or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Milton Friedman: Legalize It!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Milton Friedman: Legalize It!

post #1 of 368
Thread Starter 
Milton sez governments should gain from vice

Quote:
Milton Friedman leads a list of more than 500 economists from around the U.S. who today will publicly endorse a Harvard University economist's report on the costs of marijuana prohibition and the potential revenue gains from the U.S. government instead legalizing it and taxing its sale. Ending prohibition enforcement would save $7.7 billion in combined state and federal spending, the report says, while taxation would yield up to $6.2 billion a year.

A 14 billion dollar turn around from legalizing marijuana, but the trade off is we let government validate another vice in the name and pursuit of the all might dollar.

We've seen states legalize lotteries or even gambling because it seems like it is fine to tax people if it is a vice.

Two questions, one should the goverment continue to legalize vices in an attempt to increase revenue.

Second, should the government consider private vices acceptable only when are considered sources of revenue?

Many times the first argument for pot legalization is that cigarettes and alcohol are already legal. The same argument is now often being made for gambling as a second step from lotteries. Should vices really only be considered acceptable based off what revenue they might generate? Doesn't goverment have a responsibility to look at a problem in a manner that goes beyond the financial numbers?

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #2 of 368
Quote:
Should vices really only be considered acceptable based off what revenue they might generate?

I don't care what justification they use, they should legalise it ASAP.

It makes me mad that the jails are full of marajuana smokers, resulting in early release of murdurers and child molestors.

1.6% of the jail population is incarcerated for marajuana only (not counting the people who have multiple charges, like marajuana + assault). There are 2,000,000 prisioners in the US, so we have 32,000 people in jail for smoking pot.

This is for a substance that is less addictive than cigerettes, and less debilitating than alchohol.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #3 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Milton sez governments should gain from vice



A 14 billion dollar turn around from legalizing marijuana, but the trade off is we let government validate another vice in the name and pursuit of the all might dollar.

We've seen states legalize lotteries or even gambling because it seems like it is fine to tax people if it is a vice.

Two questions, one should the goverment continue to legalize vices in an attempt to increase revenue.

Second, should the government consider private vices acceptable only when are considered sources of revenue?

Many times the first argument for pot legalization is that cigarettes and alcohol are already legal. The same argument is now often being made for gambling as a second step from lotteries. Should vices really only be considered acceptable based off what revenue they might generate? Doesn't goverment have a responsibility to look at a problem in a manner that goes beyond the financial numbers?

Nick

You live in California hence a certain "lifestyle" and drive a leaky old Jeep hence you are not entitled to open this thread.

Besides some drugs are legal so they all should be legal to be consistent.

Can't judge which drugs are legal and not right ole Dumpet?

Otherwise you are just another judge and jury imposing your crap onto others because you are a fascist.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #4 of 368
wow.
post #5 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
It makes me mad that the jails are full of marajuana smokers, resulting in early release of murdurers and child molestors.

So we legalize pot, so that these people that are not smart enough to stay out of jail, will now be on the streets to kill innocent drivers because of DUI, or to break into our houses to support their new "legal" habit.

Brilliant! Genius!
post #6 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
So we legalize pot, so that these people that are not smart enough to stay out of jail, will now be on the streets to kill innocent drivers because of DUI, or to break into our houses to support their new "legal" habit.

Brilliant! Genius!

Legalising drugs dramatically lowers the price, so the reason that they are breaking into our houses to support their habit is that the war on drugs raises the price.

I hope your kids go to jail for marajuana - it is basically random, so you have a 1.6% chance (since most teens smoke pot).
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #7 of 368
They should legalize it so Ricky Williams can play football again!
post #8 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
So we legalize pot, so that these people that are not smart enough to stay out of jail, will now be on the streets to kill innocent drivers because of DUI, or to break into our houses to support their new "legal" habit.

Brilliant! Genius!

PS - by your logic, also, people should go to jail for talking on cell phones in cars.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #9 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
PS - by your logic, also, people should go to jail for talking on cell phones in cars.

Right, that's exactly what I said.

If is against the law, I don't see amy reason why not.
post #10 of 368
Legalising drugs dramatically lowers the price, thereby increasing the use (& abuse) enormously.

Punishment is more the issue I think. You people (americans) should really do something about your penal system. It produces criminals.
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
post #11 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Legalising drugs dramatically lowers the price, so the reason that they are breaking into our houses to support their habit is that the war on drugs raises the price.

