On 10/26/2017 6:05 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 9:15 PM, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
On 10/25/2017 5:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I am not entirely sure of this. I think that in the long term, the
free-market can work, both for preserving resource and happiness.
We might have a different feelings due to the fact that it does not seem to
have work with us, but the reason is that we don't have a free-market, given
that we have the prohibition laws. Even at the start, Henri Ford, who made
his 300 first Ford car in Hemp, and using Hemp, defended the Hemp for
building car by saying that it is a renewable resource, and that it would
not perturb the current concentration of 0_2, C0_2. If the Market would have
been free, most people would have used Hemp (which was the petrol before
petrol) instead of petrol.
Nonsense. Hemp was grown for rope. It was never a fuel. Henry Ford built
a car whose body panels were made from plant cellulose, mostly from soybeans
but including 10% hemp. But it was never shown to be economically viable or
durable enough to replace steel. Notice that when GM built plastic bodied
cars, the Corvette, Saturn, Fiero...they did not make the plastic from
soybeans or hemp and the cars have not aged well. The plastic hardens and
cracks.
To sell something as toxic and disgusting as petrol, you *need* to abolish
the free market, which is what happened. After that you do lose happiness,
and you do destroy basically everything quickly, hopefully in a reversible
way.
Free-market is like evolution. It does not see anything in the long term,
but can still lead to building things which can see in a longer and longer
terms.
Bruno
I'm afraid you've become a crank on this point...as though marijuana the
basis and measure of world capitalism.
It seems reasonable to assume that the negative social impact of the
alcohol prohibition is not a fluke, but instead a natural consequence
of any prohibition.
Yes, an prohibition, in fact any action, has negative as well as
positive natural consequences. Did the British bringing free-market
opium trade to China have positive as well as negative
consequences...sure it did.
It is also not a well-kept secret that there is collusion between
corporate interests and state actors to maintain prohibitions, and
that these reasons (already present in the times of Al Capone), have
little to do with a concern for public health. You need to go no
further than the current opioid crisis in the US. The corporate
interests promoting this terrible addiction are the same that lobby
for keeping the much safer and cheaper alternative illegal.
Are you claiming, without evidence, that cannabis is cheaper and safer
than all other pain killers?
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
