Three Pillars of Leftdom

[Ideologue]

Gangs existed, and they did stuff, but my understanding is that the hundreds of billions of 2014 dollars' worth of revenues that Prohibition gave them created well-heeled, well-organized crime.

Now, prohibition can work, but not without being matched to an effective police state.

[grumbler]

Gangs existed, and they did stuff, but my understanding is that the hundreds of billions of 2014 dollars' worth of revenues that Prohibition gave them created well-heeled, well-organized crime.

Now, prohibition can work, but not without being matched to an effective police state.

Prohibition would only work with a foreign police force.  No cop wants to arrest his partner's mother for a victimless crime, let alone his own mother.  That's why there prohibition only works in places like Saudi Arabia, where the government can hire desert Bedouin and other fanatics as their cops.

[Razgovory]

Gangs existed, and they did stuff, but my understanding is that the hundreds of billions of 2014 dollars' worth of revenues that Prohibition gave them created well-heeled, well-organized crime.

Now, prohibition can work, but not without being matched to an effective police state.

They were well organized enough to rig the World Series and operate political machines.

[Razgovory]

Gangs existed, and they did stuff, but my understanding is that the hundreds of billions of 2014 dollars' worth of revenues that Prohibition gave them created well-heeled, well-organized crime.

Now, prohibition can work, but not without being matched to an effective police state.

Prohibition would only work with a foreign police force.  No cop wants to arrest his partner's mother for a victimless crime, let alone his own mother.  That's why there prohibition only works in places like Saudi Arabia, where the government can hire desert Bedouin and other fanatics as their cops.

I had no idea that poisoning people was a victimless crime.

[Razgovory]

Gangs existed, and they did stuff, but my understanding is that the hundreds of billions of 2014 dollars' worth of revenues that Prohibition gave them created well-heeled, well-organized crime.

Now, prohibition can work, but not without being matched to an effective police state.

You don't even need that.  All you need is a lack of demand.  For instance there is a prohibition on lots of things in the US, however, very few people want to buy plutonium, and thus the prohibition on plutonium works quite well.

[Sheilbh]

They are right. In fact I think that if Western conservative parties dropped (where applicable) their silly opposition to gay marriage and women's reproductive rights, I think majority of voters would support them, especially in the current geopolitical climate. Leave homos and sluts alone, and go after towelheads and Russkies instead, I say.

In the US it'd be mad. There's a generational shift on gay marriage within religious conservatives or evangelical Protestants just as pronounced as in the general population. This, above all, is why I think that battle's won. I'd guess the GOP moves to a federalist stance on the subject within the next 10 years.

By contrast in the general population and among religious conservatives there's no such shift on abortion. In addition to that because the key decision was made by the Supreme Court the only way to influence the debate one way or the other is through Presidential (and to a lesser extent Senatorial) elections. So unless there's some sudden shift on that, which seems unlikely, abortion will probably remain the key litmus test for both parties. From what I understand the last time there was a pro-life Democrat on their ticket was Sargent Shriver (ie. just before Roe v Wade), I imagine it's similar for Republicans.

The proper mix of opportunity and justice is hard to find, but it is worth pursuing.  It becomes hard when the Left and Right get so polarized that they'd rather see their own values compromised than the other side's advanced.

To an extent. I think the problem is that perhaps the question has changed. Social Democracy did attain a balance across the West and civilised the industrial age in my view and was a durable mix for that time and that problem.

In my view the current threat to opportunity isn't from an over-active, over-taxing state but from rapidly increasing disparities of wealth, part of which is a consequence of globalisation. The weird thing is it's now difficult to be what used to be upper middle class in the South of England because their old haunts are now there for billionaires only. You don't find many old judges or George Smileys in Chelsea anymore.

And I think a lot of the super-rich of today have that unattractive self-made man element to them. Your Brins and Blankfeins deserve a lot of admiration for what they've managed to do, but in some of their comments and views you do get that sense that anyone who's failed to be rich has done so because they're lazy (I think I read a comment from one of today's super-rich to the effect that if you've not made a million by the time you're forty, you're just lazy).

I think the new challenge is finding the right balance in a globalised age, with the inheritance of fortunes largely still to come. As the question's changed I think both left and right are sort of retreating to their default positions.

This is part of the reason I like the Tea Party, unlike the rest of the Republican party they're proposing policies that aren't preserved in aspic from a Georgetown dinner party circa 1986 and I think that their populist instinct will serve them well. I've less hope for a Clinton/Cuomo-ish Democrat Party.

[Sheilbh]

I had no idea that poisoning people was a victimless crime.

Nowt poisonous about booze. In moderation it's even good for you

[Duque de Bragança]

Hilarious to see Comte Largent, the so-called catholic (as catholic as he's Irish) being a lackey of fundie Protties. Explains the ad homs as diversions.
No wine for you at the next mass

Grumbler

Your explanation and analysis make more sense to me though one could debate about the examples.

DGuller

Apples and oranges. Even in Europe, gambling is much more regulated than alcohol. In some country, you can be banned from casinos or ask to be banned.
Even so, laws about alcohol vary wildly. Fun fact the countries which had prohibitions (smaller scale) and often the most severe laws still now (Nordic countries namely since only Denmark did not have a prohibition IIRC) have the most retarded drinking patterns e.g binge drinking and/or too much spirits. Causation ? Correlation (no wine culture)? Up to debate.

Last thing, as mentioned by Sheilbh, in small doses, quality alcohol (not the kind produced by organised crime) does not harm and may actually help.

[Ideologue]

Gangs existed, and they did stuff, but my understanding is that the hundreds of billions of 2014 dollars' worth of revenues that Prohibition gave them created well-heeled, well-organized crime.

Now, prohibition can work, but not without being matched to an effective police state.

You don't even need that.  All you need is a lack of demand.  For instance there is a prohibition on lots of things in the US, however, very few people want to buy plutonium, and thus the prohibition on plutonium works quite well.

I think the plutonium market is largely bounded by supply.

[DGuller]

I was only addressing your argument about jobs, not your larger position.  Any argument for or against a policy that is about "creating jobs" or "valuable jobs will be lost" is almost universally a terrible one.

[The Brain]

I'm skeptical of some of the facts concerning Prohibition.  Like that it created the mob.  I was under the impression that the mob existed before Prohibition and existed after it.

Many things exist after being created.

[The Brain]

Gangs existed, and they did stuff, but my understanding is that the hundreds of billions of 2014 dollars' worth of revenues that Prohibition gave them created well-heeled, well-organized crime.

Now, prohibition can work, but not without being matched to an effective police state.

You don't even need that.  All you need is a lack of demand.  For instance there is a prohibition on lots of things in the US, however, very few people want to buy plutonium, and thus the prohibition on plutonium works quite well.

I think the plutonium market is largely bounded by supply.

Have you worked in the plutonium market?

[Duque de Bragança]

Your argument has merit when it's about subsidies. I can't help but thinking about what I saw on TV once, when some tobacco farmers were whingeing for subsidies because they were making "quality products" and they needed them to continue their activity. 
That's very different from outlawing an industry and decreasing tax revenues while public health problems instead of decreasing, increase even more thanks to adulterated alcohol.

[Ideologue]

Gangs existed, and they did stuff, but my understanding is that the hundreds of billions of 2014 dollars' worth of revenues that Prohibition gave them created well-heeled, well-organized crime.

Now, prohibition can work, but not without being matched to an effective police state.

You don't even need that.  All you need is a lack of demand.  For instance there is a prohibition on lots of things in the US, however, very few people want to buy plutonium, and thus the prohibition on plutonium works quite well.

I think the plutonium market is largely bounded by supply.

Have you worked in the plutonium market?

What are you, a cop?

[The Brain]

Gangs existed, and they did stuff, but my understanding is that the hundreds of billions of 2014 dollars' worth of revenues that Prohibition gave them created well-heeled, well-organized crime.

Now, prohibition can work, but not without being matched to an effective police state.

You don't even need that.  All you need is a lack of demand.  For instance there is a prohibition on lots of things in the US, however, very few people want to buy plutonium, and thus the prohibition on plutonium works quite well.

I think the plutonium market is largely bounded by supply.

Have you worked in the plutonium market?

What are you, a cop?

Labels sicken me.