3 ms·
>How about we don't dogmatically prohibit other adults from engaging in some class of voluntary interactions with each other. No, as long as it has drastic sid
by KptMarchewa 5y ago
>How about we don't dogmatically prohibit other adults from engaging in some class of voluntary interactions with each other.
No, as long as it has drastic side effects that affect others.
>hundreds of millions of people potentially being empowered
Poe's law strikes here hard.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago>>No, as long as it has drastic side effects that affect others. If the side effect is pollution, then prohibit pollution-emitting energy consumption. Don't use this as a pretense to suppress activities you don't like, by singling those activities you personally don't like, among the innumerable many non-essential activities that consume electricity, for prohibition. The rest of the effects, like retail gamblers losing money on bad investments, are voluntarily assumed, and could not possibly be worse than state-run lotteries consuming 8% of the poorest households' annual income. >>Poe's law strikes here hard. I substantiated my claim with multiple examples.