An absolutely must-read post.

Courtesy of the very smart Roderick Long (via Wilkinson).

Don Boudreaux's wonderful letter to a politician.

No one is better than Boudreaux at stripping away the pomp and circumstance of government and exposing it for what it really is. This letter is a great example.

What should the drinking age be?

According to my old Cato colleague, and all-around brilliant genius smart-guy Will Wilkinson, there shouldn't be a drinking age at all. Care to disagree?

For those who support the drug war.

Would Cindy McCain be better off in prison, or in the White House as First Lady?

Ah, Hayek.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."

I love that sweet little man.

Read this.

Right now.

What is the "right" profit for gas stations?

And why does Bill McCollum think he knows the answer?

No One Wins a Drug War

As far as the issue of the legalization of drugs, I am completely in agreement with the author. Whether it is tobacco or alcohol or some narcotic, drugs will harm people's lives regardless. And whether it be from some shady dealer on the street or from the local CVS (or Walgreens), people are going to get their drug of choice--and they are going to pay whatever price to get it. So why spend tax dollars on the Drug War to lock these people up? If they are a waste of space, then let it be their own responsibility (and fault), not the government's. Travis made an excellent point about the alcohol prohibition of the early 20th century, but I see no difference between that issue and this. Don't drugs also "help" people get through hard times, just as alcohol did during the depression? People will choose their poison accordingly.

Now, Cole's statements regarding drugs and race are a little bit more controversial. I do understand that more African-Americans are checked and incarcerated because of drugs, but this does not mean that minorities are more responsible for the drug problem than whites. I believe the author failed to mention the "methed-out whites" of suburban America. Every race has its problems; it just may be that law enforment chooses to zero in on the minorties, where it is a more obivous problem. In inner-cities, African-Americans and Latinos are probably more likely to be arrested for drugs because they find dealing the easiest way to make a living. If there were more education, along with legalization, this problem would diminish.

I think that the remedy for this "drug problem" is not punishment, but prevention and treatment. Legalizing drugs would actually make them safer, because firms for drug distribution would form, forcing standards to be created. The spread of disease and crime caused by drugs would also diminish. This is not to say that "cracked-out" people would stop committing crimes, rather the instance of this would be less likely.

I do not think that legalization would stop the drug use in America, but I think it would bring a more desirable outcome than the current situation. Drugs are still as available (if not more available) than they were twenty years ago. There will always be a demand, but the decision that must be made is how effectively this demand will be supplied.




Drugs are really bad.

Leagalize the drugs.

I, personally, agree with the author on the issue of drugs. I think they should be leagalized. People are going to do them whether they are legal or illegal, and there is nothing we can do to stop them besides let them first handed see what drugs do to people. Eventually, these drugged out people will drive themselves 6 feet under, and, as harsh as this may sound, it's not a bad thing. As my man Darwin once said, Survival of the fittest. By legalizing drugs, it will just clean out the gene pool and weed out the idiots. As for the race thing, there are just as many white people doing cocaine and lord knows what else as there are minorities. Sadly, I believe, that racism will never fully die down. However, by leagalizing drugs, it will stop those racial actions. In my opinion, it is a complete waste of tax dollars to imprison some heronie dealer. The big bad dangerous heroine dealer...how scary. Let them make there own mistakes and pay for the consequences. When it comes to the point that they start harming the public, then maybe the law can be called upon.

**I would like to add that I don't do drugs, so please don't say I want them legal to do them. I find them completely disgusting and they make me cringe.

Response to the Article...prohibition...

In responce to the article reffering to "prohibition," I believe the author is reffering to a parallel to the "drug prohibition" and alcohol prohibition in the early 1900's in the US. During the prohibition era, alcohol was illegal causing organized crime to explode in the country over the new industry of smuggling illegal liquor to the public. In responce to this, the US government ended prohibition but put a tax on all liquor while making it illegal for private production of liquor. This resulted in a reduction in crime since liquor made by big companies could be sold for less than smuggled liquor, putting gangs out of business. The author believes that if the US government would end the current "drug prohibition" it would produce a similar result. Personally, I don't think it will work exactly like the author plans since there is a big difference between weed and alcohol, and I disagree with it on a moral level since illict drugs will not benefit society at all (at least alcohol helped Americans get through the great depression even though I myself don't drink or plan to drink at all).