I hope your kids go to jail for marajuana - it is basically random, so you have a 1.6% chance (since most teens smoke pot).

My kids are already aware of pot and it's effects. So, I will be surprised if that happens.

However, if it does I will stand by the states decision to jail them. You know what they say...

"Don't do the crime..."
post #12 of 368
Quote:
Legalising drugs dramatically lowers the price, thereby increasing the use (& abuse) enormously.

This is not true, and we know it is not true because we kept track of these things during alchohol prohibition.

Usage decreases when you legalise a drug.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #13 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
My kids are already aware of pot and it's effects. So, I will be surprised if that happens.

However, if it does I will stand by the states decision to jail them. You know what they say...

"Don't do the crime..."

But why should it be illegal in the first place? I have already refuted your only two points.

It will not cause more auto accidents because usage will go down. It will not cause more break ins because the price will be low.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #14 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
This is not true, and we know it is not true because we kept track of these things during alchohol prohibition.

Usage decreases when you legalise a drug.

Study the alcohol restrictions in Norway and Sweden. Especially the restrictions on how heavy alcoholic beverages are only allowed sold at state owned monopolies. There are some great statistics on how this works in modern times.

I wouldn't trust experiences from the gangster ridden 30's as a credible source for modern regulation.
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
post #15 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
But why should it be illegal in the first place? I have already refuted your only two points.

It will not cause more auto accidents because usage will go down. It will not cause more break ins because the price will be low.

You hope. You contend. You extrapolate.

If a person cannot control hem/herself enough to stay out of jail/prison. What makes you think that some pothead is going to control himself enough to hold down a job, or even pass a chance to make some easy money? I have personally known many a pothead, so you will have a difficult time convincing me otherwise.

Besides if the government get free reign to tax Mary Jane, the price is sure to go up. Who would oppose taxing Pot?
post #16 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by New
Study the alcohol restrictions in Norway and Sweden. Especially the restrictions on how heavy alcoholic beverages are only allowed sold at state owned monopolies. There are some great statistics on how this works in modern times.

I wouldn't trust experiences from the gangster ridden 30's as a credible source for modern regulation.

The gangster ridden 30s are a good model for the current US drug situation - which is another reason for legalisation (each extra $1 we spend on the war on drugs results in an extra $4 in profit for organised crime).

I found some links on Norway/Sweden alchohol laws, but not what you were suggesting.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #17 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
You hope. You contend. You extrapolate.

If a person cannot control hem/herself enough to stay out of jail/prison. What makes you think that some pothead is going to control himself enough to hold down a job, or even pass a chance to make some easy money? I have personally known many a pothead, so you will have a difficult time convincing me otherwise.

Besides if the government get free reign to tax Mary Jane, the price is sure to go up. Who would oppose taxing Pot?

I think that you should be more worried about alchoholics, they cause much more damage to society than pot heads.

And it is better for the government to get the money instead of the crime lords.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #18 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
If a person cannot control hem/herself enough to stay out of jail/prison. What makes you think that some pothead is going to control himself enough to hold down a job, or even pass a chance to make some easy money? I have personally known many a pothead, so you will have a difficult time convincing me otherwise.

What bass ackwards reasoning.

Let's make pointy knives illegal (in reference to the other thread), and then we can say that those who "can't control themselves" well enough to stay away from pointy knives automatically demonstrate themselves to be dangerous, because if they "can't control themselves"... Well, who knows how wildly out of control these characters might get with those knives, madly stabbing about in their out-of-control frenzy?

Should the government be in the business of making arbitrary laws stressing arbitrarily emphasized dangers, just so that it can use compliance with those laws as some kind of test of who is or isn't a trustworthy citizen?
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #19 of 368
Absolutely.

The perversion here is that people can't even grow Hemp in the US. Mr. Hearst was able to convince congress to change the laws so he could make more money on his forest investments. He wanted to avoid that paper was being made from Hemp instead of trees. This would be cheaper and far easier on the environment. Again the greed of one individual has changed US laws. In this case it has costed the taxpayer trillions over the years and a few pot growers made and still make fortunes.

At the turn of the 20 century pot was sold in cigarette packs all over the world. There is no evidence of rampant abuse. In many Muslim nation it is part of the day like coffee. The average Maroccan man carries pot in the left sock and hash in the right sock, the cafes there team with tea drinking stoners. The only reason why the world has not been taken over by Islamic militants is pot. Anybody who has tried it will know that you just don't feel like killing when you got good weed.
post #20 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Usage decreases when you legalise a drug.

