Taking your response from the top, I don't think I've yet said anything to you about
simple answers (I may before this is done, though).Reagan was the one who said there were simple answers
1. To debate this, we would first need some definitions of drug offenses. As I noted a
few moments ago to FT, I don't care too much what individuals do if it has no negative
impact on the rest of us. If I may begin with an extreme -- if you as an adult, encounter
some purely personal problems with drug use, as far as I'm concerned, you can rehab
your own damn self at your own expense.
Given your expressed views on the harm done by polluters, I wonder if drugs and
requisite equipment ought to come, in some way, under the purview of government
regulation in the way that food and drugs and medical devices are. Who will pay for
this?
In what way, if any, will we regulate and enforce the use of drugs by minors, by adults
who provide to minors, by teachers, coaches, public officials, doctors, nurses, airline
pilots, basketball players, judges, juries, ad infinitum?
If I may be so bold, I think it is YOU who are way oversimplifying the decriminalization
of drug offenses. alcohol and tobacco are drugs- they are controlled and regulated- same treatment for drugs. If you decriminalize you help to take the enormous profit out of the drug business- in doing that you better society in a number of ways- for it is the huge profits (right now) that make some people in our society choose the risky and violent drug underworld over other activities. Also drugs were taxed, AND if we plow the savings from the reduced load on our courts and penal system (from decriminalization) into prevention and rehab I don't think we'd have a problem. Does your attitude towards currently criminalized drugs mean that you would also like to see alcohol and tobacco criminalized? I believe alcohol and tobacco do much more harm to the body, than, for example, heroin does.
2. I am always astonished when prostitution is called a victimless crime. If you want,
let's debate this one as a separate subject later -- I would be interested in what others
say. I don't want to presume any knowledge on your part but most whores in the world
don't have a very glamorous life. I'm not going to start in on this one now.women sell themselves in all sorts of ways- just as men do. women who are married and stay at home moms- aren't they just prostitutes for one man? in a way - YES. So if a woman chooses to sell her body for sex (OR a MAN- cause remember lots of homosexual prostitutes out there) it is their choice. lots of choices aren't glamorous- like working in a rendering plant for example. I can think of jobs that might make whore look not so bad.
3. Your #3 is unbelievable to me. Your views re. # 1 and #2 having a positive effect are
wild. No offense if you want to call me stupid. I don't get it. Not only is there no simple
solution to the underlying problem here, I'm not sure there is ANY solution. Mo' money,
IMO, will do nothing. At some point here, I'm willing to talk child abuse charges,
sterilization as a condition of additional benefits and ORPHANAGES (many of these
children are without parents in any meaningful sense of the word). mo money spent correctly can do IMMENSE good. Never underestimate the power of money- it is what our world runs on. As for drugs - they fuel the decay of the inner city. THAT is why all that mythology has come up about the CIA running crack to destroy the black race. it is stupid- but it IS true that crack and other illegal drugs destroy whole areas. I don't see how you cannot see a connection to outrageous teen pregnancy rates (and abortions) as a result of hopelessness stemming from being raised in an environment poisoned by gang wars over drugs, and social problems caused by drugs- social problems that would be very much mitigated were the drugs decriminalized- because they would be cheap, and gangs would be out of the loop- they are only IN the loop because criminalization has created an artificially high market for their products (think prohibition- after the end of prohibition- did the mafia care about alcohol?)
4. The U.S. should stand behind the integrity of sovereign nations, as they exist now?
How convenient for the U.S. to declare the end of history. You sound a little like Pat
Buchanan as you go on. I'm surprised.
Although there are many different ways to look at the issue, there is a strong case to be
made for the U.S. having NO actual foreign aid program at this time (except for giving a
lot of money to Israel and Egypt). I've gone over this several times- unless you want to go back to the year 0, there is not other way to begin.
5. Lots more money for education? NO NO NO!!! I forget if you mentioned where you
live (DC?). I'd like you, or anyone, to look over the DC school stats maintained by the
Post and tell me money does the job. Choices? Forget it. Teach the little terrors to read
and write and add and find Cleveland and Tokyo on a map (sorry, Joan, Chechnya
strictly for gifted classes).
Channel energy? There's gym class and there's a strange looking thing in black and
white (a woman I'm told) with a lethal weapon called a ruler. It works. Kids can learn to
sit still and pay attention. Until that happens, nothing happens.Sorry- I disagree. Money means attention- look at the budget and you'll see what we really pay attention to- and it ain't education. HAVE you looked at the budget? If you haven't- do- because I have.
