4 ms·

Good question. If I harm no other, and if I am not deceived as to known side effects, why ought I not to be able to do so?

by mises 7y ago

jniedrauer 7y ago
The point of regulation is not to prevent you, the consumer, from making an informed decision to damage yourself. The point is to prevent the producer from exploiting uninformed human vulnerabilities. In the case of quack medicine, we have an easily exploited glitch in our brains that makes us associate exotic substances with medicine. In the case of gambling and microtransactions, we are easily exploited by the "gambler's fallacy." Just one more roll...
- magduf 7y ago
  >The point of regulation is not to prevent you, the consumer, from making an informed decision to damage yourself. The point is to prevent the producer from exploiting uninformed human vulnerabilities. In the case of quack medicine, we have an easily exploited glitch in our brains that makes us associate exotic substances with medicine. So why don't we regulate/ban quack medicine then?
  - dTal 7y ago
    We do. Dunno what country you're from, but in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Food_and_Drug_Administration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Food_and_Drug_A...
    - magduf 7y ago
      Sorry, that's BS. Here in the US, we have chiropractors, homeopathy, TCM, and other "alternative medicine", all making tons of money, and the FDA doesn't do anything at all about it.
- beenBoutIT 7y ago
  Intelligent humans notice things like wasting $16 and 60 minutes on an utterly worthless gaming experience or getting a 3 minute buzz from a cigarette or a crack rock and put together value equations. It's not the government's job to tell people what they can and can't do with regards to harming themselves, it's the government's job to make sure the labels are accurate.
  - dTal 7y ago
    Which is why nobody's addicted to crack and there's no problem! /s The notion that people are perfectly free and rational entities is a dangerous fallacy. People don't have perfect information, they don't make perfect decisions, and if there's something the government can do that improves the lives of many while inconveniencing few, then it's absolutely the government's job. There exist substances which will get you addicted instantly. Do these have any place in a free market? Where does the rational "value equation" come in to that?
    - beenBoutIT 7y ago
      The problem with crack isn't the cocaine it's the format. Crack is the chemical equivalent of a freemium game, no buy-in and once a user's involved they only pay a few bucks for each subsequent hit. A few dollars quickly adds up to much more than that same person would have spent on an entire 8ball if they were capable of delaying gratification, but they aren't. Console-type games that you pay more for and only pay for once are the digital 8ball to freemium's digital crack rock, addictive but not nearly as destructive. Perfect Information is what the government needs to guarantee and regulate, not morality. Apps need to be transparent and honest and substances need accurate labeling and purity from contaminants. Heroin is a one-way ticket to pain and degeneracy and everyone in the Western world knows this; it's a terrible value that generally only appeals to someone who's already hooked on opiates.

Good question. If I harm no other, and if I am not deceived as to known side effects, why ought I not to be able to do so?

by mises 7y ago

Good question. If I harm no other, and if I am not deceived as to known side effects, why ought I not to be able to do so?

jniedrauer 7y ago

The point of regulation is not to prevent you, the consumer, from making an informed decision to damage yourself. The point is to prevent the producer from exploiting uninformed human vulnerabilities. In the case of quack medicine, we have an easily exploited glitch in our brains that makes us associate exotic substances with medicine. In the case of gambling and microtransactions, we are easily exploited by the "gambler's fallacy." Just one more roll...

magduf 7y ago
>The point of regulation is not to prevent you, the consumer, from making an informed decision to damage yourself. The point is to prevent the producer from exploiting uninformed human vulnerabilities. In the case of quack medicine, we have an easily exploited glitch in our brains that makes us associate exotic substances with medicine. So why don't we regulate/ban quack medicine then?
- dTal 7y ago
  We do. Dunno what country you're from, but in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Food_and_Drug_Administration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Food_and_Drug_A...
  - magduf 7y ago
    Sorry, that's BS. Here in the US, we have chiropractors, homeopathy, TCM, and other "alternative medicine", all making tons of money, and the FDA doesn't do anything at all about it.
beenBoutIT 7y ago
Intelligent humans notice things like wasting $16 and 60 minutes on an utterly worthless gaming experience or getting a 3 minute buzz from a cigarette or a crack rock and put together value equations. It's not the government's job to tell people what they can and can't do with regards to harming themselves, it's the government's job to make sure the labels are accurate.
- dTal 7y ago
  Which is why nobody's addicted to crack and there's no problem! /s The notion that people are perfectly free and rational entities is a dangerous fallacy. People don't have perfect information, they don't make perfect decisions, and if there's something the government can do that improves the lives of many while inconveniencing few, then it's absolutely the government's job. There exist substances which will get you addicted instantly. Do these have any place in a free market? Where does the rational "value equation" come in to that?
  - beenBoutIT 7y ago
    The problem with crack isn't the cocaine it's the format. Crack is the chemical equivalent of a freemium game, no buy-in and once a user's involved they only pay a few bucks for each subsequent hit. A few dollars quickly adds up to much more than that same person would have spent on an entire 8ball if they were capable of delaying gratification, but they aren't. Console-type games that you pay more for and only pay for once are the digital 8ball to freemium's digital crack rock, addictive but not nearly as destructive. Perfect Information is what the government needs to guarantee and regulate, not morality. Apps need to be transparent and honest and substances need accurate labeling and purity from contaminants. Heroin is a one-way ticket to pain and degeneracy and everyone in the Western world knows this; it's a terrible value that generally only appeals to someone who's already hooked on opiates.