TrueBeaver
-
Posts
171 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by TrueBeaver
-
-
-
... Vice President [bleep] Cheney ...
heh.
-
I'd like to see them locked up. They clearly weren't doing it for any beneficial purpose, they were doing it to prove a point.
My views have been said many times throughout this thread.
-
Ok, so first you said that poor people should have mandatory drug tests to get welfare, and now you are saying they shouldn't because it's their body? It's illogical because first you say that drugs should be legalized, but then you say people should have to take drug tests to get assistance, which makes no sense because you don't think drugs are that dangerous and drug testing when it's legal to get assistance is illogical. I don't get what you are trying to say, first you say X, then you say Y and denounce X? Clarification please.
Oh, hahaha, I see, you think that people should be able to take drugs, except those lazy bums! So lets make policies aimed at criminalizing and hurting the poor so that they don't do drugs (instead of actually addressing problems like employment, education, equality, etc)! Bad idea.
How would they even swing that?
"Yes drugs are legal, no we don't think they are dangerous enough to be deemed illegal, yes people should be able to do to their bodies what they want. That is, of course, unless you are poor."
I don't even-
Yes, I think you should be able to do whatever you want with your body with your money. I never said drugs aren't dangerous. Lots of things are dangerous and legal, but people who are spending their own money should be able to gauge risk v reward and make a decision. It's human nature to spend your own money more effectively than someone else's and I think everyone can agree buying an eight ball isn't doing anything to help employment, education, or equality. Further, it's not like this is the one policy I want. I'd love to see school districts around the world learn from AIPCS so poor youth have a fair shot at receiving a quality education and thus better employment. I'd love to see rent control eliminated so fair housing can return. There is a whole host of policies I'd like to see implemented to deal with employment, education, and equality. This one is simply to provide those who are receiving other people's money an extra incentive to spend it wisely. In fact it would free up more funds to help those who are serious about improving their situation. I don't care if poor people want to buy drugs, but I do care if they're using taxpayer money to buy them.
Never been to a hospital before? Numerous patients on morphine. There are also other similar drugs you can obtain legally. Here in Australia you can get what's called a green whistle, which is a small inhaler which looks like a green whistle and contains a small amount of methoxyflurane. It's given out by paramedics and hospitals as a short-term pain reliever. My friend had one when stacked his skateboard out the front of the hospital and ripped some skin off of his forearm. If he was on welfare then they could have taken him off it simply from consuming something that the government hospitals gave him.
People on welfare can already spend their money on drugs (alcohol, caffeine) and also on whatever the hell they want (gambling, tvs, computers, gaming consoles, pools, the list goes on) without any government intervention, why would something new change that system?
You're clinging to a point that would not be an issue pragmatically. Drug testing is not an all-or-nothing deal, it'd be very easy when you are testing someone to ask "Have you taken any medications in the last 90 days?" and send those notes with the samples to be tested. My friend initially failed his drug test to get into West Point because he had a couple poppy seed bagels for breakfast. After the failed test they asked him about it, he explained, and they tested further to verify it was poppy seed and not anything illicit.
Your second point is much stronger, but just because a proposal does not encompass every detail does not mean it would not have an effect. Recently some legislator blocked a bill that would make it illegal to drive while texting in my state because she felt it should include eating, doing make up, etc. A step in the right direction is better than no step at all.
Further, according to NPR polling 75% of low-income Americans said that they felt that drug use was a major cause of poverty. For comparison, 52% said a shortage of jobs was a major cause and 46% said poor quality schools was. What's the harm in forcing people to make a choice: government assistance or their drug fix?
-
Do you really want us to?
Because I could start listing Israeli peace talks where they failed to halt the building of settlements on Palastinian land. Which negates any chance for a peaceful resolution because it's basically a slap in the face to Palastinians.
We want a peaceful resolution but while these talks are going on we are still going to be stealing your land. Ya that's a great stratagy for reaching a compromise.
What makes it Palestinian land? Israel won it in an armed conflict and even gave back the vast majority of 'occupied' land in a peace treaty.
