The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations • Hacker News Board

Re: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations

#131

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:30 AM UTC

newjersey wrote: post #20

ypeterholmes wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. By skipping over the huge $$$ profits this article reveals itself to be pretty disingenuous.

I think we shouldn't base our arguments for legalization on tax revenues. I hope the tax revenue will go down as more states (I hope) will legalize. I oppose the use of sin taxes to fund our government. I hope most people would agree with me on that.

I actually think that taxes functioning as user fees on things with significant social costs is the ideal policy approach to internalize the externalities at play.

Re: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations

#132

Post by hackuser » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:31 AM UTC

Kadin wrote: post #118

zkhalique wrote: post #78

I would express the same sentiment about illegal immigrants. This is to all the people who support Donald Trump's rhetoric about deporting all 11 million undocumented immigrants. These people fled the drug gangs and violence that our war on drugs helped create (think fleeing ISIS) and came to work jobs no one else would take and make a better life for their family. Yes technically they broke a law. If you're going to…

> came to work jobs no one else would take This is a particular piece of rhetoric I find distasteful. If there are jobs that are structured such that only an illegal immigrant, who by definition exists outside the normal labor pool and its protections, will take, that job should not exist in that form or at that pay rate. Full stop. So the fact that jobs that "no one else would take" exist and are being taken by ille…

>> came to work jobs no one else would take

> If there are jobs that are structured such that only an illegal immigrant, who by definition exists outside the normal labor pool and its protections, will take

Typically, that statement also refers to jobs that are perfectly legal, but most Americans wouldn't take anyway. For example, many of the experienced people reading this wouldn't drive a cab, deliver pizzas, work as unskilled construction labor, a dishwasher or a janitor if they became unemployed. They'd continue to look for their next IT job. And they'd be choosy about that - not selling computers at Best Buy, for example.

(I'm not putting down those jobs; personally I respect any work.)

Re: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations

#133

Post by AstralStorm » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:32 AM UTC

existencebox wrote: post #25

bendykstra wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet has made it very easy to shield ourselves from the arguments of people with differing views. Disclaimers such as this are just another way for us to filter what we read and further isolate ourselves ideologically. Who cares who said it so long as what they said has merit? Conversely, a healthy skepticism is always valuable, regardless of the source.

Because who is saying something colors the merit it brings. And as a healthy skeptic, knowing the direction to look for potential bias _does_ help orient my skepticism and find potential ulterior motives within the infinite space of "all ulterior motives". I certainly was asking myself "I wonder who was backing this" while reading it. (Don't take me the wrong way, I absolutely agree with you with respect to not filte…

Which is why you shouldn't read just the conclusions, but get the actual source data they used.

Easier said than done. It's easy to dismiss, but hard to verify.

Science found hard! News at 11! ;) http://www.theonion.com/article/national-science-foundation-...

Re: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations

#134

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:39 AM UTC

hackuser wrote: post #132

Kadin wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> came to work jobs no one else would take This is a particular piece of rhetoric I find distasteful. If there are jobs that are structured such that only an illegal immigrant, who by definition exists outside the normal labor pool and its protections, will take, that job should not exist in that form or at that pay rate. Full stop. So the fact that jobs that "no one else would take" exist and are being taken by ille…

>> came to work jobs no one else would take > If there are jobs that are structured such that only an illegal immigrant, who by definition exists outside the normal labor pool and its protections, will take Typically, that statement also refers to jobs that are perfectly legal, but most Americans wouldn't take anyway. For example, many of the experienced people reading this wouldn't drive a cab, deliver pizzas, work…

I've done almost all of those things before (general maintenance rather than construction, and I've never driven a cab) -- including retail sales at an electronics chain (Radio Shack before Best Buy was the thing) -- and would again if I didn't have better prospects elsewhere (with my experience and expectations of the future labor market, I don't expect to need to do any of those things again, but that's a different thing than being unwilling to consider it if there was a need.)

I suspect that's not all that uncommon here (well, maybe not having done as many of the less-skilled jobs you talk about, but not being unwilling if it was genuinely the best prospect.)

Re: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations

#135

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:40 AM UTC

hackuser wrote: post #132

Kadin wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> came to work jobs no one else would take This is a particular piece of rhetoric I find distasteful. If there are jobs that are structured such that only an illegal immigrant, who by definition exists outside the normal labor pool and its protections, will take, that job should not exist in that form or at that pay rate. Full stop. So the fact that jobs that "no one else would take" exist and are being taken by ille…

>> came to work jobs no one else would take > If there are jobs that are structured such that only an illegal immigrant, who by definition exists outside the normal labor pool and its protections, will take Typically, that statement also refers to jobs that are perfectly legal, but most Americans wouldn't take anyway. For example, many of the experienced people reading this wouldn't drive a cab, deliver pizzas, work…

[deleted]

Re: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations

#136

Post by viraptor » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:45 AM UTC

hueving wrote: post #125

viraptor wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All these are examples of claims that are misleading because they're misleading, not because of who is making the claim. I think you've got it the other way around. Claims like that would not exist in the first place if someone wasn't either ignorant or purposefully trying to mislead you. > identifying the author doesn't automagically lift the responsibility of coming up with a refutation. I never said it does. But…

>you know what kind of facts are they may be omitting, or know where to look for opposing opinions. No, that's being lazy. If you follow that guideline you would only scrutinize things which fit into your preconceived notion of what the biases of the author would be. You should scrutinize everything rigorously. Just because someone is voting for Hillary doesn't give them free reign to say any negative thing they want…

Never said you shouldn't look in other directions. Sure, you can look in all the possible places. It's better if you do.

