CDR: Re: why should it be trusted?

[David Honig]

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)? 

>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.  

>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? 

>(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.

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