-
My children will be playing sports up to high school simply because of the values they instill. In high school I'll allow them to choose another extracurricular activity if they want, but the teamwork, obedience, exercise, etc. provided from playing team sports is priceless.
Also, in regards to this:
Presence - You have to spend time with your kids, and set an example for them. Too many parents are so hands off that kids don't feel they have parents at all, just "older friends".Either myself or my wife will be a stay at home parent because I feel like presence is incredibly important for raising children.
And in regards to this:
How would you deal with children who are undisciplined though? Should smacking be considered acceptable for the deterrence effect, or would it be 'wrong' to do so?Smacking will be the least of my children's worries if they are undisciplined.
-
I rarely talk to people in-game because I hate the vast majority of RuneScape players with the burning passion of a thousand suns (present company excluded, of course). I hope nothing like this happens to me.
I wish you the best trying to correct your situation.
-
I don't usually flame people, it's their own decision if they want to leave and I'm not there to stop them. Sometimes when someone posts a leaving topic saying something along the lines of "I don't like the clan, going to find another one" when they only have a couple of posts on the forums and haven't attended any events is annoying though.
This.
I feel like if you're going to leave a clan you should at least have the decency to be forthright and honest about why you're leaving so that any issues can be addressed.
That said, we have a chronic ragequitter/rejoiner and I flame him when he leaves.
-
People can side-step that by taking drugs you can legally obtain such as morphine and DXM. The only time I can see drug testing as useful is for people such as pilots and people working with heavy machinery. Maybe the army. Even then, only testing for the drugs that would have serious negative effects in their ability to work.
If they're so poor-off that they require state assistance they shouldn't be spending that money on any currently-illicit drugs, with obvious exceptions (not that it's illicit now but cough medication, etc) and special circumstances (marijuana for cancer patients). Also, morphine is classified as a controlled substance in most(?) countries as well as internationally.
That would just criminalize/hurt the poor even more, and if you think all drugs should be legalized then it's just illogical. Also, when the people who require assistance are working, they are paying into welfare and such. That's why it's there.
Why is it illogical? It's my body, the government has no more right to legislate what drugs I put in it as they do what food I put in it. What's illogical is your next sentence. You seem to be implying that if I said "Drug testing should be mandatory to receive any form of government assistance past what the individual has personally paid in taxes." it would be okay. Considering nearly half the households in the USA aren't affected by the income tax, I suspect there are similar statistics for other countries which tend to have more progressive tax policies, and the personal income tax accounts for 45% of federal revenue I'd say it isn't much of a distinction.
I'm not sure on which point "That would just criminalize/hurt the poor even more" is directed but I'd like to hear your reasoning.
-
I wouldn't condone their viewing of pornography but lettuce be reality, there's nothing to can do to stop them.
I agree with Giordano; carrot and stick parenting. Do bad things, get the belt. Do good things, get spared the belt rewards.
I will consider myself a successful parent if my indoctrination lasts their entire life.
Also, in response to a question not asked, I will force them to play sports whether they like it or not. There won't be any fat asses running around my house.
-
Well, it could be argued that the country was split, Jordan (then 'Trans-Jordan') for Arab Palestinians and Israel (then 'Palestine') for Jewish Palestinians, in 1923.
I don't think anything but time (and perhaps not even that) can stop the violence.
-
The gigantic quote pyramids arn't necessary.
I would have to disagree.
You can disagree all you want. They still need to stop, as it can be annoying to other user's.
I would have to disagree.
I'm also gonna have to disagree with PoorLepRecon. I find that it provides a small chuckle to the users of TIF.
I don't think there's anything wrong with it either.
I would like to express my support for four of these individual posts and my disagreement with two.
On topic: still haven't shaved my arm pits.
-
Jesus, don't these threads ever die?
War on Drugs has failed, stop wasting taxpayer money on petty offenders when we're in the middle of a budget crisis.
That said, I doubt this new panel's suggestions will gain much traction. I hope it does, but I'm not optimistic.
War on ANYTHING fails.
War on poverty failed
War on terrorism failed [well military aspect]
War on Communism [vietnam] failed
War on drugs was doomed to fail before it began
I certainly hope it gains traction but people dont learn their lesson.