I sincerely doubt it. Currently, illegal drugs are hardly a problem in terms of usage and health effects compared to the ones that are legal. Tobacco use is the number one cause of death in the US, ferchrissakes. Alcohol is number three. Illegal drugs are barely on the radar, at around 5% of the number of deaths caused by legal drugs.

I would decriminalize some drugs, but I wouldn't tax the sales. I'd keep the sales illegal.
post #21 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
My kids are already aware of pot and it's effects. So, I will be surprised if that happens.

Like your children, I too was aware of pot and its effects.

Now look at me.

(Actually I've practically given up because it was making me useless, but I couldn't resist the joke.)
post #22 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
I think that you should be more worried about alchoholics, they cause much more damage to society than pot heads.

And it is better for the government to get the money instead of the crime lords.

I think you are wrong. People that drive drunk are the very same people that would drive high. I will contend that they are often doing both.

Most people that i know that smoke pot use alcohol at the same time. A puf and a beer chaser. Let's deal in the real world, please.
post #23 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
If a person cannot control hem/herself enough to stay out of jail/prison. What makes you think that some pothead is going to control himself enough to hold down a job, or even pass a chance to make some easy money? I have personally known many a pothead, so you will have a difficult time convincing me otherwise.

Well, you'd probably be extremely surprised at how common marijuana is around successful, ambitious and productive people. Of course, I seems to me that marijuana effects different people different ways, making the lazy lazier while simply relaxing those who are driven. In fact, some of the most productive people I've known are potheads (though not obviously at all), many saying it helps them focus when they need to work hard. Go figure. I suspect the fact that you are aquainted with so many failures reflects something less to do with marijuana and more to do with the type of people you gravitate toward or perhaps the fact that you live in the giant COPS set we graciously call florida.
post #24 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
Well, you'd probably be extremely surprised at how common marijuana is around successful, ambitious and productive people. Of course, I seems to me that marijuana effects different people different ways, making the lazy lazier while simply relaxing those who are driven. In fact, some of the most productive people I've known are potheads (though not obviously at all), many saying it helps them focus when they need to work hard. Go figure. I suspect the fact that you are aquainted with so many failures reflects something less to do with marijuana and more to do with the type of people you gravitate toward or perhaps the fact that you live in the giant COPS set we graciously call florida.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Man are you wrong.

That is an excuse for getting high. Figures you would post some garbage like that.

I am productive and talented and consistently successful at my endeavors. I do not rely on a substance for success nor do I blame one for my failures. Get real.

I am a musician and come into contact with many musicians. As you might imagine, I meet all types. I have family that have drug issues. They do not live here in Florida.

I love your assumptions, keep 'em coming.
post #25 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I am a musician and come into contact with many musicians.



Pothead musicians? That explains where you opinion about it comes from, then.
post #26 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by giant


That explains where you opinion about it comes from, then.

Not really.
post #27 of 368
Incidentally, I know someone who just divorced a cellist from the Naples Philharmonic Orchestra in part for being too much of a stoner.
post #28 of 368
Quote:
A 14 billion dollar turn around from legalizing marijuana, but the trade off is we let government validate another vice in the name and pursuit of the all might dollar.

Difficult to categorize it as a "vice" in the same way one would call alcohol, gambling, hard drugs "vices".

Further, it seems to me more like it's the pursuit of all mighty freedom.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #29 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
Incidentally, I know someone who just divorced a cellist from the Naples Philharmonic Orchestra in part for being too much of a stoner.

That's just peachy. Thanks.
post #30 of 368
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
Difficult to categorize it as a "vice" in the same way one would call alcohol, gambling, hard drugs "vices".

Further, it seems to me more like it's the pursuit of all mighty freedom.

Well I probably didn't put it across as well as I would have liked but the point I wanted to ask was, is freedom really only granted when the government can make money from it?

It seems like certain activities were previously prohibited because the government deemed them harmful to the general welfare. Now it appears they have decided they are not harmful and to grant more freedom in these areas, but only because they will make more money.

Should our freedoms really be given a dollar amount and be judged or granted using a government cost analysis table? To me it isn't what is granted there but why it is granted. The reasoning seems sort of dangerous. If the government decides freedom of speech is too expensive, could they begin reasoning that they should take it away for example. These reasoning seems most evident with gambling, alcohol, drugs and cigarettes and increasingly it is proposed for food as well.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #31 of 368
I think that the government should do what the majority of the governed think is right.

