Why?Harmor wrote:
I'm going to vote No on the measure.
Last edited by Turquoise (2010-04-10 11:35:29)
Already addressed that, make prison PRISON! and not a rec center. minimal cost. Hell do preisoners even really NEED electricity?Turquoise wrote:
Not everyone fails the first time, and as I said, they'd have to fail several times to equal the cost of imprisoning someone for years.lowing wrote:
and just how effecient is rehab when it fails and the person repeats. It is a waste of money.
my rationale is one of punishment.
My rationale is cost, because I'm not too concerned about whether or not someone fucks their own life over except with the respect of how much it costs me and society.Because bans don't work. At least with pot, the cost of enforcing the ban is more than the net cost of making it legal and taxed.Dilbert_X wrote:
Why not just keep it illegal?Turquoise wrote:
The funds should go to both education and rehabs.
I also am acting on principal. Do not choose to fuck your life up and then expect me to pay to make you right. I will pay to punish you so you learn a real lesson.
The one thing out of all of Ruis's bullshit that is true is, he said I was prejudiced in my attitude. He is exactly correct. I want to punish behavior that fucks up society, not subsidize it.
Even if the payment is far more for punishment than for rehabbing? Well, personally, I'm more concerned about how much it's going to cost me, but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.lowing wrote:
Already addressed that, make prison PRISON! and not a rec center. minimal cost. Hell do preisoners even really NEED electricity?
I also am acting on principal. Do not choose to fuck your life up and then expect me to pay to make you right. I will pay to punish you so you learn a real lesson.
I don't generally try that hard to teach people lessons, because I know that, ultimately, learning is up to them, not me.
But you're not subsidizing it. Paying for rehabs is mostly through taxes on the consumption of the products that cause the need for rehabs in the first place. Granted, some of your tax money is paying for them, but it's a pretty small portion.lowing wrote:
The one thing out of all of Ruis's bullshit that is true is, he said I was prejudiced in my attitude. He is exactly correct. I want to punish behavior that fucks up society, not subsidize it.
Last edited by Turquoise (2010-04-10 11:53:00)
Well... if weed was legal people wouldn't have to be going to prison at all for it, I think that makes the most sense.lowing wrote:
Already addressed that, make prison PRISON! and not a rec center. minimal cost. Hell do preisoners even really NEED electricity?Turquoise wrote:
Not everyone fails the first time, and as I said, they'd have to fail several times to equal the cost of imprisoning someone for years.lowing wrote:
and just how effecient is rehab when it fails and the person repeats. It is a waste of money.
my rationale is one of punishment.
My rationale is cost, because I'm not too concerned about whether or not someone fucks their own life over except with the respect of how much it costs me and society.Because bans don't work. At least with pot, the cost of enforcing the ban is more than the net cost of making it legal and taxed.Dilbert_X wrote:
Why not just keep it illegal?
I also am acting on principal. Do not choose to fuck your life up and then expect me to pay to make you right. I will pay to punish you so you learn a real lesson.
The one thing out of all of Ruis's bullshit that is true is, he said I was prejudiced in my attitude. He is exactly correct. I want to punish behavior that fucks up society, not subsidize it.
Taxes are supposed to be used to cover the costs of running a govt., not a rehab center... The taxes collected should be used to help relieve an already over taxed society. To tax drugs , then use that money to pay for the drug addicts rehab, instead of fund education, vets benefits etc...is dumb to me. so yes, it is subsidizing drug use.Turquoise wrote:
Even if the payment is far more for punishment than for rehabbing? Well, personally, I'm more concerned about how much it's going to cost me, but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.lowing wrote:
Already addressed that, make prison PRISON! and not a rec center. minimal cost. Hell do preisoners even really NEED electricity?
I also am acting on principal. Do not choose to fuck your life up and then expect me to pay to make you right. I will pay to punish you so you learn a real lesson.
