Via Reason, John McWhorter points out the folly and destructive nature of The War on Drugs. A snippet:
The simple fact is that if there were no profit to be made in selling drugs on the street, no one would bother. For all of the “root causes” reasons so many young black and Latino men turn to this trade instead of seeking legal work, if there were no War on Drugs, they would seek other solutions to the obstacles that face them. And whatever those were, they would involve less murder, fewer crossfire injuries and killings of the kind that have likely ruined Ms. Vasquez’ life at 15, fewer men in prison for long periods, and fewer of their children growing up fatherless and on their way to repeating their father’s mistakes.
What's holding back millions of poor young Americans (black, white, Latino, male, female, whatever) is not lack of healthcare or tax-cuts for the rich or other important but ultimately red herring issues, but is The War on Drugs combined with a disastrous federal school system (no child gets left behind if every child gets left behind!).
You can demonize Wall Street and insurance companies and Bernie Madoff and whatever super-rich entity is the populist flavor of the month, but if you ever want to make a real difference for the most disadvanted in our country, start with the mafia that our federal government has mutated into.
Showing posts with label Government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Government. Show all posts
Public Choice in Action
Via David Henderson over at Econlog, keithhennessey.com points out some precarious and perverse incentives facing DC legislators at the moment. In particular:
The Democratic party is unified in wanting a major legislative accomplishment. I know of no Democrat who is saying he or she wants the bill to fail, even if some of them will vote against it. This sounds trivial but is important. Congressional Democrats appear to believe that enactment of a comprehensive law is critical to their re-election. Most seem to believe that a White House signing ceremony is more important than the contents of the bill that becomes law. This helps the Leaders and the President rally votes and creates legislative bargaining flexibility.
Relying on government benevolence is like leaving the front door of your home unlocked 24/7 because you believe everyone around you is good. It's a wonderful thought, but you are going to get robbed.
The Democratic party is unified in wanting a major legislative accomplishment. I know of no Democrat who is saying he or she wants the bill to fail, even if some of them will vote against it. This sounds trivial but is important. Congressional Democrats appear to believe that enactment of a comprehensive law is critical to their re-election. Most seem to believe that a White House signing ceremony is more important than the contents of the bill that becomes law. This helps the Leaders and the President rally votes and creates legislative bargaining flexibility.
Relying on government benevolence is like leaving the front door of your home unlocked 24/7 because you believe everyone around you is good. It's a wonderful thought, but you are going to get robbed.
A Logical Understanding of Markets vs Coercion
1. Society = Community
2. Community requires interaction
3. Two types of interaction
a. Voluntary
b. Coerced
4. Two types of voluntary interaction
a. Markets
b. Altruism
5. Altruism not practical
6. Two types of interaction
a. Coercion
b. Markets
7. Interaction based on markets
a. A desires good/service X
b. B recognizes A's demand and produces X
c. B produces X at Y cost
d. A recognizes opportunity to obtain B for Y+P cost
e. A values X at Z amount
f. If Z > or equal to Y+P , A will purchase X from B
g. If Z <> or equal to Y+P. If they cannot agree to that price, no transaction
h. Transactions, even if they fail to occur, result in most beneficial outcome for all parties
involved
i. Interaction is not corrupted
j. Society is not corrupted
8. Interaction based on coercion
a. G has monopoly on application of legal force on all parties
b. G has monopoly control over all terms and conditions of all past, present and future
transactions for all parties
c. Perverts fundamental institutions that all market conditions are based on
d. Interaction is corrupted
e. Society is corrupted
9. Markets are preferable to coercion in terms of societal operation
This is obviously a very simple application of logic towards both of these organizational styles. There are clearly many more variables that need to be taken into account in such analysis. But I do think the underlying premises and conclusions are fair and accurate. Also, to note, I am not advocating anarchy in this analysis. I am simply noting the perversion of markets governments inevitably create when they interfere in areas that markets should solely be involved in. But in areas where markets are not appropriate, the institution of government is not simply preferable, it is necessary. In other words, government is necessary to facilitate effective market interaction. But government should not involve itself in the actual interaction. And that is from everything as subtle as indirect regulation to as blatant as direct competition with private participants.
2. Community requires interaction
3. Two types of interaction
a. Voluntary
b. Coerced
4. Two types of voluntary interaction
a. Markets
b. Altruism
5. Altruism not practical
6. Two types of interaction
a. Coercion
b. Markets
7. Interaction based on markets
a. A desires good/service X
b. B recognizes A's demand and produces X
c. B produces X at Y cost
d. A recognizes opportunity to obtain B for Y+P cost
e. A values X at Z amount
f. If Z > or equal to Y+P , A will purchase X from B
g. If Z <> or equal to Y+P. If they cannot agree to that price, no transaction
h. Transactions, even if they fail to occur, result in most beneficial outcome for all parties
involved
i. Interaction is not corrupted
j. Society is not corrupted
8. Interaction based on coercion
a. G has monopoly on application of legal force on all parties
b. G has monopoly control over all terms and conditions of all past, present and future
transactions for all parties
c. Perverts fundamental institutions that all market conditions are based on
d. Interaction is corrupted
e. Society is corrupted
9. Markets are preferable to coercion in terms of societal operation
This is obviously a very simple application of logic towards both of these organizational styles. There are clearly many more variables that need to be taken into account in such analysis. But I do think the underlying premises and conclusions are fair and accurate. Also, to note, I am not advocating anarchy in this analysis. I am simply noting the perversion of markets governments inevitably create when they interfere in areas that markets should solely be involved in. But in areas where markets are not appropriate, the institution of government is not simply preferable, it is necessary. In other words, government is necessary to facilitate effective market interaction. But government should not involve itself in the actual interaction. And that is from everything as subtle as indirect regulation to as blatant as direct competition with private participants.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
