ERICOPOLY

In all cases... Buybacks return capital to shareholders. No exceptions. Returned, not destroyed.

You have both selfish needs as well as social instincts. They are sometimes at odds and based on your individual situation you may service one at a higher priority to the other. These are instincts though and not Gods that drive us, IMO.

Please stop with all the evolutionary references. I respect your views on social issues and I agree with most of them. If you don't like people going to hookers, fine, but don't try to rationalize things by fitting them in your self-constructed moral framework, where, if you don't believe in your specific god and your specific values then it's ok to murder your boss, cheat on your wife and inject your baby daughter with heroin. Your line of reasoning on morality is outdated, egocentric and doesn't stand up to scrutiny, as several people tried to explain to you in previous threads on similar issues. Besides that, your constant references are a very childish way to end any productive discussion. "You don't agree with me? You must be a barbarian living in the animal kingdom ... ". Right. Some people have a more nuanced view of what's right and what's wrong. They try not to listen to their gut feelings (like those in the animal kingdom ;)). writser, that's the thing. I've thought about this a lot and I think Eric will agree. There is no "true" right and wrong. All of our brains are wired in a certain way and we don't control the original wiring. Our evolutionary instincts are just that. Some people are wired to steal others are wired to sacrifice their lives for a stranger. Neither is better or worse. They are simply different. The bottom line is this: if there is no deity, there is nothing that is moral or immoral. Actions are simply that: actions. We can glam it up and say "well if it causes harm, it's bad." That's arbitrary though. We can say we "reason" and that's why we do certain things. Indeed, even that is arbitrary. One person may "reason" almost anything. I have no problem with anyone who is a deist, theist, agnostic or atheist. I do find it a little puzzling when they aren't logically consistent though. That goes even when a Christian is for the death penalty or an atheist grumbling about social rights. If life is valuable, then even a person on death row has value. If we really are just stardust, don't expect people to get up in arms about people dying in a foreign country. Morals aside, legislators could take a hypocratic oath to "do no harm". Policies that lead to an increase of human trafficking of sex slaves could be seen as doing harm.

The problem with democracy is that the tastes and preferences of the majority are forced upon the minority with guns. (and they think it is funny) I don't see how that's a problem. That's how it is throughout the animal kingdom - the strongest survive. Isn't infidelity merely the emergence of a stronger woman, who can better compete for the man's attention?

If you eat badly and don't exercise, you potentially rob your wife of precious years of your life. We need to implement a paternalistic totalitarian fascist state to make you eat your veggies, take the stairs, and brush your teeth... Stoning for leaving the toilet seat up.

Your wife wouldn't be a victim of force/violence/aggression, no. We don't (and shouldn't) lock people up for cheating on their wives. As far as human trafficking goes. Car sales are legal and stolen car trafficking occurs. Selling cars is engaging in peaceful free-market commerce, trafficking in stolen cars is not. Prostitution is simply engaging in peaceful free-market commerce. Kidnapping and selling human beings against their will is not. In both cases the peaceful free-market activity (voluntary commerce between consenting adults) should be legal, the theft and/or violence should not. Are there any examples of human trafficking where the service is legal? Like what if you kidnapped a psychologist and forced her to see clients, pocketing her fee for yourself? Things like that just don't happen with legal services AFAIK.

It would certainly be interesting if the police kicked in your door after surveillance footage caught you with your hand up your secretary's skirt. After all, your wife is a victim of infidelity and the police must enforce marriage vows.

