snrplfth

24 ms·

181.
by snrplfth 10y ago
What makes a War on Drugs doable is the laws prohibiting drugs. It's literally what makes it legally possible. You'll note that very few adults are arrested for "possession of alcohol".
182.
by snrplfth 10y ago
"Regulated but not banned" is not a middle ground between "banned or not". It is "not banned". I am not saying that you can't have regulations on a drug, I am saying that if you make a drug entirely illega
183.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Yes, of course, rules against incorrectly marked or marketed or adulterated products are different from the war on drugs. What I'm saying is that drug-war-type activities are based on rules prohibiting the sale of particular goods
184.
by snrplfth 10y ago
> If personal possession and consumption stopped being a crime, that would effectively end the War on Drugs overnight. Well, sure, the current way it's being done. But you'd still have cartel warfare for selling territory, adul
185.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Let me try to clarify: if you have rules prohibiting the creation and sale of substances solely for personal consumption by competent, consenting adults, then you have the primary tool needed to conduct a War on Drugs. I think that it is a
186.
by snrplfth 10y ago
I understand that, yes. But what I am saying is that, even with a "safety" criterion, the War on Drugs is completely prosecutable. Heck, alcohol is dangerous as hell, as evidenced by the number of deaths it precipitates. There is
187.
by snrplfth 10y ago
I was replying to the comment, which left out that context from the quoted statement. Context which I knew because I read the article.
188.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Okay, but what I'm saying is that once the tools are in place to ban various substances for personal consumption, and make those bans stick through enforcement, then that's all the tools you need for a War on Drugs. I mean, at tha
189.
by snrplfth 10y ago
I mean, I don't know what those numbers are. But when people give a per capita value for something that occurs over time, nearly always , that value is per annum. But here it wasn't, it was over several years. It'd be like s
190.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Well, they still destroy unapproved drugs at the border and raid places like whole milk producers and nutritional supplement makers. It's not exactly "caveat emptor" over at the FDA. My point is really that, if somebody'
191.
by snrplfth 10y ago
I've never been quite able to grasp the logic of those people who think that, while the War on Drugs is a bad idea, the FDA being able to ban whatever drugs it likes is a good idea. Either the government should have the power to ban dr
192.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Well, 433 over six years, 2007 through 2012. Which is about 72 per year, per person. I mean, what is supposed to be done about this? Cut off WV from painkillers? Have the DEA raid a bunch of pharmacies?
193.
by snrplfth 10y ago
I'm pretty sure that shooting down aircraft is already illegal. IANAL, though.
194.
by snrplfth 10y ago
This is a good point. Drones will probably be used for very prompt delivery. So the problem of unsecured packages will probably not be that important, for the same reasons that the problem of unsecured delivered pizzas is not that important
195.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Oh, I think a few people will try - until they get chased down by "Order Fulfillment Assurance Drones" and carried away to a nearby unregistered warehouse for interrogation.
196.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Thanks for looking. I've never heard of it happening, but all sort of arrangements happen in the grey areas of the law. I've been stipended before as an intern, but under the understanding that my hourly "wage" would not
197.
by snrplfth 10y ago
I think the problem of definition is that you opened with "slavery, or indentured servitude", and the article here referred to previously existing indenture systems where servants breaking their contracts would be jailed. Your wik
198.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Hmm...I do not see in those links where a sub-minimum stipend is allowed except in the case of high school vocational training. Can you quote it? (Criteria #6 appears to indicate no wages permitted.)
199.
by snrplfth 10y ago
A forfeitable posted bond is not indentured servitude any more than student loans are. (EDIT: It's really just a way to prepay for training without falling afoul of wage laws.) Now, I would rather that such loans were harmonized with
200.
by snrplfth 10y ago
That would be in a logically consistent world. We are not in that world. The main rules are here, for unpaid internships: https://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs71.pdf So unpaid ($0) internships are per
201.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Well, that's the problem, isn't it? At the outset, not only is it hard to tell whether an apprentice will stay once trained, but also whether they'll be any good at what they're being trained to do. It's doubly risk
202.
by snrplfth 10y ago
What I'm saying is that, if you insist that monetary compensation for a particular job must be no less than a certain amount, then all other benefits (insurance, training, experience) will be limited by that. A job that does not confer
203.
by snrplfth 10y ago
The problem is that, generally by law, you can either pay them $0, or minimum wage, but not in-between. This creates a gap in the market, and generally skews internships towards people who can afford to make $0 for an extended period.
204.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Did you even read the article? From the text: "It is entirely clear that 21st century Americans have no interest in jailing runaway apprentices. A legislative proposal calling for the arrest and detention of individuals in breach of th
205.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Yes, that's the thing. Total compensation for apprentices (for most employees really) is their pay, plus the experience gained, which can be considerable. But US wage law very rarely makes any exceptions for apprentices like this, so i
206.
by snrplfth 10y ago
Paying that little is generally illegal in the USA. At minimum wage, a worker working 37.5 hours a week will earn $1087 a month. If they're underperforming that price, it doesn't make sense to hire them.
207.
by snrplfth 10y ago
The point is that they are useful at multiple employers. An employer, when training an apprentice, incurs a cost in doing so, but cannot be sure that they'll be able to recoup the cost if the apprentice leaves soon after finishing tr
208.
by snrplfth 10y ago
> Wonder why we aren't working 15 hour weeks as predicted by Keynes? Blame all the people making adverts and everyone who's making content funded by those adverts. Keynes was speaking relative to the conditions of the day, thou
209.
by snrplfth 10y ago
I'd say it's overwhelmingly due to the regulatory straightjacket these cities are caught in. Municipal and regional governments have made it extremely difficult to add new housing through increased density, and then they find that
210.
by snrplfth 10y ago
We can stack houses though. That does work pretty well.

More ›