Tainted booze, you say?

/143 killed? Amateurs.

I prefer people don't dip their taints in my booze, but that's just me.

Because the free market can't have their own inspectors & seals of approval?
I wonder how many people think Underwriters Laboratories (UL) is a government agency?

LOL at submission title! First of all, the article clearly states the liquor was 'illegal', which means there already is regulation, second (and perhaps more important) 'free market' and 'unregulated industry' aren't even close to the same thing.

Anyway, +1 to subby for not being afraid to broadcast his ignorance!

This About That: SpamMan5R: trolled

All the same, the Tea Party speaks the same line and wants us to believe they believe it. It's getting harder to tell the difference between an honest troll and propaganda.

Wasn't intended to snag. I see, too often, others stating that things should be thrown to the market to solve, yet they don't consider or rebuff efforts to consider what might be called collateral damage. (IE, nixing public schooling and allowing the market of ideas to test. what happens to those who are harmed by the failed test systems)

I know that's a bad example, but it was a quick one

\I thought the "marketeers" was a hint that it was a mock statement
\\M-A-R (R you ready for some laissez-faire?)
\\\K-E-T (Tea party grassroots, activate!)

Let the lawyers decide.

This About That: SpamMan5R: trolled

All the same, the Tea Party speaks the same line and wants us to believe they believe it. It's getting harder to tell the difference between an honest troll and propaganda.

Poe's Law FTL.

lovegravy: LOL at submission title! First of all, the article clearly states the liquor was 'illegal', which means there already is regulation, second (and perhaps more important) 'free market' and 'unregulated industry' aren't even close to the same thing.

inasmuch as "free market" refers to the degree of government non-involvement, they are very much the same thing

On one hand we have an uncontrolled capitalism, and on the other we have stiffening big brother controls over everything. How about we find a happy middle?

Ugh.. this is just stupidity. Everyone knows that when you are trying homemade booze to let someone else drink it first. If they go blind or die, then you should pass on it. so Capitalism and the free market do work.
DNRTFA

lovegravy: LOL at submission title! First of all, the article clearly states the liquor was 'illegal', which means there already is regulation, second (and perhaps more important) 'free market' and 'unregulated industry' aren't even close to the same thing.

Anyway, +1 to subby for not being afraid to broadcast his ignorance!

In a truly free market, there would be no illegal products. Right?
Or do you mean "sort of free", or "freeish?"

skullkrusher: lovegravy: LOL at submission title! First of all, the article clearly states the liquor was 'illegal', which means there already is regulation, second (and perhaps more important) 'free market' and 'unregulated industry' aren't even close to the same thing.

inasmuch as "free market" refers to the degree of government non-involvement, they are very much the same thing

There is more to regulation than government regulation

stebain: This About That: SpamMan5R: trolled

All the same, the Tea Party speaks the same line and wants us to believe they believe it. It's getting harder to tell the difference between an honest troll and propaganda.

Wasn't intended to snag. I see, too often, others stating that things should be thrown to the market to solve, yet they don't consider or rebuff efforts to consider what might be called collateral damage. (IE, nixing public schooling and allowing the market of ideas to test. what happens to those who are harmed by the failed test systems)

I know that's a bad example, but it was a quick one

\I thought the "marketeers" was a hint that it was a mock statement
\\M-A-R (R you ready for some laissez-faire?)
\\\K-E-T (Tea party grassroots, activate!)

What happens to those who are harmed by the failed public education system?

My goodness! How could such clear market failures occur in such heavily regulated industries?

Surely it couldn't be the astronomically high alcohol tax (supplying over 10% of total revenue in most states) that creates these black markets.

Insurance companies sometimes inspect the things they insure, especially high dollar amount things. The only reason they don't do it very often now is the government already does it.

Get rid of fire inspections and insurance companies will absolutely step in to inspect the things they insure. I'd also bet they'd do it much more quickly with far fewer bureaucratic hoops to go through just to get the inspection started.

As for liquor, the solution would still probably lie in the tort system. Insurers who insured liquor production facilities would probably demand more proof or inspections, and the spectre of lawsuits and jail time should keep companies in line-at least it would if companies weren't regularly able to get the government to protect them from being held accountable .

trappedspirit: skullkrusher: lovegravy: LOL at submission title! First of all, the article clearly states the liquor was 'illegal', which means there already is regulation, second (and perhaps more important) 'free market' and 'unregulated industry' aren't even close to the same thing.

inasmuch as "free market" refers to the degree of government non-involvement, they are very much the same thing

There is more to regulation than government regulation

a self regulating industry is compatible with the definition

l3randon: What happens to those who are harmed by the failed public education system?

like I said...

pedrop357: Get rid of fire inspections and insurance companies will absolutely step in to inspect the things they insure.