The trouble with the Mrs is one example. Your guilt is another. These are examples that keep us monogamous without needing police intervention. However, I can't say being married is a violation of our instincts. There are examples of monogamy throughout the animal kingdom, even amongst primates. Same for polyamory. So are you being driven by your instincts or your morals? It might just be convenient that you can be morally superior whilst merely acting within your instincts. However, there is sexual variation amongst species as well. Another person may be acting within his instincts and yet have multiple partners at once. He is not acting outside of his idea of moral behavior. We are social animals with social instincts. Typically, if you feel bad about something it's because your actions were harmful to another -- this is going to happen if you are programmed to cooperate with others within a social unit. Problems arise when some of us are programmed with monogamous instincts, some with polyamorous, and some with homosexual. We are going to get at each other's throats as to what is "moral" or not. That's because of the lack of understanding how we are different. Eric, you can use the same argument for theft. Madoff was acting on his instincts - greed. Some people may have the polyamorous instinct and some may have the theft instinct. Some may have the monogamous instinct and the charity instinct. None of these are more moral or immoral than the other - all simply instincts. There was a victim in Madoff's crime. It's like complaining that your dentist is committing a crime for not doing your dental work for free. So you should imprison him. However, if he cleans your teeth for free it's not a crime. You wanted your teeth cleaned -- you are not a victim of the dentist. Now, if you want to get off, how are you a victim of the prostitute? Your wife wouldn't be a victim? First, the law isn't there to protect marriage. They lock up unwedded people all the same. You can legalize prostitution for unwedded persons if that's your chief complaint. Next, what is the legal remedy for infidelity? Prison?

There was a prostitution sting in the local area where the police reported that prostitution is not a victimless crime because of the human trafficking. Uh huh... which is a result of it being illegal. So you start off without any victims. Then you make it illegal which create victims where none existed before, and then you reason that enforcing the law is the best policy to save the victims. It's tragic this circle of logic.

The NFL can throw a person out of the league if they want. I would be irritated if the police then put him in prison too.

It's actually one of those professions that provides the best customer service. Funny that BofA is allowed to keep it's door open, and some of these women go to jail.

The trouble with the Mrs is one example. Your guilt is another. These are examples that keep us monogamous without needing police intervention. However, I can't say being married is a violation of our instincts. There are examples of monogamy throughout the animal kingdom, even amongst primates. Same for polyamory. So are you being driven by your instincts or your morals? It might just be convenient that you can be morally superior whilst merely acting within your instincts. However, there is sexual variation amongst species as well. Another person may be acting within his instincts and yet have multiple partners at once. He is not acting outside of his idea of moral behavior. We are social animals with social instincts. Typically, if you feel bad about something it's because your actions were harmful to another -- this is going to happen if you are programmed to cooperate with others within a social unit. Problems arise when some of us are programmed with monogamous instincts, some with polyamorous, and some with homosexual. We are going to get at each other's throats as to what is "moral" or not. That's because of the lack of understanding how we are different. Eric, you can use the same argument for theft. Madoff was acting on his instincts - greed. Some people may have the polyamorous instinct and some may have the theft instinct. Some may have the monogamous instinct and the charity instinct. None of these are more moral or immoral than the other - all simply instincts. There was a victim in Madoff's crime. It's like complaining that your dentist is committing a crime for not doing your dental work for free. So you should imprison him. However, if he cleans your teeth for free it's not a crime. You wanted your teeth cleaned -- you are not a victim of the dentist. Now, if you want to get off, how are you a victim of the prostitute?

Politically, when you decriminalize drugs you just call it "economic sanctions against Al Qaeda". That way Fox News will support it.

A while ago I watched a documentary on Netflix about why we "fall in love". I think this is it: http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/brainsex-why-we-fall-in-love/ It showed brain-scans of various couples. The brains of some married couples were still "in love" after a couple of decades of marriage. I believe it also compared the brains of some individuals (not monogamous) with brains of primates that are not monogamous. It was interesting. I think it explains a lot -- some people just can't stay married. Biologically. For others, they can't understand why anyone would cheat on their spouse. People are different. Not immoral, just different.

Also, the law doesn't say that prostitution is only illegal if the johns are married. It's illegal even for unwedded johns. So that marriage argument is bull-crap.

You are in just as much trouble with your wife if you have sex with your dental hygienist for free. So legality isn't what gives us pause. Any special reason you mentioned "dental hygienist sex"? Is that a fetish? Post some pics and the crowd wisdom will decide hot or not! Are you looking for some material to take to your sperm bank?

The trouble with the Mrs is one example. Your guilt is another. These are examples that keep us monogamous without needing police intervention. However, I can't say being married is a violation of our instincts. There are examples of monogamy throughout the animal kingdom, even amongst primates. Same for polyamory. So are you being driven by your instincts or your morals? It might just be convenient that you can be morally superior whilst merely acting within your instincts. However, there is sexual variation amongst species as well. Another person may be acting within his instincts and yet have multiple partners at once. He is not acting outside of his idea of moral behavior. We are social animals with social instincts. Typically, if you feel bad about something it's because your actions were harmful to another -- this is going to happen if you are programmed to cooperate with others within a social unit. Problems arise when some of us are programmed with monogamous instincts, some with polyamorous, and some with homosexual. We are going to get at each other's throats as to what is "moral" or not. That's because of the lack of understanding how we are different.