I don't generally try that hard to teach people lessons, because I know that, ultimately, learning is up to them, not me.But you're not subsidizing it. Paying for rehabs is mostly through taxes on the consumption of the products that cause the need for rehabs in the first place. Granted, some of your tax money is paying for them, but it's a pretty small portion.lowing wrote:
The one thing out of all of Ruis's bullshit that is true is, he said I was prejudiced in my attitude. He is exactly correct. I want to punish behavior that fucks up society, not subsidize it.
You are correct. But alcohol is legal and people are sent to jail for alcohol related crimes as well. I do not think my tax dollars should fund alcoholics recovery either. This is one area where I stray from my "helping those that help themselves" ideology. To become an alcoholic is something not done easily, it is not something thathappens over night like spilled milk. It probably takes years of drinking, ( and knowing you are drinking) to become addicted If you can not stop yourself from such a slow plunge, you are not interested in helping yourself. After you kill a family of 4 on your 6th DWI is not the time to decide ya need help from me.Mekstizzle wrote:
Well... if weed was legal people wouldn't have to be going to prison at all for it, I think that makes the most sense.lowing wrote:
Already addressed that, make prison PRISON! and not a rec center. minimal cost. Hell do preisoners even really NEED electricity?Turquoise wrote:
Not everyone fails the first time, and as I said, they'd have to fail several times to equal the cost of imprisoning someone for years.lowing wrote:
and just how effecient is rehab when it fails and the person repeats. It is a waste of money.
my rationale is one of punishment.
My rationale is cost, because I'm not too concerned about whether or not someone fucks their own life over except with the respect of how much it costs me and society.
Because bans don't work. At least with pot, the cost of enforcing the ban is more than the net cost of making it legal and taxed.
I also am acting on principal. Do not choose to fuck your life up and then expect me to pay to make you right. I will pay to punish you so you learn a real lesson.
The one thing out of all of Ruis's bullshit that is true is, he said I was prejudiced in my attitude. He is exactly correct. I want to punish behavior that fucks up society, not subsidize it.
Those are still minorities though (alcohol abusers compared to people who drink it, which is nearly everyone), IMO the positives of legalisation outweigh the actions of the minority abusers
I know what you mean by thinking that legalising it just gives people another thing to abuse, but I still think when you see all the shit that's related towards things like that being illegal in society, in comparison it doesn't seem as bad
I know what you mean by thinking that legalising it just gives people another thing to abuse, but I still think when you see all the shit that's related towards things like that being illegal in society, in comparison it doesn't seem as bad
Last edited by Mekstizzle (2010-04-10 12:16:31)
And if drug use will happen regardless of whether or not it is legal and the costs of imprisoning people are still more than rehabbing them, then you'd still imprison people just because of "principle"?lowing wrote:
Taxes are supposed to be used to cover the costs of running a govt., not a rehab center... The taxes collected should be used to help relieve an already over taxed society. To tax drugs , then use that money to pay for the drug addicts rehab, instead of fund education, vets benefits etc...is dumb to me. so yes, it is subsidizing drug use.
Last edited by Turquoise (2010-04-10 12:20:32)
Don't get me wrong, I am all for the legalization of drugs. What I am not supporting is throwing away the reason for doing so, increased revenues, by turning right around and spending the money collected on rehab centers for those that chose to abuse their new found freedom instead of funding govt. THis is what does not make sense to me. If you are going to legalize it, I would assume it would be to the betterment of society. To spend those revenues on drug addicts is counter productive to the intent of taxing the drugs in the first place.Mekstizzle wrote:
Those are still minorities though (alcohol abusers compared to people who drink it, which is nearly everyone), IMO the positives of legalisation outweigh the actions of the minority abusers
I know what you mean by thinking that legalising it just gives people another thing to abuse, but I still think when you see all the shit that's related towards things like that being illegal in society, in comparison it doesn't seem as bad
Most states use at least part of the funds gained from taxes on alcohol to fund alcohol rehabilitation. The same is true for tobacco taxes.lowing wrote:
You are correct. But alcohol is legal and people are sent to jail for alcohol related crimes as well. I do not think my tax dollars should fund alcoholics recovery either. This is one area where I stray from my "helping those that help themselves" ideology. To become an alcoholic is something not done easily, it is not something thathappens over night like spilled milk. It probably takes years of drinking, ( and knowing you are drinking) to become addicted If you can not stop yourself from such a slow plunge, you are not interested in helping yourself. After you kill a family of 4 on your 6th DWI is not the time to decide ya need help from me.