6. Job Corps. I'm willing to listen to ideas. As you might guess, I have a few of my own.
First, let me say that any program will produce anecdotal evidence of success.
"Boot camp" type programs have received tremendous attention. I am VERY personally
familiar with some of them. Most don't work worth beans -- unless you're running some
kind of model program and willing to assign a whole team of people to "support"
individual miscreants in every imaginable way. Costs generally go way up (I had a
cousin who established and ran a program for whole state) after you get started and
off-buget fiscal support required is sometimes out of sight.
Aside from summer employment and perhaps about 10 hours a week during the school
year, I am against school age kids working. Their "job" is to get smart. I realize a
segment of the economy might go in the dumper (kid consumerism) but maybe it ought
to anyway.
Along these lines, every local paper ought to devote an equal amount of ink to
academics as to school sports. Kids are embarrassed as hell when their football team
gets run off the field. Not that hard to develop similar awareness and pride in academic
achievement. FWIW, in 8th grade, there were 44 kids in my class (and NO screwing
around) -- once a month the Black & White at the front of the room put the best student
front left, second left, etc. Except for one true retard that they left in about spot #30,
everyone moved, every month. Very serious motivation.
7. Agree. Kinda. I think corporations would love to do more actually but are held back
by amazing amounts or regulation, etc. Every time a corporation gets involved in
anything they incur incredible responsibility and liability.
What you are suggesting (maybe?) sounds something like let churches and charities do
more. Problem is, governments want to mandate the programs, take the money and tell
the "privates" how to play ball. B.S.
8. When you find a guaranteed job requiring minimal skill that pays 20K over the
poverty level, fax me immediately! I can make time. In the county where I live, the
unemployment rate is less than 1 percent. Lots of illegals, lots of traditionally
disadvantaged folks. Lots of entry level employment. Lots of movin' on up. If you can't
make a decent buck in Beaufort County, SC, you just can't be bothered. Some people
are that way. Re. "blue collar workers," we need the ones we need -- there's a "rap" in
this country (mostly from *** *** union stiffs) about the nobility of the "working class,"
that reeks of "hero of the Soviet Union." Every time I need some blue collar help, the
guy seems to want about $60 and hour. More power to him if he can get it -- **** him
if he wants it through the back door (govt. assistance).we subsidize all kinds of things and people- including the rich and powerful (think sugar farmers and tobacco farmers) I would rather subsidize people who want to work- and allow them a wage they can live on comfortably- and take it away from some other subsidy I don't like
9. I mostly agree with you on this one. Couple big problems though. Get the fairy tale
people out of the EPA for starters. Re-do the laws so every little teensie group with an
ax to grind can't bring the world to a halt with the help of an environmental law. I have
no shortage of personal/professional horror stories on this one.
Re. clean-up. In many cases, this is plain stupid. I've seen mandates for spending billions
of dollars for clean up when it would have been just as easy to relocate dozens (or
hundreds) of dirt-bag level homes in undesirable industrial areas, to nicer surroundings.
The SuperFund is a major SuperScam. I've been away from this area for a few years -
forgive me if rules have changed.
10. I can't really comment. I recently moved from California. In that state if you wanted
to learn something -- anything, the community college system would do everything for
you but your homework. You may be able to kick my *** on a few of these but don't
mess with me on this one. No prisoners. The community college system is great in California- but not so in the rest of the country. PLUS you need to eat while you are in school. Some people do fine working and going to school- but if some people can't do that- I do not think the answer is to let them sink. I would rather see them helped.
11. I'm on your side. Way. That said, some people will always have "better" health care
than others. Right now, you can pay through the nose or be on public assistance - or
better yet - in prison. I have numerous friends and relatives of the medical persuasion
and no shortage of "amusing" tales.
We need reform badly. I have some ideas if you ever want to discuss.
12. AMEN! PRAISE JESUS!
13. Yeah. Sort of. Maybe. I think I might approach the problem from a different angle.
Later. Tell me what you propose.
14. Yeah, but. Encourage. Incentives. ??? Along with #8, I have to say I hate tax
incentives. I just ******* hate them. Root of all evil in our legislative process.
Make the money -- pay the tax. Period. Plenty of other ways to encourage beneficial
behavior without corrupting the tax code. No intent to suggest it is not completely
corrupted as it exists now. what you tax you get less of, what you subsidize you get more of- these are the ultimate carrots and sticks. There is no better motivator and I (as your president) won't give them up. |
