Government

Sex Work in New Zealand

This entry was posted in Capitalism Culture Domestic Terrorism Government Regulation Sex on by

The good folks over at Marginal Revolution show again that they are paying attention to all things economic by bringing our attention to New Zealand’s decriminalization of prostitution.
Alex is so intrigued by the sex-safety manual (PDF) produced by the NZ equivalent of OSHA that he doesn’t get around to discussing the economic side of the decriminalization. Who can blame him? The manual is both well done and a hoot! I’ve downloaded a copy to read at leisure but even a brief skim will be both instructional and entertaining for any of you so inclined.
PZ Myers adds that the Kiwi feds have published a straightforward, unblushing guide to safe sex behavior and suggests that the manual’s section on repetitive stress injuries might also be useful to computer-using geeks.
One thing that is not quite clear to me is whether the ability to produce an entertaining manual is enough to justify the governments involvement in the business. I can’t think of any other good reasons…
Oh, the answers provided for the IQ question posed by Alex Tabarrok seem, at first look, to provide a topological solution more then a safe sex solution.

Spend, Spend, Spend

This entry was posted in Constitution Drug Laws Federal Government Government on by

Some will say big deal others will say w can do no wrong:

The White House will project soon that this year’s federal deficit will exceed $420 billion, congressional aides said, a record figure certain to ignite partisan warfare over President Bush’s handling of the economy.
The annual summertime analysis is expected out this Friday, said several congressional aides speaking on condition of anonymity Tuesday. That would be well after the frequently ignored legal deadline of July 15.
Showing an exemplary respect for the law of the land:
White House budget office spokesman Chad Kolton said the report will be issued when it is ready, and offered no date.
I wonder how this would work on the street:
Drug War Jackboot: You are under arrest for growing and possession of marijuana!
Drug War Victem and Cancer Patient: But my doctor gave me a prescription.
Drug War Jackboot: Tough!
Drug War Judge: Twenty years! You must obey the law.
Sure, there are a lot of laws that should be ignored. However, if you are the Whitehouse and the law applies to you then you really should set a good example.

Everything Changed?

This entry was posted in Capitalism Constitution Democracy Domestic Terrorism Government Libertarianism Patriot Act US Politics on by

Point 14 of the things Mark Kleiman recently learned at an Executive Session on Gang Violence opens with:

14. On the other hand, gang violence accounts for more deaths each year than were killed on 9-11. Thinking about getting ready to think about it isn’t really a satisfactory response.
Why hasn’t this changed everything?
It is pretty clear that the policies of local, state, and federal governments over the past 100 years have not fulfilled the government’s obligations to the people. Perhaps it is time to make some fundamental changes in these entities to get them refocused on serving the people’s rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness rather than the faction de jour.

Speeding

This entry was posted in Government Law Libertarianism on by

Don Boudreaux at Cafe Hayak tells this story:

There it was, in big, bold, black and white: “SPEED LIMIT 65”
As I drove on Saturday to a conference, signs with this crystal-clear message were displayed prominently along I-66, I-81, and I-64 in Virginia. And yet I disobeyed this command not to drive at speeds in excess of 65 MPH. I set my cruise-control on 73 (just shy of ten-miles per hour over the posted speed limit), kept it there, and enjoyed the drive. I even passed three or four patrol cars lying in wait for speeders. Not one pursued me.
And then opines:
This everyday driving experience and my mental experiment confirm that law is not just what the state says it is and only what the state says it is.
Except when the state wants it to be exactly what it says it is.
Law is much more nuanced, rich, and spontaneous than the state’s written rules.
But not near as nuanced, rich and spontaneous as it was prior to the state writing this precise law.
The real law on U.S. highways is something like the following: if weather conditions are decent and if traffic is not too heavy, then you can drive between five and ten miles per hour over the posted speed limit.
Which is not near as nuanced, rich and spontaneous as what used to be the law in many jurisdictions, e.g., Washington:
No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing.
And then came maximum speed limits.
Back to Don:
No one legislated this rule; it’s not written down in any official statute book; it’s certainly not posted along highways. It evolved spontaneously from everyday practice and is now part of the expectations of all drivers — and, importantly, it is also part of the expectations of highway patrol officers.
This does seem to reflect everday practice. But both the law and the practiced rule represent a devolution from the days of no written maximum speed limits. And, in many cases, this cushion may exist via legislative intent as the penalties available for minor speeding infractions are nominal and enforcement is viewed as a poor use of officer’s time both from the perspective of revenue generation and highway safety. They want the big ticket reckless speeders as defined in their respective state statutes.
There is a fairly detailed review of state speeding laws here.