I am Colombian, only if Friedman was heard we would have such a different country. Narco culture has destroyed institutions, and the libertarian solution would have been so cheap and easy. This is something to regret. 😕

It's a real shame that alcohol gets separated from other substances that are called drugs, because alcohol is a drug!

@pseudonayme7717

7 жыл бұрын

And a truly hideous one that makes many people go literally insane.

@VaShthestampede2

6 жыл бұрын

Don't forget caffeine.

Milton Friedman: A man who actually deserved a Nobel prize

Right at 25:07 Pete makes a horrendous mistake on his position. He says "Drugs are not dangerous because they are illegal. We made them illegal because they are dangerous." His statement is 180 degrees from the truth when it comes to cannabis. And that is exactly what Dr Friedman was mentioning two minutes prior.

The drug war is based on a false premise. It is that man is "perfectable". That is with proper legislation, that man will behave properly, and not use the drugs. This premise is totally false.

@carolfrancey3647

10 жыл бұрын

Brilliant! Repeat message, repeat message. Thanks!

@fredbarns9669

9 жыл бұрын

Charles Martin Great straw man but I doubt you'll find any one in favour of drug prohibition seriously arguing that you will have zero drug users if our policies are followed.

@dookiejuju192

7 жыл бұрын

brilliant

It's easy to tell who is wrong in a debate with Milton Friedman... The person who isn't Milton Friedman

The drug war is like the war in Vietnam. The war on poverty, the war on hunger, etc. All done by government at great expense, and all lost.

@carledwardvincent7131

6 жыл бұрын

At 22:50 to 23:20, empirical evidence given that liberalization failed horribly in Netherlands and Britain. You can't get finer evidence on drug liberalization than those two countries, among the most developed and therefore arguably among the most capable countries to implement it.

@pixelrancher

5 жыл бұрын

Carl Edward Vincent Portugal would qualify as finer evidence on drug liberalization. As would Switzerland. Both countries took a different approach to the war on dugs - with Portugal decriminalizing all personal drug consumption. The money that was saved from not being spent on policing, court costs, incarceration, Hep C treatment, HIV/AIDS treatment, associated crime due to prohibition - was diverted to social programs including safe injection sites, free medical grade heroin, proper housing, employment opportunities, harm reduction and rehabilitation. Portugal went from having one of the highest rates of heroin usage in Europe to one of the lowest, from a high death rate from overdoses to almost a zero death rate, a significant drop in Hep C and HIV/AIDS infection, a significant drop in crime and a significant reduction in costs to the justice system. With few exceptions (like nicotine) drugs aren't addictive. Heroin, cocaine, crack - not addictive. What IS addictive is the result of taking those drugs, not the drugs themselves. Every hospital around the world dispenses opiates/opioids. Healthcare wouldn't exist without them. In dentistry, local anesthetics are 2% lidocaine hydrochloride and 2% mepivacaine (Carbocaine) - all from the cocaine family. Pain suppressive drugs like morphine, Buprenorphine, Diamorphine (heroin), Hydromorphone, Oxycodone, Oxymorphone - natural opiates and semi-synthesized opioids derived from opium - all prescribed routinely on a daily basis and without addiction. However, when administered over long periods of time, consumers can become addicted to the "feeling" these drugs provide, whether that is the feeling from having your pain numbed or the feeling from having your senses numbed. Our idea of what addiction is is based on "rats in a cage" experiments. Rats are put into a small empty cage with two water bottles. One filled with water, and the other filled with a water/drug mixture. The lone rat will drink from both water bottles and over time will choose the drug-filled bottle more often and will eventually die from it. Therefore, the drugs are addictive and fatal - only they're not. Psychologist Bruce K Alexander built "Rat Park", where the same bottles of the same water and water/drug mixture is placed in a large cage, with other rats, toys to play with, opportunities for sex - stimuli - and the rats chose to drink the water, and only occasionally, the water with the drug mixture - but never at a rate that would imply addiction or dependance and never at a rate that was fatal. If rats feel socially connected to their colony and live in a good environment, they choose drugs less often and it can reduce already established addictive behaviours.

Milton is the Carl Sagan of economics. He is an amazing communicator, he could make mud fascinating.

Buddy just made the most compelling argument I’ve ever heard championing the war on drugs and it was still horrible.

It's too bad that American Christians didn't listen to Milton Freedman on this one.