I agree that a war on something as insignificant as drugs was doomed to fail before it started, but many times wars are successful. For example, in the five years after the War on Poverty was announced the poverty rate lowered by 10 million people, while in the previous 5 years it dropped by 5 million. At what cost is up for debate but I wouldn't lump the War on Drugs in with the rest of those.
-
I love getting sloppy drunk, waking up the next morning not knowing what the hell happened, then regrouping with some hair o' the dog. Although I've toned it down a bit since a few years back.
I smoke weed when it's offered but I don't enjoy it nearly as much as alcohol so I don't seek it out and I don't do any other drugs, although I'm not necessarily against the idea.
I think all drugs should be legalized and drug tests should be mandatory for any sort of government assistance.
-
Jesus, don't these threads ever die?
War on Drugs has failed, stop wasting taxpayer money on petty offenders when we're in the middle of a budget crisis.
That said, I doubt this new panel's suggestions will gain much traction. I hope it does, but I'm not optimistic.
-
Am I the only one who's surprised middleschoolers know who Charles Manson is?
Tbh, I'm not that surprised. At least back when I was in middle school, sadistic serial murderers and stuff like that was "cool." Not in the sense that we all wanted to go torture and kill people but they tended to be popular subjects for reports and such. I can't tell you how many current events about the Beltway Sniper were presented.
In hindsight, that may explain some things...
-
1. Generic Dictator
2. Generic Dictator
3. Generic Dictator
4. Host of an America news show.
5. Someone within the American Government
Doing it right.
I was hoping this thread would evolve into more of a who was worse: Ran Min/Genghis Khan/Scipio Aemilianus/other ancient genocidist or Hitler/Stalin/Mao/other modern genocidist. Alas :(
I also expected quite a bit more anti-American sentiments to surface in this thread. There were a couple lists that included W (lol) and O'Reilly (lolier) but for the most part there weren't that many. Especially considering what we did to the Native Americans, Filipinos, and Vietnamese.
-
Not since Middle School when some phaggot went around telling people I was jacking off in the locker room at the pool. During High School there was too much true stuff going on for any rumors about me to gain any traction. However, some of my friends were victims to rumors that we still don't let them live down, even though they're obviously fake. It probably helped that I went to a small school and was in the "popular" clique.
Edit: I also wasn't a very good target for rumors because I made it very clear throughout high school that I didn't care what people thought about me. One of my friends who was a bit more sensitive (a lot of time when we'd go drinking he'd have us all compliment him before he would start) was the target of more than a few nasty rumors. I think there's some causation there.
-
Kind of hard to control for technological disparity across time, for example Genghis Khan's actions may be 'more impressive' compared with more modern leaders who killed far more people, but the top 5 from relatively recent history:
Stalin
Mao
Hitler
Pot
Talat/Asaka/a lot of other people could challenge for this spot.
-
I've never used it, but I hear Abe Books is a good site.
-
Anyone who doesn't shower every day obviously is doing it wrong. Life saver.
-
I come on tip it to argue politics and discuss clans, so I prefer serious topics. I do enjoy the fun threads as well, though.
Arguing on the internet increases the size of my e-penis.
-
Disagree. If I can't see my woman's ribs we're done.
-
Nice work AL. Impressive to win a war with no deaths regardless of the fact you outpulled.
Drinking/Drugs
in Off-Topic
Posted
Addressing the cause of drug use would be in legalizing all drugs. In the example of Portugal cited in the other thread, enrollment in drug rehab shot up dramatically, 63%, since they legalized all drugs. In my last post I posted policies to address those issues, drug testing for welfare is not some miracle policy that will fix all that is wrong in society.
Again, I don't care if they use drugs to numb themselves from reality. The purpose of the various welfare programs is to assist low-income people to try to help them advance upwards socio-economically. As I cited in my last post, the poor themselves cite drug use as the #1 reason preventing them from getting out of the low-income bracket (poverty line x2).
Legalizing drugs will lessen crime and violence in addition to freeing up law enforcement to address any rise in crime and violence. As cited, in your post as well as earlier in this post, legalizing drugs allows drug-addicts to get the help they need which would also mitigate drug-addiction fueled crime.