response to Newburn's blog

Okay, so I read that article Newburn posted, and at first, I thought the author was going against drugs. But, then I got to the end of the article and read this;
"I represent Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, an international organization of sworn antidrug warriors who know that we must end this prohibition in order to legalize and regulate all drugs, thus wresting control from the cartels and street thugs who prey on children. Ending this prohibition is a singularly potent civil rights issue. It is a remarkable movement, led by both white and minority law enforcement officials."
By "ending this prohibition," does the author mean that he/she wants to rid of the laws that forbid marijuana, cocaine, etc? That’s what I got out of it. And if this is true, then what the perdition? The author went on by saying that the "minorities" were imprisoned more, so by legalizing these drugs, are they just wanting to have less of them in jail? This would also alter peoples incentives, and everyone will be smoking and shooting that arm candy because it would be legal!

On the Drug War...

What do you guys think of this article?

Today...

So, today I took the ACT plus writing and the plus writing essay prompt dealt with how teachers could reduce student tardiness. What kind of incentives should they use? I discussed how effective incentives are and also about their unintended consequences.

Let's just say I appreciate the usefulness of this class.

In class movie

I can't find the actual movie that we were watching in class. Does anyone have the link?
Breanna

Class discussion.

Today in class, we had a very deep discussion about killing innocent people and about Bush signing the executive orders to send troops to Pakistan if Bin Laden is there. My personal opinion is that for once Bush actually did something correct. Our military has had so many opportunities to capture, even kill Laden; however, each time, there is an interference. I believe if Pakistan were truly an ally of the United States, they would have no problem having U.S. troops on their soil, especially since Laden is one of the hardest men for the U.S. to capture. At this point in time, I also believe, it would be acceptable to take a few innocent bystanders lives. As I see it, if Laden is in their city, country, where ever he may be, and the people do nothing about it, they are risking their own lives. It's a little thing the law likes to refer to as "guilt by association." If Bin Laden is there, and those people don't do anything about it (try to kill him or run him off), I believe they have every right to die if the U.S. gets tipped that he is located there. As Mr. Newburn pointed out, the more we back off, the more incentives he gains to protect himself. If the troops refuse to shoot because of civilians, the unintended consequences may be that Laden constantly surrounds himself with women and children. This man is extremely evil. The longer he stays alive, the more likely it becomes that another attack like 9/11 will occur. I say that if the U.S. sees him in a crowd, attack. If the U.S. gets reasonable proof he is in Pakistan, march through, with or without permission, and take him out once and for all!

10 gallon gas limit?

So, Ja'Layne informed me that there is going to be a 10 gallon gas limit as of today. Apparently the prices are supposed to shoot up tomorrow as well. They say they are doing this to avoid a panic being created. Is this because of the hurricane? It has me a little bit worried. We know it's true, Ja'Layne's dad was only able to put 10 gallons in his truck at a Newberry gas station. So, can anyone elaborate on this?

My thoughts about the Video in Newburn's

For the past two days in Newburn’s class, we’ve been watching a video on 9-11. I’m not sure the name of the video, but after watching only half of it, I’ve learned so much. I had no idea that attacks on the United States, that were planned by Osama, had even happened! Yea, I never really watched the news when I was younger, but it amazes me that someone could have so much hatred towards a country. I’ve never had that much anger towards anyone my entire life. Of course, I didn’t grow up in the Middle East, nor do I have the same beliefs as they do, but it’s hard for me to understand how someone sane could ever do such a thing.

AHH! I dont get it!

Are they just not sane? Or do their beliefs really beleive that by attacking the United States, that we would pull our troops out of their coutnry?

Whatever, Im done expressing my thoughts.

Greed continuation

Greed has many forms: lust, envey, and gullnoty. But greed is basically wanting too much where it deprives others of those needed items or resources; however, how can we find a distinction between the two concepts of greed being a constructive or destructive force? Look at the bussiness man who sells you a product that improves your life in some way. Now is he greedy? Yes, but he also makes you more better off. Then look at the government taxing you. It is like what Mr. Newburn said, " a guy putting a gun to your heat and saying give me your money!" When the government taxes us, dose our lives improve because of it. Yes and no to that statement, because the government provides services to the general public but also spends tax dallors on projects that in no way bentift us and sometimes makes our lives wrost.

