Links for October 17, 2011: Protesters arrested for demonstrating inside of Citibank; Justice Scalia eschews federal drug prohibition; More economic myths.October 15, 2011
Links for January 31, 2011: This is the War on Drugs. Any Questions?; Thoughts on the Depression of 1920.January 30, 2011
“He was not a dealer,” Arlean Blair insists. “I know that he used … but he was not a drug dealer. A drug dealer has lots of money and nice things. If you looked in his house, he had nothing. He gave everything away to people who were having trouble. … It isn’t clear from evidence logs whether investigators found the drugs they were looking for. There was paraphernalia and ‘a small, pink plastic bag with a white crystal substance.’”
The Weber County Attorney’s Office found the shooting to be legally justified under Utah Law. This is drugs. This is the War on Drugs. Any questions?
The Austrian School’s “Great Depression of 1920” line of reasoning goes like this: Following the First World War, America fell into a depression the first year of which was worse than that of the Great Depression. The government then did very little in the way of stimulus then, and the economy recovered basically on its own within a couple of years. By the 1929, America saw the onset of the Great Depression. Over a decade of New Deal government intervention did not get us out of that depression. To the contrary, New Deal meddling prolonged the Great Depression. Over a year and a half has passed since I first heard this account, and I have not come across so much as a peep in response from the interventionists….until now. The Austrian Review of Economics first published this article online in late October, 2010. I have not yet read this article because it costs $34 to download, but the author, Daniel Kuehn, responds to a critique of the article here.
Reason.tv once again lives up to its name.
On January 5, 2011, a gang of gun-wielding thugs rampaged into a private residence and killed a grandfather of 12. My question is: Were the killers inspired by violent “drug war” rhetoric, or were they simply crazy? It is time for an American Conversation on the tragedy in Framingham. Raids like this are conducted over 100 times each day across America. Yes, people die.
ANN COULTER: I have one statement for you: the welfare state. No, people can not do whatever they want to do and live however they want to live, as long as Ann has to pay for it, when they can’t hold a job and raise their own kids and buy their own food and pay for their own rent. You get rid of the welfare state and we’ll talk about people sitting home and shooting heroin all day, but right now, oh, and now I have to pay for their health care!
JOHN STOSSEL: So because we have a social welfare system, we have to give up these other freedoms?
ANN: Yeah, as long as Ann is paying for it.
Ann Coulter is a little more forthright than the average prohibitionist. Her argument is that since the government is forcing her to pay for something, then it might as well be what she wants most of all, which is to bastille her fellow citizens when she disapproves of their private, personal conduct. If she weren’t forced to pay for something, she might then be open to not paying out of her own pocket to imprison people who have committed no crimes against her or others.
If Ann doesn’t want government health care money and living expenses to go to drug addicts, then her solution is counter-productive. Even prior to ObamaCare, the only people in the United States of America who have been constitutionally entitled to state-funded health care have been prisoners. Her argument, essentially, is: “I don’t want to pay for drug addicts’ health care food, room, and board, but I love throwing them all in jail, where I’m guaranteed to pay for all of their health care, food, room, and board. It is more important to Ann that we throw drug users in jail than it is that we save Ann’s tax money.”
That is the logic of prohibition. For more hemming, hawing, evading, and stammering, see part 2:Vodpod videos no longer available.
You can decide for yourselves whether the logic of prohibition wins the day. Read the rest of this entry »