4 ms·

I know hn doesn't like politics, but it amazes me how popular one party's policies are(see polls for single payer healthcare, gov funded college, wealth tax, et

I know hn doesn't like politics, but it amazes me how popular one party's policies are(see polls for single payer healthcare, gov funded college, wealth tax, etc ), but it is still competitive. Republicans are certainly better at "politics". It will be fun to see how they spin this into the vague notion of socialism or somehow this is taking away your freedom.

robotresearcher 6y ago
> Republicans are certainly better at "politics". They don't need to be better to get their way. The US system gives rural areas disproportionate political power. Rural areas are less diverse, older, more religious, less educated and more conservative than the cities. The disproportionate influence was built in on purpose when the US was formed. Sparsely-populated states wouldn't agree to a union if populous New York was going to dominate all policy. There have always been arguments about the pros and cons.
door99 6y ago
> see polls for single payer healthcare, gov funded college, wealth tax, etc Except the Democrats don’t run on that. None of this was part of Biden’s campaign, in the primaries, only Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren ran on these issues, and Biden tried to distance himself as much as possible from them. I agree that if the Democrats ran on what you’re describing, they would do much better electorally, but most do not.
boogies 6y ago
> somehow this is taking away your freedom IIUC it could indirectly reduce some people’s freedom to live, because marijuana can impair driving but is harder to diagnose as the cause for accidents than alcohol — because tests only show whether it has been taken in the last few weeks, not whether the subject is intoxicated at the moment of the test. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  As could mobile phones, putting on make up, working a 24 hour shift at the hospital... In fact, all the things listed above make someone a far more dangerous driver than marijuana use. Yet working extra long hours and sleep deprivation in the name of "productivity" is celebrated.
  - boogies 6y ago
    I believe governments can and do outlaw using mobile phones or taking hands off the wheel while driving. 24 hour shifts at the hospital may be justified AFAIK by potentially saving more lives than they risk losing — I would hope there are precautions in place to minimize those risks (such as housing immediately adjacent to the hospital — IIRC this was the case for Ben Carson when he worked long shifts at Johns Hopkins). Similarly, I’m not opposed to medical marijuana use, which I think may alleviate more pain and suffering than it causes — but I don’t think the same is true for recreational use, I think that may trade human lives for shallow fleeting pleasure, and cannot be practically risk-mitigated by outlawing exclusively before driving, only completely or not all, for the testing reasons I mentioned in my first post.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      If you have had experience with marijuana or people who have used marijuana, I do see how one could justify the think the risks commensurate with a wholesale ban on consumption. I can think of a million other things to ban, starting with mandatory breathalyzers on all cars that disable the engine upon detection of alcohol, that would yield a bigger benefit in exchange for the loss of freedom. But I’m also not about banning every single thing that increases morbidity/mortality risks.
- chillwaves 6y ago
  As mentioned, there are 100 other ways a driver can be "impaired", what's more there are ways to make the roads safer thereby increasing my freedom. Why don't we just put automated red light cameras and speed cameras everywhere? Won't that maximize my freedom to on safe roads? Would you support such a measure?
  - boogies 6y ago
    I considered it for a bit. I think I wouldn’t, because they’d presumably run proprietary, un-auditable software that could surveil many innocent bystanders — if they ran verifiably decent Free software I likely would. There are similar risks with the DEA et. al., so I think we should push for high transparency from them, preserve oversight and due process such as requiring warrants before search and seizure, ban no-knock warrants (pass the Justice for Breonna Taylor Act), and otherwise make them much more accountable than a typical surveillance camera is. Edit: and make this a local issue, and let each locality deal with it as suits that locality best.

robotresearcher 6y ago

> Republicans are certainly better at "politics". They don't need to be better to get their way. The US system gives rural areas disproportionate political power. Rural areas are less diverse, older, more religious, less educated and more conservative than the cities. The disproportionate influence was built in on purpose when the US was formed. Sparsely-populated states wouldn't agree to a union if populous New York was going to dominate all policy. There have always been arguments about the pros and cons.

door99 6y ago

> see polls for single payer healthcare, gov funded college, wealth tax, etc Except the Democrats don’t run on that. None of this was part of Biden’s campaign, in the primaries, only Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren ran on these issues, and Biden tried to distance himself as much as possible from them. I agree that if the Democrats ran on what you’re describing, they would do much better electorally, but most do not.

boogies 6y ago

> somehow this is taking away your freedom IIUC it could indirectly reduce some people’s freedom to live, because marijuana can impair driving but is harder to diagnose as the cause for accidents than alcohol — because tests only show whether it has been taken in the last few weeks, not whether the subject is intoxicated at the moment of the test. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

lotsofpulp 6y ago
As could mobile phones, putting on make up, working a 24 hour shift at the hospital... In fact, all the things listed above make someone a far more dangerous driver than marijuana use. Yet working extra long hours and sleep deprivation in the name of "productivity" is celebrated.
- boogies 6y ago
  I believe governments can and do outlaw using mobile phones or taking hands off the wheel while driving. 24 hour shifts at the hospital may be justified AFAIK by potentially saving more lives than they risk losing — I would hope there are precautions in place to minimize those risks (such as housing immediately adjacent to the hospital — IIRC this was the case for Ben Carson when he worked long shifts at Johns Hopkins). Similarly, I’m not opposed to medical marijuana use, which I think may alleviate more pain and suffering than it causes — but I don’t think the same is true for recreational use, I think that may trade human lives for shallow fleeting pleasure, and cannot be practically risk-mitigated by outlawing exclusively before driving, only completely or not all, for the testing reasons I mentioned in my first post.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    If you have had experience with marijuana or people who have used marijuana, I do see how one could justify the think the risks commensurate with a wholesale ban on consumption. I can think of a million other things to ban, starting with mandatory breathalyzers on all cars that disable the engine upon detection of alcohol, that would yield a bigger benefit in exchange for the loss of freedom. But I’m also not about banning every single thing that increases morbidity/mortality risks.
chillwaves 6y ago
As mentioned, there are 100 other ways a driver can be "impaired", what's more there are ways to make the roads safer thereby increasing my freedom. Why don't we just put automated red light cameras and speed cameras everywhere? Won't that maximize my freedom to on safe roads? Would you support such a measure?
- boogies 6y ago
  I considered it for a bit. I think I wouldn’t, because they’d presumably run proprietary, un-auditable software that could surveil many innocent bystanders — if they ran verifiably decent Free software I likely would. There are similar risks with the DEA et. al., so I think we should push for high transparency from them, preserve oversight and due process such as requiring warrants before search and seizure, ban no-knock warrants (pass the Justice for Breonna Taylor Act), and otherwise make them much more accountable than a typical surveillance camera is. Edit: and make this a local issue, and let each locality deal with it as suits that locality best.