Greed is Needed

Greed to me is something that is natural and is needed for an economy to prosper. It is was ultimately, in my opinion, drives an economy. Without the return of something for work people wouldn't have the incentives to anything.
Greed is the reason for many of America's accomplishments, such as advanced technology and new products. These things wouldn't have came about unless the reason for creating these things would benefit them. These things are what has bettered the nation and the people as whole.
Basically, without greed we wouldn't have the living standards we do today, nor the products that make our lives easier. Greed will continually be the driving force of the economy.

Greed

Even though, we hate to admitt that greed, thought of as a social evil, actually turns the wheels of production and the capitalist economy in which we live. "Why would I work all day just to help another person I do not in any way care about or may not even like?" Well if I disire to make money I might just cooperated with this person if it is in my best interest. Yet, the gree that prossess mankind may compell us to make products and provide services that bentifical to our fellow man. Like Adam Smith said, " Its not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to thier own interest.." Thus, we find that greed in a sense is constructive and necessary, and inspires us to cooperate more in the world economy, becuase of the simple disire to get ahead and obtain something for ourselfs. The only way we can do this is by servicing our fellow men. So a question we must ask: "What exactly is this odious word, Greed?

Greed

how good is greed?

I believe that greed is a beneficial thing that helps us better all as a whole. Greed pushes people to go out and get more. Greedy people are in fact the people who have more. We are all greedy in some way, whether it's for money, power or just to get something we want. A lot of people say that greedy people are horrible and mean, but it's the greedy people that supply us with the things we have? Many people like coffee. Juan Valdez became a huge figure in the coffee business by making mountain ground coffee. We all enjoy the coffee we love because Valdez wanted to make money and become powerful.
The evil men in the black suits that everyone calls ruthless and powerful gives us our jobs. they are greedy, but it's their greed that give us the jobs we have, that puts the food on our tables and help us support our families. When we hear the word "greed" we think of some mean spirited person trying to get the most they can out of life an the people around them. But the real definition of greed is an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or desires, especially with respect to material wealth.
All in all, greed leads our economy and our lives. We cannot live without greed. Greed motivates us to do the best we can, just because we want to be higher and have more power than the next man. Greed isn't as bad as everyone thinks when you really break it down. We don't live in a perfect world, and we wouldn't live much of a life at all if we didn't have a little greed to get us through the day.

Relevent sites:
http://moneychanges.blogspot.com/2008/02/greed-and-haphazardness-truth-about.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3870/is_16_19/ai_113939155
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/109/story_10952_1.html

I Must Be Tired...

Here are some websites I found and forgot to post: <http://www.reason.com/news/show/38333.html> <http://articles.familylobby.com/495-healthy-greed-and-philanthropy.htm> You may agree or disagree.

Charities Bad, Greed Good

Although my somewhat engrained “values” make me tend to be against the greediness of bloodsucking businessmen, I have to admit that logic forces me to realize that the concept of greed being “good” is actually true. When company bigwigs decide they want more money it leads to higher production and better prices of whatever they produce. This not only creates jobs, but also satisfies more consumers.
If we could all just look past the societal pressures towards philanthropy, we would see the long term affects of “greed.” There are differing opinions of the balance between giving and taking money when you are already wealthy, but if the CEOs and wealthy people of this nation would invest their money, it would benefit everyone in the long run. Take, for example, the lifeguards of Orlando—which ones were better at saving lives? The paid lifeguards simply had the incentive to do their job correctly. I think that this can apply to the whole of charities. Although this may make some people’s skin crawl, I now think that charities may be hurting the very cause they are trying to help.
If only it were true that all people help others without thinking of themselves. This simply doesn’t happen. Capitalism has to take place in order for things to work out the way we all want them to. I never really understood the concept of “not giving” until this realization: self-interest drives the economy forward. This, in turn, drives society forward.

When is Greed to much?

Greed is all around us. Many people have different views on the subject, they either feel that it is good or that self indulgence is bad. But really if you think about it is it not greed that drive this country and its citizens to flourish and succeed? Or is the whole concept of it wrong, such as in Stossel's piece when the CEO purchased of a $100,000 pizza oven?

From the beginning of our nations history successful people have thrived do to, what most would call greed. But what is greed but the want to make ones self better off. So I ask you how is it bad to be "Greedy", don't all of our fellow Americans want to be better off then the next guy. I know I do.

But at the same time i can understand why the "lower man on the todum pole" could be upset that the CEO of his company just bought a 3 million dollar yacht and he was just laid off from his job. So my question to you is when is the need for success and more money to much? When does it become greed?

here are some links:

http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~taflinge/socgreed.html

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Business/story?id=130457