@PreciousBoxer

6 жыл бұрын

"If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people." -- House Friedman was right in his full lecture on medical care too. kzread.info/dash/bejne/padpstqJnNHTds4.html "People ought to be free to hurt themselves as well as to to help themselves so long as they do it at their own expense." There's a myth that people actually want to do harmful things to other people or themselves. Working for immoral policies gives people with ethics a negative incentive to participate. C'est la vie; carpe diem.

@Daggerpaw1

6 жыл бұрын

Atheists - always so eager to demonstrate their perceived intellectual superiority among any audience. It’s almost as if atheism exists solely to fuel intellectual arrogance. Your religion has nothing to do with your stance on drugs, only your knowledge and acceptance of information. After listening to Friedman and sowell, it appears that drug prohibition is wholly ineffective.

@carledwardvincent7131

6 жыл бұрын

Too bad you didn't listen to the other side. Pete Wilson nailed it at 22:50. You see, truth doesn't come from listening to just one side. Listen to the whole thing, it's just 26min31s, but really listen to both. I admire Friedman very much, but you can't be right all the time, and the empirical evidence given is decisive.

Undoubtedly, drug legalization will NOT bring about an end to drug use. No way. People will use drugs legal or not

@Tenebrousable

7 жыл бұрын

Sure. But it will diminish death and destruction by both the dealers, users and the government.

I'm on Milton Friedman's side here, but both men present pretty cogent arguments. His opponent isn't a snarky college student who thinks he knows more. He's pretty grounded.

@Tenebrousable

7 жыл бұрын

Milton shoved that all of the other guys "cogent" arguments were 100% assbackwards. He had nothing.

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.” -Camus "There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -O'Rourke

Like WOW, you can get legal weed in Colorado!! Bravo!! Washington state is next, and soon other states will follow. I have been looking forward to this for years. FREEDOM!

By including marijuana in Wilsons war on drugs it makes him sound as insane as Reefer Madness

Give people the choice to choose. Also give them the consequences for their choice.

@GM-yb5yg

6 жыл бұрын

Old comment but I cant help replying... consequence and responsibility is NOT something you give people as if it was a recent discovery...You can't choose if you want consequences or responsibility. What we can choose is if we should throw away more money at problems that can't be solved by fear and punishment

By six degrees of separation, everything that a person does can affect someone else, so we should (according to Pete Wilson) outlaw everything that is potentially harmful. For example, the consumption of fast food in excessive amounts is harmful. This habit of over-consumption can be learned by children and encouraged by their parents, causing an adverse health risk to the child. Therefore, consumption of fast food (or food in general) should be limited to protect the child and society. Or not.

Just because you use drugs (of any kind) does not necessarily mean you're an addict.

Well Noam Chomsky agree's with Milton's views on the war on drugs so you know morality is taken into account as well.

I must say that I stay away from all drugs I can, legal or illegal. Well, except wine and cigarettes (taxed unfairly by the way). The truth is the legal drugs are as dangerous or more so than the illegal. Milton is right, as he usually is. The government (local and federal) should be protecting our civil liberties, our property rights, and from tangible foreign countries invading. When government steps out of these confines it always opens the door for corruption - the outcome is always worse.

Why the heck does it cut off when Milton is going to make a counter statement like at 14:48 ????

As usual, the arguments largely devolved into reasonable facts against emotional appeal. Drugs are bad, you're not smart enough to stay away from them! or It's your life, choose your own adventure.

Heroin and other opioids are actually the safest drugs to use when purity is known and consistant. There is no damage to physical health. Deaths due to overdoses often occur when a person who is used to doing 2 bags of heroin which may be cut with innactives (not as strong) does 2 bags of heroin cut with fentynal or a fentynal derivitive. This also causes tolerance to rise in drug users who dont die but get higher than they may have otherwise stabilized at. Another way people can overdose is when opioids are combined with other downers such as alcohol or benzodiazapines. Lastly people overdose after being clean off of opioids for a while and relapsing using the same amount while tolerance is significantly reduced. If opiods were left to freemarket capitalism then deaths would be much less due to being able to know how strong the drug will be. Being cheaper as well means that most users will not need to resort to crime to purchase drugs unless they are heavily taxed by the government.

If you have the complete thing please let me know

I wish the point was made that it shouldn't be a federal issue. Let states decide if drugs should be legal. People will vote with their feet. And we would see very quickly who was right on the subject.

Hi please tell me about the morality of imprisoning people for victimless crimes.

OMG. OVER 40 Billion dollars!! LOL Man. Talk about the good ole' days. I think the last price tag I saw was well over a trillion dollars.