You are in just as much trouble with your wife if you have sex with your dental hygienist for free. So legality isn't what gives us pause.

I don't want my daughter to smoke cigarettes. I don't want her to chew gum. I don't want her drunk. I don't want her to drop out of school. I don't want her to use drugs. I don't want her to be a prostitute. That's all true. Now if I make them all illegal, I'm covered right? Well, how come we have drugs and prostitution if they are illegal? So the question is... Since we're pretty much screwed either way on the drugs and prostitution issue, why do we have to create a lucrative industry for violent gangs/criminals? My parents are Australian and prostitution there is legal. I haven't heard of any troubles whatsoever. And yes, your wife hates illegal prostitutes just as much. It's not like making it illegal is going to save you from yourself if you have the itch. Just ask Elliott Spitzer. Me, I have self control and don't need laws to define my morals.

I'd bet that there would be more E-Coli poisoning in the US if hamburger meat were illegal. USDA does not regulate the black market.

Eric, Do the parents have to pay extra for the HPV medication at least then? Someone's gotta cover it. It shouldn't be passed along to the others not playing the game. The vaccines could be purchased with the enforcement savings from decriminalization of prostitution. That cost (enforcement/incarceration) is born by all but is due to the moralists insisting on these vice laws. By the way, what disease is spread by hand jobs? There is only enforcement cost with no public health concern there. Sex is bizarre in that it's legal only when it's free. Look,if you are a woman and if you are rather "loose", it doesn't seem like an improvement to be so cheap as to be free at the same time. I can buy your original argument but not this one. Let's say we started fresh so that the moralists didn't have say in it. Prostitution would be legal and, as a result, there are no costs of law enforcements. However, the added costs of healthcare would still be in the system (or for sleeping around, in general). The added costs are there even if we remove the artificial constraint of law enforcement. Since the real cost is there, I don't see how it's fair to layer that on to the "moral" citizens. You can legalize professional sex with condom and outlaw free hookup sex without condoms -- that is, if this is really about health issues and not about morals. The health issue is a red herring. Google "escort backpage [your city]". Now, are those girls licensed prostitutes that undergo a regular health checkup? Nope. Illegal prostitution means disease. Legalized is less so. Just like hamburger meat, a regular inspection helps but no guarantee. Illegal just adds to the health costs. But you are against the health costs it seems? Hmmm. I think it's just a moral hurdle. The prostitutes are there either way, but you could do better from a health standpoint if they were certified by a state health inspector. Plus, you could legalize protected sex only. For example, hand jobs are illegal from prostitutes? Why? Don't argue it's a health issue.

Just buy a reloading press if bullets are 5,000. Hand loading is pretty easy.

Eric, Do the parents have to pay extra for the HPV medication at least then? Someone's gotta cover it. It shouldn't be passed along to the others not playing the game. The vaccines could be purchased with the enforcement savings from decriminalization of prostitution. That cost (enforcement/incarceration) is born by all but is due to the moralists insisting on these vice laws. By the way, what disease is spread by hand jobs? There is only enforcement cost with no public health concern there. Sex is bizarre in that it's legal only when it's free. Look,if you are a woman and if you are rather "loose", it doesn't seem like an improvement to be so cheap as to be free at the same time.

Paul, The easy way to cut down on STD costs is to make the HPV vaccine mandatory for 12 yr old girls. People's morals shouldn't drive up costs!

So I think if you legalized the distribution of both, we'd end more than 50% of the violence in this country overnight. You had drive-by shootings with tommy guns when Al Capone was minting money from alcohol prohibition. I feel like if you just take away the source of the money, the gangs are bankrupt. You don't have licensed lawyers and licensed psychologists shooting at each other with AK-47s -- instead, they just advertise legitimately for increased market share. Things just happen that way when they're legalized. You don't need to ban guns to end the gang shootings.