Why are you assuming someone is insured?

skullkrusher: trappedspirit: skullkrusher: lovegravy: LOL at submission title! First of all, the article clearly states the liquor was 'illegal', which means there already is regulation, second (and perhaps more important) 'free market' and 'unregulated industry' aren't even close to the same thing.

inasmuch as "free market" refers to the degree of government non-involvement, they are very much the same thing

There is more to regulation than government regulation

a self regulating industry is compatible with the definition

What definition of what??

lovegravy: 'free market' != 'unregulated industry'
skullkrusher: 'free market' very much the same thing as 'unregulated industry' because of the government non-involvement angle
me: government non-involvement != 'unregulated industry'

"Fudd? I thought they took that off the market after all those hillbillies went blind."

/i can't believe i'm the first

trappedspirit: skullkrusher: trappedspirit: skullkrusher: lovegravy: LOL at submission title! First of all, the article clearly states the liquor was 'illegal', which means there already is regulation, second (and perhaps more important) 'free market' and 'unregulated industry' aren't even close to the same thing.

inasmuch as "free market" refers to the degree of government non-involvement, they are very much the same thing

There is more to regulation than government regulation

a self regulating industry is compatible with the definition

What definition of what??

lovegravy: 'free market' != 'unregulated industry'
skullkrusher: 'free market' very much the same thing as 'unregulated industry' because of the government non-involvement angle
me: government non-involvement != 'unregulated industry'

He talked about "illegal" so it seems fair to assume he is speaking about government regulation.

The free market might work a little better if the legal booze weren't taxed as heavily.

NukeEuropeNow: My goodness! How could such clear market failures occur in such heavily regulated industries?

Surely it couldn't be the astronomically high alcohol tax (supplying over 10% of total revenue in most states) that creates these black markets.

I agree that "Sin Taxes" are hamfisted behavior controls that should be abolished. Calculate the same rate of income generated by them and then reapply as a broad sales tax. Still an annoyingly regressive tax, but using taxes to try and influence "moral" behavior is durn stupid. Fat taxes on HFCS or junk food is another one of those idiotic behavior taxes that will never cover all that it needs to and creates weird market irregularities.

On the other hand I heartily approve of "use taxes" or as I call them "externalities taxes" For instance gasoline is ostensibly taxed to pay for the roads that said gasoline is generally used for driving on (I think a tire tax would be more efficient, but that's neither here nor there). If we decided we wanted to be carbon neutral, things like gasoline, propane, firewood, and electricity based on fossil fuels should be taxed by the eventual carbon that will be produced. This would pay for the scrubbing/trees/sequestration or whatever. You could say fat taxes try to model for healthcare down the road, but there are so many factors that go into health, it seems pointless.

Taxes that are tightly linked to the usage of the product have a place, but besides that, please stop taxing behaviors!

BunkoSquad: Tainted liquor
Whoa-oh-oh
(BOMP BOMP)
Tainted liquor

+1

You can't vote with your dollar if you're dead.

pedrop357: Insurance companies sometimes inspect the things they insure, especially high dollar amount things. The only reason they don't do it very often now is the government already does it.

Get rid of fire inspections and insurance companies will absolutely step in to inspect the things they insure. I'd also bet they'd do it much more quickly with far fewer bureaucratic hoops to go through just to get the inspection started.


Fire inspections are not there to protect the insurers, they're there to protect the people who will end up living/working in the buildings. No fire inspectors just means people will build things that can't pass inspection because it cheaper, and those who don't know about it or can't afford any better will be stuck with using them.

Interestingly, in the US, the Bottled-in-Bond act (designed to protect consumers from adulterated spirits, and to allow better tax collection) was passed in 1897, the height of the un-regulated free market era.

Rude Turnip: You can't vote with your dollar if you're dead.


THAT'S THE PLAN...

pedrop357: Get rid of fire inspections and insurance companies will absolutely step in to inspect the things they insure. I'd also bet they'd do it much more quickly with far fewer bureaucratic hoops to go through just to get the inspection started.

Along those lines, old Sanford Fire Maps are amazingly useful things for locating old buildings and structures.

lovegravy: LOL at submission title! First of all, the article clearly states the liquor was 'illegal', which means there already is regulation, second (and perhaps more important) 'free market' and 'unregulated industry' aren't even close to the same thing.

Anyway, +1 to subby for not being afraid to broadcast his ignorance!

Came here to say this, but some jerk beat me to it. Even worse, they were more articulate than I'd have been. (nice work LG!)

I'm sure this will besmirch India's famous laissez-faire capitalism.