Two reasons: 1) I believe Pot is a gateway drug; and 2) I've seen half a dozen people from high school have their lives destroyed by it.Turquoise wrote:
Why?Harmor wrote:
I'm going to vote No on the measure.
However, I'm all for finding the medical/industrial uses for it.
Now excuse me while I go pay my high Californian taxes...
for drug related crimes?....you bet yor ass!! I do not ensorse sending the message, don't worry about being responsible, we will be responsible for you.Turquoise wrote:
And if drug use will happen regardless of whether or not it is legal and the costs of imprisoning people are still more than rehabbing them, then you'd still imprison people just because of "principle"?lowing wrote:
Taxes are supposed to be used to cover the costs of running a govt., not a rehab center... The taxes collected should be used to help relieve an already over taxed society. To tax drugs , then use that money to pay for the drug addicts rehab, instead of fund education, vets benefits etc...is dumb to me. so yes, it is subsidizing drug use.
Already addressed that...Turn prisons into PRISONS.
The only reason pot is a gateway drug is because of who you have to associate with to get it, and because illegal drugs aren't regulated to prevent them from being laced with other things.Harmor wrote:
Two reasons: 1) I believe Pot is a gateway drug; and 2) I've seen half a dozen people from high school have their lives destroyed by it.Turquoise wrote:
Why?Harmor wrote:
I'm going to vote No on the measure.
However, I'm all for finding the medical/industrial uses for it.
Now excuse me while I go pay my high Californian taxes...
If pot was legal and regulated, you would only have to go to the ABC store to get it, and it wouldn't be laced with anything else.
So, your first argument is negated by legalization.
We need to clarify something here. Are you talking about stealing or attacking people for drugs? Or are you talking about just being busted for possession?lowing wrote:
for drug related crimes?....you bet yor ass!! I do not ensorse sending the message, don't worry about being responsible, we will be responsible for you.Turquoise wrote:
And if drug use will happen regardless of whether or not it is legal and the costs of imprisoning people are still more than rehabbing them, then you'd still imprison people just because of "principle"?lowing wrote:
Taxes are supposed to be used to cover the costs of running a govt., not a rehab center... The taxes collected should be used to help relieve an already over taxed society. To tax drugs , then use that money to pay for the drug addicts rehab, instead of fund education, vets benefits etc...is dumb to me. so yes, it is subsidizing drug use.
Already addressed that...Turn prisons into PRISONS.
If drugs were legalized, there would be no more possession. I speak of drug related criminal behavior.Turquoise wrote:
We need to clarify something here. Are you talking about stealing or attacking people for drugs? Or are you talking about just being busted for possession?lowing wrote:
for drug related crimes?....you bet yor ass!! I do not ensorse sending the message, don't worry about being responsible, we will be responsible for you.Turquoise wrote:
And if drug use will happen regardless of whether or not it is legal and the costs of imprisoning people are still more than rehabbing them, then you'd still imprison people just because of "principle"?
Already addressed that...Turn prisons into PRISONS.
Ok, we agree on that then.lowing wrote:
If drugs were legalized, there would be no more possession. I speak of drug related criminal behavior.Turquoise wrote:
We need to clarify something here. Are you talking about stealing or attacking people for drugs? Or are you talking about just being busted for possession?lowing wrote:
for drug related crimes?....you bet yor ass!! I do not ensorse sending the message, don't worry about being responsible, we will be responsible for you.
Already addressed that...Turn prisons into PRISONS.
However, I believe pot should be taxed to at least partially fund rehabs for pot use, if someone wants to quit and needs help.
I disagree.. To start drug abuse is a personal choice, so it should be with stopping. Friends, family, chairty etc should fund your rehab. Not govt.Turquoise wrote:
Ok, we agree on that then.lowing wrote:
If drugs were legalized, there would be no more possession. I speak of drug related criminal behavior.Turquoise wrote:
We need to clarify something here. Are you talking about stealing or attacking people for drugs? Or are you talking about just being busted for possession?
However, I believe pot should be taxed to at least partially fund rehabs for pot use, if someone wants to quit and needs help.
I choose not to do drugs, yet you insist I pay for it anyway? Don't think that is right. Sorry. I made my choice and I live with it. You make yours and you live with that.
Lowing... Like I said earlier, a very small portion of income taxes go to rehabs. The majority of funding for rehabs that is public is coming from taxes on the consumption of things like alcohol, tobacco, and pot.lowing wrote:
I disagree.. To start drug abuse is a personal choice, so it should be with stopping. Friends, family, chairty etc should fund your rehab. Not govt.Turquoise wrote:
Ok, we agree on that then.lowing wrote:
If drugs were legalized, there would be no more possession. I speak of drug related criminal behavior.
However, I believe pot should be taxed to at least partially fund rehabs for pot use, if someone wants to quit and needs help.
I choose not to do drugs, yet you insist I pay for it anyway? Don't think that is right. Sorry. I made my choice and I live with it. You make yours and you live with that.
So, the amount you pay annually for rehabs in taxes probably amounts to about a dollar, unless you buy alcohol or cigarettes (or pot if it is legalized).
In other words, the only significant amounts you'd pay would involve your own consumption of these products -- which seems pretty fair to me.
Dunno the numbers to be honest. But imagine the revenues if funding stupidity was left to others instead of govt. Taxes could be diverted to programs that really need funding. Like those I listed earlier.Turquoise wrote:
Lowing... Like I said earlier, a very small portion of income taxes go to rehabs. The majority of funding for rehabs that is public is coming from taxes on the consumption of things like alcohol, tobacco, and pot.lowing wrote:
I disagree.. To start drug abuse is a personal choice, so it should be with stopping. Friends, family, chairty etc should fund your rehab. Not govt.Turquoise wrote:
Ok, we agree on that then.
However, I believe pot should be taxed to at least partially fund rehabs for pot use, if someone wants to quit and needs help.
I choose not to do drugs, yet you insist I pay for it anyway? Don't think that is right. Sorry. I made my choice and I live with it. You make yours and you live with that.
So, the amount you pay annually for rehabs in taxes probably amounts to about a dollar, unless you buy alcohol or cigarettes (or pot if it is legalized).
In other words, the only significant amounts you'd pay would involve your own consumption of these products -- which seems pretty fair to me.
When you legalize drugs, for better or for worse, you are sending a message of approval. To send that message as well as relieve a person of all responsibility for their choices by funding their recovery is also sending message.
That message being: you are not responsible for your actions, WE are.
also: Why not show up to the party? You are paying for it anyway.
I do not like those messages sent. I would prefer a message that says, legalized drug use comes with responsibility, own up to your responsibility or society will fuck you relentlessly.
Last edited by lowing (2010-04-10 12:56:42)
The only problem is that the more you fuck people for their stupid decisions, the more likely they are to do something desperate that costs society a lot more than their own ruin.lowing wrote:
Dunno the numbers to be honest. But imagine the revenues if funding stupidity was left to others instead of govt. Taxes could be diverted to programs that really need funding. Like those I listed earlier.
When you legalize drugs, for better or for worse, you are sending a message of approval. To send that message as well as relieve a person of all responsibility for their choices by funding their recovery is also sending message.
That message being: you are not responsible for your actions, WE are.
also: Why not show up to the party? You are paying for it anyway.
I do not like those messages sent. I would prefer a message that says, legalized drug use comes with responsibility, own up to your responsibility or society will fuck you relentlessly.
Unless you propose instituting a police state, you're going to have a tough time anticipating the actions of desperate people.
The best we can do while maintaining a free society is to have certain institutions in place. It's the burden of living in a free society.
Disagree, as proven by our current welfare state. The more you relieve people of their responsibilities the more they will let you. Then they will migrate further toward irresponsibility. Consequences for your actions is the only true governance.Turquoise wrote:
The only problem is that the more you fuck people for their stupid decisions, the more likely they are to do something desperate that costs society a lot more than their own ruin.lowing wrote:
Dunno the numbers to be honest. But imagine the revenues if funding stupidity was left to others instead of govt. Taxes could be diverted to programs that really need funding. Like those I listed earlier.
When you legalize drugs, for better or for worse, you are sending a message of approval. To send that message as well as relieve a person of all responsibility for their choices by funding their recovery is also sending message.
That message being: you are not responsible for your actions, WE are.
also: Why not show up to the party? You are paying for it anyway.
I do not like those messages sent. I would prefer a message that says, legalized drug use comes with responsibility, own up to your responsibility or society will fuck you relentlessly.
Unless you propose instituting a police state, you're going to have a tough time anticipating the actions of desperate people.
The best we can do while maintaining a free society is to have certain institutions in place. It's the burden of living in a free society.
Weed's illegal?
That must be why it is so hard to get hold of.
Honestly, if weed's legal or not it doesn't bother me. It's not like it's difficult to get. Maybe if it was legal though people wouldn't be so quick to judge and jump the weed->drugs->illegal->bad train.
That must be why it is so hard to get hold of.
Honestly, if weed's legal or not it doesn't bother me. It's not like it's difficult to get. Maybe if it was legal though people wouldn't be so quick to judge and jump the weed->drugs->illegal->bad train.
Except for the fact that most people on welfare spend a relatively short time on it.lowing wrote:
Disagree, as proven by our current welfare state. The more you relieve people of their responsibilities the more they will let you. Then they will migrate further toward irresponsibility. Consequences for your actions is the only true governance.Turquoise wrote:
The only problem is that the more you fuck people for their stupid decisions, the more likely they are to do something desperate that costs society a lot more than their own ruin.lowing wrote:
Dunno the numbers to be honest. But imagine the revenues if funding stupidity was left to others instead of govt. Taxes could be diverted to programs that really need funding. Like those I listed earlier.
When you legalize drugs, for better or for worse, you are sending a message of approval. To send that message as well as relieve a person of all responsibility for their choices by funding their recovery is also sending message.
That message being: you are not responsible for your actions, WE are.
also: Why not show up to the party? You are paying for it anyway.
I do not like those messages sent. I would prefer a message that says, legalized drug use comes with responsibility, own up to your responsibility or society will fuck you relentlessly.
Unless you propose instituting a police state, you're going to have a tough time anticipating the actions of desperate people.
The best we can do while maintaining a free society is to have certain institutions in place. It's the burden of living in a free society.
Also, welfare reforms put into place during the 90s limit how much you can get and for how long.
You are doing nothing except proving my point.....We hadda KICK people off of welfare and FORCE them into being responsible.Turquoise wrote:
Except for the fact that most people on welfare spend a relatively short time on it.lowing wrote:
Disagree, as proven by our current welfare state. The more you relieve people of their responsibilities the more they will let you. Then they will migrate further toward irresponsibility. Consequences for your actions is the only true governance.Turquoise wrote:
The only problem is that the more you fuck people for their stupid decisions, the more likely they are to do something desperate that costs society a lot more than their own ruin.
Unless you propose instituting a police state, you're going to have a tough time anticipating the actions of desperate people.
The best we can do while maintaining a free society is to have certain institutions in place. It's the burden of living in a free society.
Also, welfare reforms put into place during the 90s limit how much you can get and for how long.
This is about accountability. Bottom line, who do you propose we hold accountable for the actions of those that choose the path of drug abuse. I say the drug abuser, what say you?
Last edited by lowing (2010-04-10 15:54:25)
You know probably most pot users are poor to lower-middle class...so if you legalize it how else are you going to tax them?
Lotteries and scratch'em tickets can only extract so much...
--
As for the gateway issue. I'm not sure it would matter if you could buy pot next to the milk at Wal-mart vs. the dealer in your local Olive Garden. I could be wrong though, I would just need more proof.
Lotteries and scratch'em tickets can only extract so much...
--
As for the gateway issue. I'm not sure it would matter if you could buy pot next to the milk at Wal-mart vs. the dealer in your local Olive Garden. I could be wrong though, I would just need more proof.