But unless I'm going to write a report and spend a few hours/days doing a complete research, finding opposing views (and opposing views to those views) is a good approximation.

Re: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations

#137

Post by mc32 » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:49 AM UTC

hackuser wrote: post #132

Kadin wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> came to work jobs no one else would take This is a particular piece of rhetoric I find distasteful. If there are jobs that are structured such that only an illegal immigrant, who by definition exists outside the normal labor pool and its protections, will take, that job should not exist in that form or at that pay rate. Full stop. So the fact that jobs that "no one else would take" exist and are being taken by ille…

>> came to work jobs no one else would take > If there are jobs that are structured such that only an illegal immigrant, who by definition exists outside the normal labor pool and its protections, will take Typically, that statement also refers to jobs that are perfectly legal, but most Americans wouldn't take anyway. For example, many of the experienced people reading this wouldn't drive a cab, deliver pizzas, work…

Most Americans (as well as non-Americans) would prefer other things, if they had them available. There are poor people out there. I knew a couple who'd sell their blood often (they'd cheat by going to different banks) in order to afford gas to get to a menial job. Another one working home depot, etc. getting minimum wage --I'm not taking about highschoolers working McDonald's or the mall, I mean grownups.

Re: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations

#138

Post by drewrv » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:51 AM UTC

drcode wrote: post #95

zkhalique wrote: post #78

I would express the same sentiment about illegal immigrants. This is to all the people who support Donald Trump's rhetoric about deporting all 11 million undocumented immigrants. These people fled the drug gangs and violence that our war on drugs helped create (think fleeing ISIS) and came to work jobs no one else would take and make a better life for their family. Yes technically they broke a law. If you're going to…

Your argument is basically "everybody's doing it, everybody is breaking a law somewhere" and that it's OK for people to break one law because other people are breaking a different law. I think a more sensible approach than saying "lawbreaking is OK" is for the parties on Capitol Hill to forge a compromise that involves (1) easier legal immigration (2) better funding and more enforcement of existing immigration laws (…

I think the major disagreement isn't whether law breaking is ok or not. The question is whether violating US immigration laws is a serious crime that requires harsh punishment or a minor crime the requires a slap on the wrist.

The "apologize, pay a token fine, get a work permit" crowd thinks violating immigration laws are like speeding, pot, or jaywalking laws. The "deport them all" crowd thinks violating immigration laws is like stealing or committing fraud.

That's why this issue won't be resolved any time soon. If liberals get a big enough majority there may be a one time amnesty or a change that allows new immigrants in. If the right got a big enough majority there would be a one time mass deportation or maybe a stupid wall. But the bottom line is that some people see it as no big deal, the others see it as a heinous crime, and it's a Rorschach test: agreement on who's right will never happen.

Re: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations

#139

Post by rayiner » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:51 AM UTC

blackbagboys wrote: post #130

rayiner wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether or not people have that right outside the US doesn't mean it's our problem to enforce that right. Those people have their own countries, with their own governments organized for their benefit. As an immigrant, this is one of those things that still perplexes me about Americans despite my having grown up here. Nobody in Bangladesh thinks they should care as much about people in Africa as they do about their ow…

Frequently it seems that caring about immigrants or refugees in the abstract is an oblique way of attacking your fellow citizens. Additionally, if government officials are supposed to be governing the nation for the benefit of all mankind rather than looking after the interests of the people whom they theoretically represent, we might as well dispense with the pretense of representative government and try to formulat…

I grew up with a lot of "college democrats" types who think big about being "citizens of the world" but will happily shit on people from "flyover country," "rednecks," etc.

Re: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations

#140

Post by 2muchcoffeeman » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:55 AM UTC

hueving wrote: post #123

linkregister wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ad hominem fallacy is simply a guideline to evaluate the logical consistency of an argument. It's not a magic spell you can use to discount a premise. Indeed, blind use of "fallacies" is just an appeal to ancient Greek authority! For non-expert HN commenters, we have to use authority, preexisting bias, and past actions of the speaker to give us more information without fully delving into the article. Unless you'r…

>The ad hominem fallacy is simply a guideline to evaluate the logical consistency of an argument. Precisely. So an argument is not logically consistent if it's just attacking the messenger instead of the content. Here's a hint: if your argument in any way relies on discounting the messenger, it's pretty weak and you should not make it. How many times have you been swayed by someone that says, "Well I would disregard…

I still find it useful to know about the person or organisation saying something. Some people and organisations have a history of being deceitful or irrational and it's pretty safe for a non-expert to just disregard their ideas with no consequence.

Eg Ken Ham/AiG, Donald Trump, all conspiracy theorists.