Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-02-2013, 05:10 AM
Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(26-02-2013 09:36 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  "Name one example of a country where the capitalists haven't interfered with government."

Strawman much? No one has argued that capitalists haven't leveraged the guns of the state in their favor. You vilify the capitalists for bribing the people who call themselves government but I wonder, why do you give the latter a free pass? Have they not betrayed you more than the capitalist? After all, the capitalist hasn't stood in front of a podium, begging for your vote and promising your protection in return.

So I'll pass the question right back to you, exactly as you have worded it. And then, I want you to tell me how you can justify handing over your life to sociopaths in suits.

I am against the apparatus that the capitalist use (known as the state) to wield their power and I am against the capitalists. You wrongly assumed I was pro-capitalist state.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2013, 05:17 AM
Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(26-02-2013 08:11 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(26-02-2013 08:00 PM)I and I Wrote:  You act as if capitalists want nothing to do with government when history shows otherwise. Capitalists always have interfered in government policies and need to do so to maintain power. Name one example of a country where the capitalists haven't interfered with government.
I made no such claim, however you did make yours and now that you've been called out you are desperately trying to deflect. Back your shit up or concede and shut up.

No fucktard, you see, you made the stupid and laughably retarded assumption that there ever was a " free" market that ever existed. Only stupid people believe that once upon a time in magic land there was a market that was free and not corrupted by the governmental system.

I will leave this forum forever if you name ONE FUCKING EXAMPLE of any instance in history where the market was not involved with government in modern history.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2013, 05:51 AM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(26-02-2013 10:50 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  "Hmmm, pollution, dangerous products, unsafe workplaces, slave wages just for starters,"

The state doesn't protect people from those things. It proscribes behavior and then issues fines after the fact. I don't need the state to write some words on paper in order that I'm able to sue a company that does me harm. What I do need is a system of law courts that isn't rigged in favor of the attorneys who run it and that is affordable for me to access.

Not to mention, the state is the largest single polluter. Who protects us from its pollution? In the case of dangerous products, Underwriters Laboratories protects more people from them than any other organization. It does so by inspecting and approving them before they go to retail. It's voluntary and it's private. The state doesn't protect people from slave labor, it enforces a minimum wage that ensures the poor won't be able to find employment.

There you go with your silly 'words on paper' argument.

Of course the laws prevent further wrongdoing. The evidence is all around you.

UL (or other) certification is not, in any real sense, voluntary. Try getting insurance or an import/export license without safety certification.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2013, 05:53 AM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(27-02-2013 05:17 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(26-02-2013 08:11 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I made no such claim, however you did make yours and now that you've been called out you are desperately trying to deflect. Back your shit up or concede and shut up.

No fucktard, you see, you made the stupid and laughably retarded assumption that there ever was a " free" market that ever existed. Only stupid people believe that once upon a time in magic land there was a market that was free and not corrupted by the governmental system.

I will leave this forum forever if you name ONE FUCKING EXAMPLE of any instance in history where the market was not involved with government in modern history.

internet porn.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2013, 07:38 AM
Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(27-02-2013 05:53 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(27-02-2013 05:17 AM)I and I Wrote:  No fucktard, you see, you made the stupid and laughably retarded assumption that there ever was a " free" market that ever existed. Only stupid people believe that once upon a time in magic land there was a market that was free and not corrupted by the governmental system.

I will leave this forum forever if you name ONE FUCKING EXAMPLE of any instance in history where the market was not involved with government in modern history.

internet porn.

Porn industries have had representatives sent to lobby government. The fact is there never has been a government in modern times that wasn't in control of or influenced by the market. The idea that there ever was a time when they were 2 distinct entities is not true. The state is the apparatus which capitalists use to wield power.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2013, 07:54 AM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(27-02-2013 07:38 AM)I and I Wrote:  Porn industries have had representatives sent to lobby government.
Got any examples? Consider

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2013, 08:11 AM
Re: RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(27-02-2013 07:54 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(27-02-2013 07:38 AM)I and I Wrote:  Porn industries have had representatives sent to lobby government.
Got any examples? Consider

James Dean to argue about the condom law L.A. Passed

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2013, 08:11 AM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(27-02-2013 07:38 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(27-02-2013 05:53 AM)Chas Wrote:  internet porn.

Porn industries have had representatives sent to lobby government. The fact is there never has been a government in modern times that wasn't in control of or influenced by the market. The idea that there ever was a time when they were 2 distinct entities is not true. The state is the apparatus which capitalists use to wield power.


Like in North Korea? Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
27-02-2013, 09:46 AM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
"You wrongly assumed I was pro-capitalist state."

Fair enough. So you're an anarcho-syndicalist?

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-02-2013, 10:00 AM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
"There you go with your silly 'words on paper' argument."

There's nothing silly about shedding euphemisms.

"Of course the laws prevent further wrongdoing. The evidence is all around you."

I see the evidence around me. There is wrongdoing in the form of dangerous, unproven drugs gaining FDA approval, recalls on products that have caused harm, environmental damage caused by manufacturing plants, etc. When the state passes laws against the latter, manufacturers simply do an economic analysis and often come to the conclusion that dumping wasted is less expensive than proper disposal, because the fines can be included in the cost of doing business... if they are in fact caught. If they had something real to lose, such as insurance coverage, that economic analysis would always prove proper disposal to be the lesser cost.

"UL (or other) certification is not, in any real sense, voluntary. Try
getting insurance or an import/export license without safety
certification."


You're conflating free market, voluntary agreements with compulsory, government mandates. There is nothing involuntary about an insurer refusing to insure a client unless certain provisions are met. Regarding imports and exports, the state may require UL listing for export licensing but that doesn't stop domestic sale of a product that isn't UL listed. Moreover, there are a lot of instances wherein dangerous, unlisted products have passed customs and been sold.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: