John Stossel
2003-10-02 12:27 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
archershipsI went to see John Stossel speak at Duke tonight. He was invited by the Duke Student Union, and sponsored by the Young Americans for Freedom. The crowd was young, mostly Duke undergraduates, though there were a sprinkling of older people (50+). Very few people my age though. I felt like a perv.
Stossel discussed how he started as consumer reporter in the 1980's for ABC. Back then, he thought capitalism was a necessary evil, and had to be highly regulated. However, after doing a number of these stories, he began to see that some things were much greater risks than others, and that he and other reporters may be commiting statistical murder by making people too fearful of the wrong things. For example, if you scare people enough not to fly, by exaggerating the risk of flying (which is quite low), they'll drive instead, which will actually increase their risk of dying.
So he created a chart of the relative risks such as the risk of dying from environmental toxicity, flying, driving, toilet seats, etc. That in turn led to one of his first specials "Are we scaring ourselves to death?". As he researched further, he came to believe that government regulations almost always harmed more than they helped. For example:
* FDA stopped thalidomide, but has probably cost more lives than it saves by retarding new product growth.
* Trial lawyers and defense attorneys launch frivolous lawsuits costing billions. Example, DPT vaccine manufacturers sued. Number of vaccine manufacturers dropped from 20 to 4. Trial lawyers are lazy reporters best friend--they find photogenic victims, they subponea (sp?) firms, they prepare the story. The reporter doesn't even have to go interview the victims--the trial lawyers bring them to the reporter. Advocated a "loser-pays" system.
* Illegal drug laws. Illegality creates crime, not drug per se, due to drug sellers fighting each other, users committing crimes pay high prices. "Researchers suggest nicotine is as addictive as heroin, yet not many people are robbing convenience stores for a pack of Marlboros."
* Government growth. In the past 150 years, government has grown from 3% of GDP to 40% of GDP, with no signs of stopping.
* Poverty is strongly correlated with reduced lifespan. Therefore, regulations which cost a lot (Superfund cleanup) without a corresponding risk reduction cost more lives than they save.
He was quite generous with his time afterward, allowing 20 min. for questions, as well as staying for an hour or so at a reception held in another room.
During the Q&A, he expressed frustration at not knowing how turn back the tide of regulation. I asked him "If I were a voter in the California election, my vote is one in 80 million. If I vote in the national election, my vote is one in 270+ million. Do you think that it might be easier to reform the system if the U.S. were broken up into several smaller countries?" The crowd laughed. He seemed surprised by the question, and said that he hadn't thought much about it. He then asked the audience if they had heard about the Free State Project. There was a surprisingly loud cheer. He then said that the idea is for a bunch of libertarians to move to New Hampshire to reform the political system there. He said that he wished them luck, and hoped that the project was a success.
I hung around the reception for a while, and met a couple of people, including some local libertarian activists. I learned that Ben Stein will be coming to speak at some point in the future. Toward the end of the reception, I also got to ask Stossel another question: "Why do you think that there's so few reporters who share your views?" He said that he didn't know.
He then asked if anyone had a cell phone he could borrow. I said yes, and offered him mine. He gave me a number to dial. Unfortunately, my cell phone couldn't get a signal, nor could anyone else--something about the room was blocking it.
Stossel discussed how he started as consumer reporter in the 1980's for ABC. Back then, he thought capitalism was a necessary evil, and had to be highly regulated. However, after doing a number of these stories, he began to see that some things were much greater risks than others, and that he and other reporters may be commiting statistical murder by making people too fearful of the wrong things. For example, if you scare people enough not to fly, by exaggerating the risk of flying (which is quite low), they'll drive instead, which will actually increase their risk of dying.
So he created a chart of the relative risks such as the risk of dying from environmental toxicity, flying, driving, toilet seats, etc. That in turn led to one of his first specials "Are we scaring ourselves to death?". As he researched further, he came to believe that government regulations almost always harmed more than they helped. For example:
* FDA stopped thalidomide, but has probably cost more lives than it saves by retarding new product growth.
* Trial lawyers and defense attorneys launch frivolous lawsuits costing billions. Example, DPT vaccine manufacturers sued. Number of vaccine manufacturers dropped from 20 to 4. Trial lawyers are lazy reporters best friend--they find photogenic victims, they subponea (sp?) firms, they prepare the story. The reporter doesn't even have to go interview the victims--the trial lawyers bring them to the reporter. Advocated a "loser-pays" system.
* Illegal drug laws. Illegality creates crime, not drug per se, due to drug sellers fighting each other, users committing crimes pay high prices. "Researchers suggest nicotine is as addictive as heroin, yet not many people are robbing convenience stores for a pack of Marlboros."
* Government growth. In the past 150 years, government has grown from 3% of GDP to 40% of GDP, with no signs of stopping.
* Poverty is strongly correlated with reduced lifespan. Therefore, regulations which cost a lot (Superfund cleanup) without a corresponding risk reduction cost more lives than they save.
He was quite generous with his time afterward, allowing 20 min. for questions, as well as staying for an hour or so at a reception held in another room.
During the Q&A, he expressed frustration at not knowing how turn back the tide of regulation. I asked him "If I were a voter in the California election, my vote is one in 80 million. If I vote in the national election, my vote is one in 270+ million. Do you think that it might be easier to reform the system if the U.S. were broken up into several smaller countries?" The crowd laughed. He seemed surprised by the question, and said that he hadn't thought much about it. He then asked the audience if they had heard about the Free State Project. There was a surprisingly loud cheer. He then said that the idea is for a bunch of libertarians to move to New Hampshire to reform the political system there. He said that he wished them luck, and hoped that the project was a success.
I hung around the reception for a while, and met a couple of people, including some local libertarian activists. I learned that Ben Stein will be coming to speak at some point in the future. Toward the end of the reception, I also got to ask Stossel another question: "Why do you think that there's so few reporters who share your views?" He said that he didn't know.
He then asked if anyone had a cell phone he could borrow. I said yes, and offered him mine. He gave me a number to dial. Unfortunately, my cell phone couldn't get a signal, nor could anyone else--something about the room was blocking it.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-01 10:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-02 07:07 am (UTC)The man was one of the smartest reporters I have seen. He did not talk like other reporters -- much less hype much more content. Your post backs that up in suits.
Nice that he his aware of the Free State Project and that he triggered asking the group via your question.