5 ms·

> "Personally, I prefer a government that lets people do stupid things" What an ignorant statement to make. Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions"

> "Personally, I prefer a government that lets people do stupid things" What an ignorant statement to make. Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions" like smoking in public places ? Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions" like driving drunk ? Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions" like shooting up a school ? Society works when we look out for each other - and not let people do whatever they think is "right".

crazy1van 11y ago
I think his caveat of "barring negative impact on others" pretty much covers these cases.
- wrong_variable 11y ago
  > "barring negative impact on others" You think taking what little money poor people have from them via allowing them to spend it on lottery does not have social consequences ?
  - palakchokshi 11y ago
    Ummm what happens when you apply your argument to allowing them to spend it on alcohol or cigarettes or a car or a thousand other things? This is a flawed argument my friend. No one group has a right to enforce their social, moral, economic or other ideology on another group based on what the enforcing group thinks is "right". That's a slippery slope with extra grease on it.
  - nostrebored 11y ago
    I guess it's hard for some people to relate to a large portion of any future savings being 'invested' in lottery tickets ("the money just goes towards your college education either way!") and spent on cigarettes -- not that hard at all when it's been your reality.
  - timbowhite 11y ago
    Well then the government should create laws allowing it to dictate what you can spend your money on if you make less than $X per year. You know, to prevent social consequences.
  - xixi77 11y ago
    In your line of reasoning, should we perhaps also introduce mandatory drug testing for people with low income, and prohibit them from buying alcohol and cigarettes? Surely, these purchases have more social consequences than lottery tickets.
  - mindslight 11y ago
    This concept of "social consequences" is essentially a flipped framing of a situation to incorporate an implicit utility function of whomever is using the term. If a person or group of people does not act in a way that benefits you, they still have not harmed you. It simply means they have not chosen to conform to your expectations.
  - frogpelt 11y ago
    Different methods of governing can basically all boil down to a simple balance scale: On one side you have the rights of the individual and on the other side you have the rights of the community. Some people tend to lean the scale toward individual rights and others toward community rights. Smaller government tends to handle the balance by staying out of the way until it's necessary that they step in. Bigger government tends to handle the balance by marking clear (or blurry) lines and moving them when necessary.
    - exolymph 11y ago
      This is exactly what I was trying to say. Well put.
- exolymph 11y ago
  *her, but thank you. (I know it's a little thing, but it bothers me that people automatically assume anyone on Hacker News is a man.)
nmrm2 11y ago
One could make the argument that there's a difference between letting people do stupid things that only indirectly and only in certain contexts hurt others (ex spending the rent money on lottery tickets) and letting people do stupid things that by definition hurt others (shooting up a school, smoking in public and populated places) or have a significant liklihood of harming others (driving drunk). Of course this is always an awkward line to walk, and the definition of stupid is entirely subjective. Most things that make people happy aren't totally "rational".
AlgorithmicTime 11y ago
You completely ignored the bit where they said that the government's there to prevent negative externalities, like shootings, etc. To say that the government's job is to prevent us from making stupid choices is absurd. At that point, you may as well make cheeseburgers and fries illegal, and tax whole milk. `
zeveb 11y ago
> Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions" like smoking in public places? Yes, because mature adults recognise that smoking in public places is no more offensive than poor bathing hygiene, and less harmful than woodsmoke. > Society works when we look out for each other - and not let people do whatever they think is "right". What is right? The majority? That's just a synonym for might.
CompelTechnic 11y ago
All examples you give have a high likelihood of hurting other people. How does buying a lottery ticket hurt others?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

crazy1van 11y ago

I think his caveat of "barring negative impact on others" pretty much covers these cases.

wrong_variable 11y ago
> "barring negative impact on others" You think taking what little money poor people have from them via allowing them to spend it on lottery does not have social consequences ?
- palakchokshi 11y ago
  Ummm what happens when you apply your argument to allowing them to spend it on alcohol or cigarettes or a car or a thousand other things? This is a flawed argument my friend. No one group has a right to enforce their social, moral, economic or other ideology on another group based on what the enforcing group thinks is "right". That's a slippery slope with extra grease on it.
- nostrebored 11y ago
  I guess it's hard for some people to relate to a large portion of any future savings being 'invested' in lottery tickets ("the money just goes towards your college education either way!") and spent on cigarettes -- not that hard at all when it's been your reality.
- timbowhite 11y ago
  Well then the government should create laws allowing it to dictate what you can spend your money on if you make less than $X per year. You know, to prevent social consequences.
- xixi77 11y ago
  In your line of reasoning, should we perhaps also introduce mandatory drug testing for people with low income, and prohibit them from buying alcohol and cigarettes? Surely, these purchases have more social consequences than lottery tickets.
- mindslight 11y ago
  This concept of "social consequences" is essentially a flipped framing of a situation to incorporate an implicit utility function of whomever is using the term. If a person or group of people does not act in a way that benefits you, they still have not harmed you. It simply means they have not chosen to conform to your expectations.
- frogpelt 11y ago
  Different methods of governing can basically all boil down to a simple balance scale: On one side you have the rights of the individual and on the other side you have the rights of the community. Some people tend to lean the scale toward individual rights and others toward community rights. Smaller government tends to handle the balance by staying out of the way until it's necessary that they step in. Bigger government tends to handle the balance by marking clear (or blurry) lines and moving them when necessary.
  - exolymph 11y ago
    This is exactly what I was trying to say. Well put.
exolymph 11y ago
*her, but thank you. (I know it's a little thing, but it bothers me that people automatically assume anyone on Hacker News is a man.)

nmrm2 11y ago

One could make the argument that there's a difference between letting people do stupid things that only indirectly and only in certain contexts hurt others (ex spending the rent money on lottery tickets) and letting people do stupid things that by definition hurt others (shooting up a school, smoking in public and populated places) or have a significant liklihood of harming others (driving drunk). Of course this is always an awkward line to walk, and the definition of stupid is entirely subjective. Most things that make people happy aren't totally "rational".

AlgorithmicTime 11y ago

You completely ignored the bit where they said that the government's there to prevent negative externalities, like shootings, etc. To say that the government's job is to prevent us from making stupid choices is absurd. At that point, you may as well make cheeseburgers and fries illegal, and tax whole milk. `

zeveb 11y ago

> Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions" like smoking in public places? Yes, because mature adults recognise that smoking in public places is no more offensive than poor bathing hygiene, and less harmful than woodsmoke. > Society works when we look out for each other - and not let people do whatever they think is "right". What is right? The majority? That's just a synonym for might.

CompelTechnic 11y ago

All examples you give have a high likelihood of hurting other people. How does buying a lottery ticket hurt others?

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]