Perusing the news has left me in a quandary this morning. One story, the proposed banning of McDonald's fries, doughnuts and pastries in New York City eating establishments is downright frightening, a sure harbinger of socialistic doom. Then there's the story about a crackdown on internet gambling (already illegal) ready to be signed by Bush. This one sounds kinda prudent.
Oops, we've got a conundrum here.
Ok, here goes. If NYC is allowed to set precedent by banning a food the FDA isn't trying to ban it might open a legal pandora's box and crack the very fiber of America. Say you want a revolution...just try taking away fries or Krispy Kremes. Blood in the streets, folks. At the same time, people who choose these items should not expect others to pay for their bypass.
As to internet gambling, this is a tougher one. It's addictive--I once saw a co-worker gamble away his entire paycheck. The prospects of that happening are magnified by having the one-armed bandit sitting in the living room or housed on the blackberry.
But Libertarians will argue that it's simply another choice among many destructive choices we have, like eating doughnuts or fries, or drinking. Technically they might be correct. And, it's likely that lobbyists from Harrah's and the other brick and mortar casinos are behind this crackdown--after all they provide jobs and tax revenue to the politicians' constituency. If we're going to have addition might as well make some money off it, right?
Wondering, have the lefties weighed in on this? Sounds like a target-rich environment on both sides. As for me, I haven't solidified my position quite yet. Guess I'll finish this cinammon roll and one more cup of coffee and think about it some more.
No comments:
Post a Comment