Call me a crackpot libertarian
Murray Sabrin
May 23rd, 2013
In his Star Ledger column,
“<http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2013/05/crackpot_libertarianism_at_the_1.html>Crackpot
libertarianism at the convenience counter,” Paul
Mulshine tries to make the case that Senator
Richard Codey’s bill to increase the age to
legally buy cigarettes from 19 to 21 is not an
infringement on individual liberty. He fails miserably.
Mulshine writes. “…think about the fact that
cigarettes annually kill more Americans than all
of those (marijuana, opium and crack cocaine)
drugs combined, plus alcohol use, car accidents
and suicide. So just what is the basis for
outrage at a minor restriction (emphasis added)
on the most deadly drug of them all?” Applying
Mulshine’s logic, then the State of New Jersey
should ban cigarettes completely, saving everyone
from their own destructive behavior.
Next, Mulshine correctly states, “A strict
libertarian could argue that the government has
no role in regulating either drug,” that is,
marijuana or cigarettes. Correct. The government
should not regulate, ban, proscribe, etc., what
we smoke, drink, eat, read, where we travel, or
how we should defend ourselves. That is called
liberty, the founding principle of our country.
Senator Codey, the once acting governor and
undertaker, not only buries the departed, he
wants to bury individual liberty under the guise
of altruism. As Mulshine observes, “Codey is on
much firmer ground when it comes to the ‘nanny
state’ argument often raised by the crackpot
libertarians. Codey argues that people who get
through their teen years without smoking are much
more likely to avoid addiction. This is backed up
both by science and his own observations as an
undertaker. In that capacity, he meets many
relatives of people killed by smoking.” But
people usually die after decades of smoking.
Mulshine then makes the disingenuous argument
that since state government pays for the
healthcare of the poor (Medicaid), charity care,
etc., it has the right to stop young people from
smoking by raising the legal age to buy cigarettes from 19 to 21.
Mulshine writes, “If we taxpayers are going to
pick up the tab, why shouldn’t we tell young
people how to behave? Yuck. Why not raise the
age to 25 or 30 or higher, if the “scientific
evidence” shows that individuals who begin
smoking in their teens increase the risk of a lifetime nicotine addiction?
The logic of this argument should force Codey and
Mulshine to support raising the legal age to
smoke to 25, 30 or higher, which will then lower
the risk of young people beginning to smoke at an
early age. Will Codey amend his bill to raise
the legal age to purchase cigarettes or will he
call for a total ban on cigarettes?
The correct policy on smoking or any other
medical issue is for the government to get out of
the healthcare sector. Period. That would force
individuals to make better decisions about their
lifestyle choices. Currently, the government has
created a huge moral hazard by subsidizing
smoking, in effect telling people that taxpayers
will pay for their healthcare if they get ill
because of smoking, excessive drinking, overeating, etc.
The solution to create better outcomes in
healthcare among other areas of our society is
liberty, individual responsibility and voluntary
charity, not the twisted logic of the Senator Codey and now Paul Mulshine.
http://murraysabrin.com/new-jersey/call-me-a-crackpot-libertarian/
--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
