|
|
|
|
|
|
by yarrel
5056 days ago
|
|
|
Legalisation and state provision of drugs would minimise harm both to drug users and to society. Since this would result in a reduction in government (with the end of the War On Drugs), this is actually a Libertarian argument. How Libertarians react to this says a lot about just how much of a caricature they are. |
|
|
Why do you think provision of drugs is necessary to minimize harm?
If drugs were legal (and not heavily taxed) the prices would drop to a level that even indigent beggars could afford.
Are you saying that drugs specifically should be provided, or are you arguing that in general all basic needs should be provided?
Because if that's the case, I'm not opposed to a guaranteed minimum income of the type supported by Milton Friedman in lieu of the current welfare system.
Incidentally, I think that by guaranteeing a minimum income we would be free to remove much of the regulation that ineffectually attempts the same outcome--resulting in an overall reduction in the size and scope of government.