@sapster1337

8 жыл бұрын

+killingfloor70 This is a year after you commented but fuck it xP. The 40 billion is for 1 year while the 1-2 trillion is for the entire drug war.

Older Uncommon Knowledge intro is so funny and cheesy compared to the more recent one. So funny to see the change

Is arresting someone for basic possession of a drug moral? Does arresting that person reduce the moral consequences?

If they would stop the war on drugs, and start education of drugs we would all be better off. If people knew more of what drugs ( including legal prescription drugs ) do to the body over long time use they ( the people ) could choose for themselves. The fact is if you have a child born addicted to crack you are a criminal, If the baby is addicted to alcohol is it different cause it's legal?

9:37 is key

I wonder if Milton ever smoked a joint.

If only they allowed each speaker to explain themselves. I hate when interviews are edited/chopped so you cannot get a comprehensive debate.

Once again. Milton Friedman is right in hindsight in 2018.

Milton Freeman is to being right about just about anything having to do with the gov't or economy as is Chuck Norris is to round house kicks to the face.

Criminalizing anything just feeds the illegal trade of such items. One issue during prohibition was the quality of the alcohol. There was a lot of poison in the market. The same thing is happening now with Fentanyl. Teens are going to get drugs, legal or not.

The fundamental problem of drug use in my opinion is not the drugs. It's the factors pushing people to escape their realities and use drugs. Also all the deceiving anti-drug propaganda doesn't help. Whether it's moral or not like stated before me should be a matter of personal responsibility. And since Pete Wilson is so concerned with the danger drugs pose to 3rd parties why isn't he talking about gun control then? Those have a much greater risk of hurting people than a few grams of vegetation..

Yeah seriously... "Or not."

so we should just assume all weed smokers are gonna kill someone when they're high. Big cost on society, letting those people smoke!

Prevent? you mean prosecution of pre-crime. That seems expensive.

I didnt get one point. They both agree that the role of government is to protect others from those who are using drugs. But I dont get how milton says that they could protect people with a legalized use.

@Tenebrousable

7 жыл бұрын

I do not think Milton said that. Prohibtion causes more harm even to bystanders, like in Columbia, or the shopkeeper who gets robbed and killed for someone trying to support the habit, Milton said repeatedly. Government is not supposed to make us safe from ourselfs, against foreign nations perhaps, but only free.

Not that it weighs in favor of either party at all but the pro drug war speaker is particularly rude. Keeps snickering and cynically laughing at the beginning of some of Friedman's points.

Check it,Its kinda hard to get beer as a teen,but weed all day right.That's cause the state controls the sale of it.And a black market dealer sells a lot more than weed no identification needed.So you do the math,then when you vote try a guy who has a different stance.

Milton Freedman was great.

that's definitely Kellyanne Conway, the woman on 11'

i think Milton has loose this debate

I strongly disagree with the majority of responses which the premise if Miltons argument is cost, any type of law enforcement is costly, the objective argument should be the effectiveness of the process, if cost is associated with how one determines if something is effective. The following question has to be determined how much of that money is used to supposedly war against drugs. Our government is not an efficient cost saVing operation as us. And that 40 billion a year is not directly linked to Police Officers on the street enforcing the law. Useless programs such as DARE, drug education in public schools, Federal funded programs, and etc. So the argument is not focused on the bigger picture. What we know as drugs are rarely victimless crimes, cocaine is addictive to an violent point always. Regardless of the legality.

@PreciousBoxer

6 жыл бұрын

Addiction is a myth. There are things people prefer doing more than other things, that's it. Study Edward Bernays, or Adam Curtis' the Century of the Self, or and/or watch this clip: kzread.info/dash/bejne/k6Nsro9pnra_qso.html Do a search on microdosing sometime. These things will never go away, and we should get over this bolsheviks. Depression is an adverse side effect of oppression too, the primary cause being economic abuse, but any form of abuse will make people sad. This should be common sense, but that's only my informed opinion. C'est la vie, and carpe diem.

I cannot even begin to describe the level of intellectual dishonesty that is portrayed by Pete Wilson. Alcohol is a dangerous substance, that destroys thousands of lives every day, and he doesn't seem to be able to identify the over-arching hypocrisy of having alcohol legal but marihuana illegal. The new found libertarian principle that has awakened in me, finds disgust and derision with people like him, who think morality and ethics are orders and commands, and not principle and experience.

Ah. Legalize murder, then? After all, why should we "legislate morality"?

Terrible interviewer.