If you want to make all drugs exempt from the global convention of taxing goods, then you're dreaming an impossible dream.
The Haze in Here: A Drug War Overview
- Thread starter Tiassa
- Start date
Just because everyone does it doesn't mean it is right.
Not everyone pays taxes, but it's what our governments run on. Legality and taxation may be entirely moot on the Planet Anarchy, but here on Earth these compromises are intrinsic to all of our viable societies.
Not true at all. The free market is so much more natural, and so much more free, than a coercive state.
The free market is you, as a carpenter, trading a table you've built for some bread. The baker trades some bread for a table. Or agreeing to do this and that with someone.
It is so natural.
You can't justify taxes.
I don't want to get this thread off topic though, so back to the subject:
drugs ought to all be legalized and left unregulated (leave it to the individual)
The free market is you, as a carpenter, trading a table you've built for some bread. The baker trades some bread for a table. Or agreeing to do this and that with someone.
It is so natural.
You can't justify taxes.
I don't want to get this thread off topic though, so back to the subject:
drugs ought to all be legalized and left unregulated (leave it to the individual)
Barter works fine for simple goods and services (I'm an avid barterer), but I'm not willing to trade (for example) the airplanes I'm building for equivalent values in weed, or furniture, or bread because I don't need a tennis-court-sized table heaped with dope and donuts. A small coffee table suits me fine. But because I put a lot into my planes, it takes money to exchange them for non-equivalent goods and services efficiently.
When it comes to legal tender, a larger 3rd-party racket is necessary to back up the deal (government). And when it comes to maintaining large-scale public infrastructure, government and taxes are also necessary. Regardless how individualistic your sentiments may be, if you want to live in a human society of any size, you must accept government.
When it comes to legal tender, a larger 3rd-party racket is necessary to back up the deal (government). And when it comes to maintaining large-scale public infrastructure, government and taxes are also necessary. Regardless how individualistic your sentiments may be, if you want to live in a human society of any size, you must accept government.
Wrong. Although as I said, this isn't the thread for it. Go to my thread "Democracy is not freedom" and that is where there is a discussion about what you are talking about
And that would be where it stops. Everything else is unnecessary and unjustified, e.g, welfare, monopolies on infrastructure and currency, monopolies on land, "morality" laws, etc
A laissez-faire government.
But if an "entity" recognized property rights, then you'd have to have lawyers and courts so you could examine cases of property theft, fraud, etc. And you'd have to have cops to arrest the suspect and bring him to trial. Then, if he was convicted, you'd have to have a prison or some other form of punishment, etc.
So, ....next thing ya' know, you've got government! Ain't no way around it, Norsefire, you'd fighting a losing battle unless you go totally anarchist. And even you, with your wild, strange ideals, recognize that anarch won't work. So, .....what now?
Baron Max
No, Hype, "We, the people..." didn't change their minds about prohibition, the government officials did and mostly without asking "We, the people...". "We" didn't come to understand any of that bullshit about crime and deficits ...most of the people in those days didn't even know how to spell deficit. Don't make it out like "We, the people.." actually had anything to do with repealing prohibition ...'cause that's just bullshit.
I love how you continually use the term "we", then fail to properly identify those "we" people or groups!
I also love how you continually looking to the future and claim all kinds of marvelous things which will come true. More bullshit, Hype, just to get your own silly ideals onto the page.
Baron Max
Baron Max: " 'We, the people...' didn't change their minds about prohibition, the government officials did and mostly without asking 'We, the people...' "
No Baron, the repeal movement was a popular movement from its inception, and it was grass-roots organizing that brought change in spite of the inertia of government.
" 'We' didn't come to understand any of that bullshit about crime and deficits"
Please review some history on this subject, if you would like to discuss it without embarrassment.
"I love how you continually use the term "we", then fail to properly identify those "we" people or groups!"
It was you who raised those terms in this thread, beginning with Post 36.
"I also love how you continually looking to the future and claim all kinds of marvelous things which will come true."
I do expect the advancement of human knowledge and awareness will continue, and continue to improve our condition.
No Baron, the repeal movement was a popular movement from its inception, and it was grass-roots organizing that brought change in spite of the inertia of government.
