things like cocaine are not legal. They were legal and that didn't work out.

So if you want to understand the arguments that obtain against legalization of drugs, you need to look places other than economics. I don't think any of us opposed to drug legalization think there's an economic argument for our position.
Last edited by GIThruster on Sat Jul 10, 2010 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

That's because we don't consider the drug legalization issue a primarily economic issue.
Well that is comforting. No need to apply economic analysis to proposed policies because - wait for it: it is not an economic issue.

The harder the war is fought the stronger your enemy becomes. Cartel profits almost exactly mirror the amounts spent on enforcement. And yet it is not an economic issue.

At least $50 bn a year spent with hardly any effect. Pot is easier for kids to get than beer. And yet. It is not an economic issue.

The Taliban in Afghanistan makes good money to support their fight against Americans from opium. But it is not an economic issue.

And since it is not an economic issue there is no limit on the money that should be wasted.

Are you a progressive?

I think it is time for another musical interlude:

The Outlaws

Like it or not we have a strong outlaw culture in America. The traditional way we handle bad law is to defy it. On the sly as much as possible. Except in the Culture where the outlaws have always been in part heroes and always prominent.

I love the American spirit of defiance.

In fact even the Constitution has a soft spot for smugglers:

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/200 ... dment.html
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Post by GIThruster »

MSimon wrote:
Are you a progressive?
No. I'm a Reagan Conservative, who has had lots of first-hand experience with people whose lives were ruined by psychotropics. Walk the right streets in any city and meet the homeless folks and you'll just begin to grapple with the real issue. The real issue is not economic. It is social. That doesn't mean I agree with the idea of social engineering. it just means there are some exceptions to the rule that government ought not dabble, because some issues REQUIRE restraint. Same goes for prostitution for more complex reasons, but again, the issue is not primarily economic.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

No. I'm a Reagan Conservative, who has had lots of first-hand experience with people whose lives were ruined by psychotropics
Taking drugs is a choice. My brother was killed in a drug war crossfire. He had no choice.

So you are willing to kill 2,000 innocent people a year to prevent people from making bad choices? How Christian of you.

Are you a Nanny Stater?

But you might like to read what Milton Friedman has to say about such "morality". He also touches on economic issues.

The Drug War as a Socialist Enterprise by Milton Friedman

Conservatives are just as socialist as the liberals. Just about different things. Call it a division of labor.

Once upon a time conservatives (before they got progressive) championed smaller government in every area. You can read about it here:

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... ensus.html

We have two progressive parties in America. The right wing progressives and the left wing progressives.

The right wants to use the fasces for "moral" purposes. The left wants to use the fasces for "economic" purposes.

The people who call themselves conservatives today have bought into half the Progressive Agenda (cira 1900). And the people who call themselves liberals have bought the other half. So little by little we are getting the whole thing.

You would almost think that no one in America is interested in history any more.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Milton Friedman:

* I want people to take thought about their condition and to recognize that the maintenance of a free society is a very difficult and complicated thing and it requires a self-denying ordinance of the most extreme kind. It requires a willingness to put up with temporary evils on the basis of the subtle and sophisticated understanding that if you step in to do something about them you not only may make them worse, you will spread your tentacles and get bad results elsewhere.

o Interview with Richard Heffner on The Open Mind (7 December 1975)
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Friedman again:

Your mistake is failing to recognize that the very measures you favor are a major source of the evils you deplore.

http://www.druglibrary.org/special/frie ... ennett.htm
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

The Child who's shot in a slum in a pass-by-shooting, in a random shooting, is an innocent victim in every respect of the term. The person who decides to take drugs for himself is not an innocent victim. He has chosen himself to be a victim. And I must say I have very much less sympathy for him. I do not think it is moral to impose such heavy costs on other people to protect people from their own choices. - Milton Friedman
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/friedm1.htm

and from the same interview:
The case for prohibiting drugs is exactly as strong and as weak as the case for prohibiting people from overeating. We all know that overeating causes more deaths than drugs do. If it's in principle OK for the government to say you must not consume drugs because they'll do you harm, why isn't it all right to say you must not eat too much because you'll do harm? Why isn't it all right to say you must not try to go in for skydiving because you're likely to die? Why isn't it all right to say, "Oh, skiing, that's no good, that's a very dangerous sport, you'll hurt yourself"? Where do you draw the line?
I can answer that question: total control followed by total collapse.
Friedman: It does harm a great many other people, but primarily because it's prohibited. There are an enormous number of innocent victims now. You've got the people whose purses are stolen, who are bashed over the head by people trying to get enough money for their next fix. You've got the people killed in the random drug wars. You've got the corruption of the legal establishment. You've got the innocent victims who are taxpayers who have to pay for more and more prisons, and more and more prisoners, and more and more police. You've got the rest of us who don't get decent law enforcement because all the law enforcement officials are busy trying to do the impossible.

Friedman: And, last, but not least, you've got the people of Colombia and Peru and so on. What business do we have destroying and leading to the killing of thousands of people in Colombia because we cannot enforce our own laws? If we could enforce our laws against drugs, there would be no market for these drugs. You wouldn't have Colombia in the state it's in.
And now it is getting up close and personal. Mexico.
"The Latin American drug cartels have stretched their tentacles much deeper into our lives than most people believe. It's possible they are calling the shots at all levels of government."
- William Colby, former CIA Director, 1995
So what makes a pile of vegetables worth its weight in gold? Prohibition. Now if you were running a cartel what would you want? Ever stricter enforcement of the prohibition laws.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Here is how the change will come:

"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." - Max Planck

The same goes for politics. Mostly. The real conservatives died off and what we are left with is Progressive Conservatives. Teddy Roosevelt's revenge.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Paige: Is it not true that the entire discussion here, the entire drug problem is an economic problem to...

Friedman: No, it's not an economic problem at all, it's a moral problem.

Paige: In what way?

Friedman: I'm an economist, but the economics problem is strictly tertiary. It's a moral problem. It's a problem of the harm which the government is doing.

I have estimated statistically that the prohibition of drugs produces, on the average, ten thousand homicides a year. It's a moral problem that the government is going around killing ten thousand people. It's a moral problem that the government is making into criminals people, who may be doing something you and I don't approve of, but who are doing something that hurts nobody else. Most of the arrests for drugs are for possession by casual users.

Now here's somebody who wants to smoke a marijuana cigarette. If he's caught, he goes to jail. Now is that moral? Is that proper? I think it's absolutely disgraceful that our government, supposed to be our government, should be in the position of converting people who are not harming others into criminals, of destroying their lives, putting them in jail. That's the issue to me. The economic issue comes in only for explaining why it has those effects. But the economic reasons are not the reasons.

Of course, we're wasting money on it. Ten, twenty, thirty billion dollars a year, but that's trivial. We're wasting that much money in many other ways, such as buying crops that ought never to be produced.

Paige: There are many who would look at the economics--how the eco- nomics of the drug business is affecting America's major inner cities, for example.

Friedman: Of course it is, and it is because it's prohibited. See, if you look at the drug war from a purely economic point of view, the role of the government is to protect the drug cartel. That's literally true.

Paige: Is it doing a good job of it?

Friedman: Excellent. What do I mean by that? In an ordinary free market--let's take potatoes, beef, anything you want--there are thousands of importers and exporters. Anybody can go into the business. But it's very hard for a small person to go into the drug importing business because our interdiction efforts essentially make it enormously costly. So, the only people who can survive in that business are these large Medellin cartel kind of people who have enough money so they can have fleets of airplanes, so they can have sophisticated methods, and so on.

In addition to which, by keeping goods out and by arresting, let's say, local marijuana growers, the government keeps the price of these products high. What more could a monopolist want? He's got a government who makes it very hard for all his competitors and who keeps the price of his products high. It's absolutely heaven.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/friedm1.htm
Conservatives protecting the drug cartels? Say it isn't so.
Last edited by MSimon on Sat Jul 10, 2010 6:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Post by GIThruster »

Actually, Plank is wrong here. As Thomas Kuhn shows in great detail,

http://www.amazon.com/Structure-Scienti ... =8-1-spell

scientific revolutions occur when those holding to the old paradigm find that it has so many errors that they are finally forced to abandon it. This takes a long time but it has nothing to do with people dying off. Plank was grasping for an answer with no data--just making stuff up.

People change their minds about important stuff all the time. When their belief is one that is relatively foundational to the rest of their noetic structure, then they are greatly resistant to such change. Examples of change like this are things like religious conversion. For a scientist to admit all the troubles we have with the Standard Model, generally requires so much evidence and emotional struggle that the conversion is epistemologically identical to religious conversion, no matter the rationality of the topic.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

mvanwink5
Posts: 2155
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Post by mvanwink5 »

"people whose lives were ruined by psychotropics. Walk the right streets in any city and meet the homeless folks and you'll just begin to grapple with the real issue. "

Well, there you have it, another failed government program, failure financed by the very laws thought to solve the problem, have in fact amplified the problem and created monstrous side effects. Blindness to this reality stems from the desire to feel that "at least we tried, and can now feel good." A total blinking disaster, complete failure. Does anybody think that there will be more people taking drugs if it was made legal? What a laugh. Look at what happened when prohibition was thrown out. No rampant alcoholism. Criminals had to get honest jobs.

It is hard to think of a bigger, more costly failed progressive program.
Counting the days to commercial fusion. It is not that long now.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Post by GIThruster »

" Does anybody think that there will be more people taking drugs if it was made legal?"

Yes. This is obviously the case. Many if not most people avoid certain behaviors solely because they are illegal.

You have to really be grasping at straws to even doubt the above, let alone pretend the answer is otherwise. I meet people all the time who have never used drugs and almost none of these people would exist if the drugs were legal. What a dopey question!
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

mvanwink5
Posts: 2155
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Post by mvanwink5 »

I am sure you must be right and the war on drugs is really working and protecting somebody.
Counting the days to commercial fusion. It is not that long now.

MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

For a scientist to admit all the troubles we have with the Standard Model, generally requires so much evidence and emotional struggle that the conversion is epistemologically identical to religious conversion,
And religious conversion is rather rare in the grand scheme of things.

It is why ending things like drug prohibition is a multi-generational affair. About 50 to 75 years.

In my research on various prohibitions - tea, coffee, tobacco, tomatoes - what I found is that it takes about 50 years from the introduction of a new drug until its acceptance. This mostly from studies of eras where the lifespan ran to about 40 to 50 years.

In the modern era I'd expect a longer time frame.

The above is an indication that Planck was more right than you give him credit for.

My strategy has been to get to the kids before their minds are fixed. A long slog. But it is beginning to bear fruit.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

mvanwink5 wrote:I am sure you must be right and the war on drugs is really working and protecting somebody.
Yes. It is working for these folks:

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... rofit.html
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

Post Reply