I know it's a novel idea and I am stretching here, but hey call me a rebel.
post #32 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I think that the government should do what the majority of the governed think is right.

I'm not sure what this has to do with the drugs issue, but do you really mean this? What if the majority wanted to do away with the Bill of Rights?

How's this: I think the government should do what the majority want, as long as what the majority wants doesn't violate the Constitution's prohibition on what the government can do.
post #33 of 368
Not to mention how much of politics is about getting the majority to agree to the policy rather than the policy to agree with the majority.
post #34 of 368
The difference between marajuana and alcohol is that marajuana regularly achieves a very severe high, while alcohol must be consomed in excess to yield similar results (the way I understand it).
post #35 of 368
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
I'm not sure what this has to do with the drugs issue, but do you really mean this? What if the majority wanted to do away with the Bill of Rights?

How's this: I think the government should do what the majority want, as long as what the majority wants doesn't violate the Constitution's prohibition on what the government can do.

He's probably been reading that nasty Declaration of Independence again.

Quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

It's a terrible document. It allows you to even abolish things of those being governed feel they have not consented to what is happening.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #36 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I think that the government should do what the majority of the governed think is right.

I know it's a novel idea and I am stretching here, but hey call me a rebel.

That kind of thinking, carried too far, would indeed make you a rebel -- and not in any glorious romantic sense of "rebel" either.

There are limits to what even a majority can and should be able to do. The majority shouldn't be able to limit the free speech of a minority, for instance.

Although not specifically written into the US Constitution, the history of jurisprudence often supports the concept that no law, regardless of whether or not a majority supports that law, should limit what citizens can do without a legitimate and significant overriding public good at stake. If what you're trying to say is that the simple fact that a majority desires to make a drug illegal is all the excuse the government needs to make that drug illegal -- no obligation whatsoever required to justify the law beyond "what the majority wants, the majority gets" -- and that you support throwing people in jail merely for not automatically bending to will of that (very hypocritical) majority, what you offer is hardly a very promising or enlightened view of how to create a free society.
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #37 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
Not to mention how much of politics is about getting the majority to agree to the policy rather than the policy to agree with the majority.

Now there's a nicely turned phrase. I may need to borrow this one from time to time.
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #38 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Milton sez governments should gain from vice



A 14 billion dollar turn around from legalizing marijuana, but the trade off is we let government validate another vice in the name and pursuit of the all might dollar.

We've seen states legalize lotteries or even gambling because it seems like it is fine to tax people if it is a vice.

Two questions, one should the goverment continue to legalize vices in an attempt to increase revenue.

Second, should the government consider private vices acceptable only when are considered sources of revenue?

Many times the first argument for pot legalization is that cigarettes and alcohol are already legal. The same argument is now often being made for gambling as a second step from lotteries. Should vices really only be considered acceptable based off what revenue they might generate? Doesn't goverment have a responsibility to look at a problem in a manner that goes beyond the financial numbers?

Nick

You think of it as a vice . . . I thnk of it as a smoke and a pleasure . . . though I haven't smoked proper pot in years . . .

Is having a beer still a vice in your eyes?

I think the qestion should be: what worse forms of crime result from criminalizing a relatively harmless one?

Who is making money?
Seems to me that many big-time dealers that make huge amounts of money are very unsavory characcters . . . and not just in a 'vice' sort of way

Take away their source of cash and you take away their source of power: and you minimize their negative impact on the rest of us.

esides, the WODrugs simply does not work, peole who smoke pot will smoke pot . . . unless they live in the hinterlands of Wisconsin and don't know anybody who they can get it from without potentially embarassing themselves asking
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #39 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
My kids are already aware of pot and it's effects. So, I will be surprised if that happens.

However, if it does I will stand by the states decision to jail them. You know what they say...

"Don't do the crime..."

Boyoboy . . . the Stalinist analogy is fitting like a shirt today: it is well known that the 'triumph' of Stalinist Totalitarianism was that it managed to get Parents to turn in their kids, and kids to turn n their parents as 'enemies of the state'

hmmm?!?!
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #40 of 368
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I think that the government should do what the majority of the governed think is right.

Yeah, like not start stupid wars. Bravo.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Milton Friedman: Legalize It!