-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 09:10:27AM -0700, David Honig wrote:
> At 05:50 PM 10/17/00 -0700, Nathan Saper wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 12:07:00PM -0400, David Honig wrote:
> >> Not yet. But I believe the UK takes samples of everyone
> >> arrested (not necessarily guilty) of minor crimes, and some
> >> US states and cities do or periodically propose doing this
> >> or more.
> >
> >The next question is: What do they do with this info? Insurance
> >companies and the like use it to justify discrimination against people
> >likely to develop certain medical conditions.
>
> Discrimination in the good sense, like discriminating dangerous vs.
> safe. What do you think insurance companies *should* do, if not make various
> discriminations about risk? Are you against car insurers asking
> about your other genetic characteristics (e.g., sex)?
>
No, because they do not deny coverage based upon gender. They can
(and, in many cases, do) deny coverage based on larger-than-average
chances of contracting heart disease, for example.
> >The point is, the government is being used to do corporations' dirty
> >work.
>
> What a government can legitimately do should be reigned in
> by a constitution. And no more.
So are you saying that there is nothing wrong with the government
doing the corporations' dirty work?
>
> >And I'm much less afraid of a government that is (in theory, if
> >not always in practice) somewhat connected to the people
>
> What are you smoking?
Cigarettes.
>
> >(representatives want to get reelected, after all) than I am a
> >corporation that can do basically whatever the fuck it wants, with
> >little or no hope of punishment.
>
> Corps have to please their customers or go extinct. Real simple.
> Only govt can print money.
The problem is, corporations also control the media, so most people do
not know about the bad shit some corporations are involved in.
>
> You *should* be concerned about various individuals (legislators, their
> wives, cultists, etc.) trying to get the government to use its violence to
> accomplish their way. You *shouldn't* be concerned about the _mutually
> consensual interactions_ of the individuals (and voluntary associations
> thereof, like corps.) within your borders. Government should *only* be
> concerned with nonconsensual interactions.
>
> dh
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
- --
Nathan Saper ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | http://www.well.com/user/natedog/
GnuPG (ElGamal/DSA): 0x9AD0F382 | PGP 2.x (RSA): 0x386C4B91
Standard PGP & PGP/MIME OK | AOL Instant Messenger: linuxfu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE57kTJ2FWyBZrQ84IRAoehAJ9Z2wVyycQKkorEchtHzqvZmejeowCfcsmd
556CP7OG1KdnBJM0dU/V9kU=
=HIdC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
