Legal vs Illegal

We have all been raised to recognize the ill side effects of drug and to stay away from them because of their harsh side effects and their illegality. Is the government really doing a service by making these drugs, we all ready know to be bad, illegal to have and sell? I think making drugs illegal makes more problems than it is worth. The illegality has caused a powerful and dangerous black market.

Many dollars and hours of detective work are spent on investigating and keeping drugs of the streets. Most of all, many lives are ruined and lost because of the extremely profitable business of drugs. The government has made these dangerous drugs even more life threatening by making them illegal and allowing organized crime to be built around them. Making these drugs legal would take out the profitability and organized crime built up around these drugs.

Drug control should rely in the hands of the individual and be a product of good parenting.
This is another example of the government stepping beyond its bounds and making a problem worse by getting involved.

College Playoffs

I know it has been said a thousand times, but college needs playoffs. Playoffs would boost the ratings of college football and make its national champions more legitimate. Many of my friends complain they can get into college football because there is no playoff system. Its one bowl and thats it. One loss at the end of the season and your shot at the national title is history.

A playoff system would provide more finality and sense of accomplishment as well. The current system leaves many fans at a loss because their team was not the most popular. I feel that this has upset the football gods for far too long. I predict playoffs to be seen in the next 10 years.

Bad Press

We have all heard the news about Tiger Woods and his affairs, and Michael Phelps and his weed. Everyone looks down on these former role models for young athletes and say it is terrible how they have negatively influenced the youth of america. What they did was wrong and did not set a good example, but I think the general public is ignoring a big detail in those stories. If these controversies and evidence of role models gone bad is so damaging to today's youth than why is this information all over every TV screen?

At some point the media as well as the viewers have to start being somewhat responsible. If the stories about Phelps and Woods were bad for the American youth they should not have been published for the youth of America to see. This story would not be damaging at all if it was not reported, but no one is upset at reporters. If the news isn't doing any good or preventing bad, it should not be news. These stories are just sensless journalism.

Monopoly

I'm sure most people remember from American history the immoral practices of corrupt railroad companies of the early industrial revolution. This problem was solved through government regulation, where many laws were made to prevent immoral business practices. A little later in history antitrust acts are installed to prevent monopolies and market control. These seem to be good improvements that help the individual man as well as the economy overall. However, many businessmen and economists are skeptical of all these government regualtions and lack of "laissez faire".

As I said before Daniels seemed to imply these problems could be solved without government intervention, and the free market would prevail. While bad business practices create a demand for other companies with good practices, a high barrier to entry can make it unlikely another business will arise. This is especially true when monopolies can be built around products with inelastic demand, such as medicine or even water. Maybe certain products will need to be protected or social action will be required in this instance.

It is important to remember that capitalism relies on the human mechanism of reason to work. This means capitalism not only operates on people's desire to advance and better them selves given incentive, but also relies on people making smart decisions to progress. Every other system of economical and social concern stifles the individual's own reason and does not protect essential rights every person deserves. Other systems count on the goverment to make these decisions for the individual. I feel much more comfortable making these decisions for myself.

Unregulated Capitalism

I atteneded a a lecture by Eric Daniels at Thomas last night, where he provided a moral defense for unregualted capitalism. He states that capitalism's economic feasability is not usually contested, but rather labeled as immoral. He claims capitalism is not usually explained well on a moral basis and misunderstood even by the man who coined the term "Capitalism", Karl Marx.

In this lecture Daniel explains how Capitalism is the only system where the individual's rights can be upheld and protected. Daniel's also explains how the government should only be concerned with nation defense, policing, and judicial affairs. This government serves as a nuetral third party that can settle disputes and protect the people. Daniel's also entertained questions about how to found this government since people can not be taxed under free market economics. There are many suggestions for this mechanism, such as businesses paying for the government's services for settling disputes and charitable contributions from the public. Daniel's added if the people where not taxed and had a choice, the majority of people would be likely to pay for the government's sevices as long as they did a valuable service.

A question I did not get to pose was how the domination of monopolies can be prevented, such as the railroad tycoons of the 19th century.