" 'We' didn't come to understand any of that bullshit about crime and deficits"
Please review some history on this subject, if you would like to discuss it without embarrassment.
"I love how you continually use the term "we", then fail to properly identify those "we" people or groups!"
It was you who raised those terms in this thread, beginning with Post 36.
"I also love how you continually looking to the future and claim all kinds of marvelous things which will come true."
I do expect the advancement of human knowledge and awareness will continue, and continue to improve our condition.
And that includes allowing drugs to be marketed on the streets that can and often does turn them into addicts and zombies? And you call that "improvement" of the human condition??
Baron Max
If you will review the history of alcohol prohibition, you will find a clear example of the severe criminological side-effects that result from driving a widely-accepted and high-demand social and recreational drug underground.
In very similar ways, marijuana prohibition has been doing far more harm than good to our society. Read up on alcohol prohibition. With that information in mind, I invite you to participate here in exploring collaboratively what our nation experienced and learned through our 1919-1933 "Noble Experiment", and how lessons learned apply to the question of marijuana prohibition today.
In very similar ways, marijuana prohibition has been doing far more harm than good to our society. Read up on alcohol prohibition. With that information in mind, I invite you to participate here in exploring collaboratively what our nation experienced and learned through our 1919-1933 "Noble Experiment", and how lessons learned apply to the question of marijuana prohibition today.
and what where they?
oh i see. in order to avoid bank robberies we should do away with banks?
How do you know that it wouldn't have happened even without prohibition? Is that another of your abilities ...to see what might have been if....?
It don't matter, Hype. If "We, the people..." decide that we don't want drug addicts and drug zombies in our society, then we'll keep the drugs illegal. "We, the people..." have far more power than you do ...even with your much-self-touted, far-reaching abilities of seeing the future and the alternate past histories.
Baron Max
Hey, ya' know, ya' got a great idea there!!
And what of convienence store robberies? Hell, around Dallas that's become a favorite target of criminals who are seeking a quick, easy buck. Let's just get rid of those damned crime magnets and ....POOF... no more Quik-Mart robberies at all!!
I like it, John, can I steal your idea and email it to the Texas State Congress?
Baron Max
John99: "what where [the side effects of alcohol prohibition]?"
First, the intended effect was not achieved: Popular demand for alcohol was not reduced in the long run. Higher-potency alcoholic products became more popular because of the logistical challenges of widespread smuggling. Many lives and tremendous fortunes were expended in the war that resulted between law enforcement and alcohol producers and distributors. Organized crime, both domestic and international, and both government and private corruption thrived on the vast and lucrative illicit business. Many citizens who would not otherwise have done so became associated and involved in criminal activity. The tremendous government expenditures of prohibition enforcement took away from important infrastructure investments that were part of our recovery from the Depression. The police, justice and penal systems were severely loaded down with deterring, prosecuting, and punishing the high proportion of citizens who were breaking prohibition.
"in order to avoid bank robberies we should do away with banks?"
Your comparison of marijuana use to bank robbery doesn't make much sense to me. Please elaborate, if you have a point to make with it.
First, the intended effect was not achieved: Popular demand for alcohol was not reduced in the long run. Higher-potency alcoholic products became more popular because of the logistical challenges of widespread smuggling. Many lives and tremendous fortunes were expended in the war that resulted between law enforcement and alcohol producers and distributors. Organized crime, both domestic and international, and both government and private corruption thrived on the vast and lucrative illicit business. Many citizens who would not otherwise have done so became associated and involved in criminal activity. The tremendous government expenditures of prohibition enforcement took away from important infrastructure investments that were part of our recovery from the Depression. The police, justice and penal systems were severely loaded down with deterring, prosecuting, and punishing the high proportion of citizens who were breaking prohibition.
"in order to avoid bank robberies we should do away with banks?"
Your comparison of marijuana use to bank robbery doesn't make much sense to me. Please elaborate, if you have a point to make with it.
What percentage, Hype? How many people of the entire population do you consider "popular demand"?
And do you think that that small percentage of "We, the people..." should be able to dictate laws and government policy to all the rest of the people?
Do you think the same with the druggies of the nation, Hype? Should that small percentage of "We, the people..." dictate the drug laws for the entire nation?
Baron Max
