Say What?

Yesterday's (5/6/11) The Baltimore Sun had an interesting juxtaposition of articles.  On the one hand it noted "Delayed slots to cost Anne Arundel Millions".  On the other, we learned that "Maryland backs programs to help gambling addicts".   Seems like we need those addicts out there gambling!  So, I've got the solution:  Avoid the middle man and just give the addicts the money that would be used for the addiction program.  Problem solved.  Next?

But seriously, did anyone not think this would be the case.  Individual abuse and addiction is a balancing act.  It is one of society's cost of doing business. However, when individual or corporate abuse spills over to the public arena (i.e. society), as with smoking and pollution, the cost is deemed too high and we take appropriate steps to control the situation. That being said, now that we have accepted the costs for gambling and drinking, when will we accept it for marijuana and currently illicit drugs?  Would this add to, or might it actually subtract from, society's total cost of doing business?


1914