Monday, June 27, 2011

Flying cars would solve a few problems.

My reason for being a strong proponent of public transport is two fold:
- Environmental damage and resource consumption - ie carbon emissions and the economic threat of peak oil. Using a car seems to be an extravagent use of a precious resource.
- Congestion - even if cars were using a renewable clean energy - you would still have a problem of traffic congestion - this wastes everyone's time. We would be a more productive society without it.

If we invented flying cars, and a clean renewable energy to power them, this would solve both these problems. Unlike in movies like the Fifth Element, there would be no intersections with flying cars; at the points where there usually would be intersections, the cars could just fly around each other (similar to how highway clovers don't intersect).

There is still an issue with resources I guess, if given we have the energy to run a flying car for everyone, we would still need the materials. But this seems like a problem that would easily be solved by free market allocation.

Sunday, June 26, 2011

My model for drug regulation.

Drug Policy
From an economics point of view, I don't really want to be commenting on what society's attitude toward drugs should be. However I think in the context of this discussion it is useful to have a minimal type of approach. So: drug use should not be encouraged. For this reason, drug advertising should be illegal (alcohol advertising should be made illegal). We assume that people are rational actors and make their own mind about what value their is to take from using drugs. Education should be given to so that they can make decisions based on all information available. The real grey area here, is whether drug use should be condoned or seen as a legitimate social activity - I'm talking mainly about drinking and smoking cannabis here. I guess why could try say, from a government point of view 'that's not our business - that's up to the people to decide'. The practical issue here is, do we allow bars and smoking cafes?


Legalize all drugs and legislate such that people need to earn a 'drug using license' before they can buy drugs.
They need to earn their license for each drug they wish to take, including alcohol and cigarettes and possibly even caffeine. In practical terms the licenses would be on a single ID card, which displays which licenses they have acquired, similar to how a NZ drivers license lists which various license types you have (full car, heavy traffic, motorcycle etc...).

The license test would require demonstrating that the user is aware of the effects and consequences of use of that particular drug, and that they know how to use the drug 'responsibly' as determined by the government drug regulation authority. We would require that this authority actually does some good research in to determining genuine effects of drugs and their responsible use.
For the harder drugs like heroin and methamphetimine, it's more a matter of 'damage control'. Ideally the licenses might only be given to people who are already addicts. The test could involve seeing a doctor, who might refuse a license to someone who is wanting to try heroin for a bad reason (ie if they were just feeling depressed at the time).

Good things to test:
- Appropriate dosage
- Addiction potential. (Ask how they plan to deal with it, see if they give a mature response).
- Appropriate activities/contexts for drug use (ie for party drugs: raves good, crowded malls probably not so).
- Physiological effects.


Drugs like alcohol, cannabis and cigarettes could be sold as alcohol currently is, at regulated licensed premises. The drug ID cards could include a scanner strip of some sort to quickly authenticate that person is allowed to buy the drugs.
Drugs like LSD, ecstasy and other 'party' drugs should be sold at pharmacies or specific 'party pill stores', which could specialize in giving advice and selling associated equipment.
Hard drugs like methamphetamine and heroin should be sold at pharmacies only.

The value of this system.
- Standard argument: massive savings on enforcing prohibition; ability to collect tax revenue.
- It's a robust way to educate.
- Can use taxes to consumption levels. Double bonus of reducing consumption from it's natural level, and increasing government coffers.
- Can collect information about drug use. Makes for good research.
- Can keep an eye on 'problem' drug users - ie with methamphetimine and they might be inclined to wig out and become dangerous the police can be prepared.
- A chance to intervene (doctor example above).