4 ms·

> It makes it easier to contact addicts and get them into effective treatment programs. Who do you expect will fund these treatment programs? I seriously doubt

> It makes it easier to contact addicts and get them into effective treatment programs. Who do you expect will fund these treatment programs? I seriously doubt most addicts are equipped to pay for it. You're talking about a country where a major political party actively works to remove funds from women's healthcare. [0] I fully agree that these substances should be legalised for the reasons you mentioned, but I think it's laughable to think present-day politicians give a shit about these people. If anything, they'd probably face substantial lobby from police unions concerned legalisation would lead to job cuts. [0] http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/business/article145926149.html http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/business/article145926149...

eberkund 9y ago
>Who do you expect will fund these treatment programs? I seriously doubt most addicts are equipped to pay for it. Taxes on the drugs themselves would probably more than cover it.
- kogepathic 9y ago
  > Taxes on the drugs themselves would probably more than cover it. And you seriously think politicians will use this new revenue source for the treatment of addicts? I predict they'll push another tax cut that benefits their major donors.
  - logfromblammo 9y ago
    Perhaps we require that our legislators eat a cannabis cookie before opening any session of congress? I have no idea what they would spent the tax revenues on, other than a Strategic Doritos Stockpile, but it couldn't be any worse than the budget they are likely to pass this year.
prbuckley 9y ago
You know who cares about these addicts, their families, who are the voting constituents of these politicians. The heroin epidemic is the worst in many traditionally republican states. I think you may find there is more bipartisan support for fixing the heroin problem than there is consensus around hot button topics like abortion.
- kogepathic 9y ago
  > You know who cares about these addicts, their families, who are the voting constituents of these politicians. You're making the assumption that their families have the resources to pay for their treatment. Nearly half of Americans are one pay cheque away from not being able to make ends meet. [0] [1] [2] Here's a poverty map of America: http://www.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2014/01/05/poverty-map/ http://www.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2014/01/05/poverty-map/ [0] http://www.marketwatch.com/story/half-of-americans-are-desperately-living-paycheck-to-paycheck-2017-04-04 http://www.marketwatch.com/story/half-of-americans-are-despe... [1] http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/12/pf/americans-lack-of-savings/ http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/12/pf/americans-lack-of-savings... [2] http://nypost.com/2016/09/27/why-even-half-the-middle-class-is-living-paycheck-to-paycheck/ http://nypost.com/2016/09/27/why-even-half-the-middle-class-...
  - prbuckley 9y ago
    I am suggesting people will put political pressure on the government to help pay for treatment as part of the solution. As others here have suggested that if drugs were legalized the tax revenue could fund things like this.
  - mmjaa 9y ago
    Some of us have families. Some of us know addicts. Between these sets, there are enough humans willing to take responsibility and help the addict. Your problem?
- illumin8 9y ago
  Ironically, the AHCA would significantly cut spending on drug rehabilitation programs. So, basically, the GOP are telling their constituents they are going to help them, and then passing legislation that does the opposite. It doesn't surprise me at all. They are in the pockets of big pharma and big healthcare.
prbuckley 9y ago
You know who cares about these addicts, their families, who are the voting constituents of these politicians. The heroin epidemic is the worst in many traditionally republican states. I think you may find there is more bipartisan support for fixing the heroin problem than there is consensus around hot button topics like abortion.
Omnius 9y ago
> Who do you expect will fund these treatment programs? Well hypothetically there is a ton of money being spent on the war on drugs if drugs were legal that money or even a small portion of it could do wonders for treatment programs.
maxxxxx 9y ago
"Who do you expect will fund these treatment programs? I seriously doubt most addicts are equipped to pay for it." Prosecuting and jailing drug addicts costs a lot of money. You could move that money to treatment.
- senorjazz 9y ago
  > "Who do you expect will fund these treatment programs? The state should pay as part of the universal health care coverage IMO. Treatment as a cost is cheap. Heroin would be next to nothing to purchase by a government. They can be tapered off or in very serious cases just maintained. When life is no longer 24x7 about finding your next fix, the person can live a relative useful and productive life. They do not need to steal, they do not need to commit crime to fund their habit. They do not need to go to prison where the cost per inmate exceeds by orders of magnitude the cost of treatment
  - maxxxxx 9y ago
    No idea why this got downvoted. Because of "universal health care"? The prison system is already universal health care for mental patients and for drug addicts.

eberkund 9y ago

>Who do you expect will fund these treatment programs? I seriously doubt most addicts are equipped to pay for it. Taxes on the drugs themselves would probably more than cover it.

kogepathic 9y ago
> Taxes on the drugs themselves would probably more than cover it. And you seriously think politicians will use this new revenue source for the treatment of addicts? I predict they'll push another tax cut that benefits their major donors.
- logfromblammo 9y ago
  Perhaps we require that our legislators eat a cannabis cookie before opening any session of congress? I have no idea what they would spent the tax revenues on, other than a Strategic Doritos Stockpile, but it couldn't be any worse than the budget they are likely to pass this year.

prbuckley 9y ago

You know who cares about these addicts, their families, who are the voting constituents of these politicians. The heroin epidemic is the worst in many traditionally republican states. I think you may find there is more bipartisan support for fixing the heroin problem than there is consensus around hot button topics like abortion.

kogepathic 9y ago
> You know who cares about these addicts, their families, who are the voting constituents of these politicians. You're making the assumption that their families have the resources to pay for their treatment. Nearly half of Americans are one pay cheque away from not being able to make ends meet. [0] [1] [2] Here's a poverty map of America: http://www.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2014/01/05/poverty-map/ http://www.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2014/01/05/poverty-map/ [0] http://www.marketwatch.com/story/half-of-americans-are-desperately-living-paycheck-to-paycheck-2017-04-04 http://www.marketwatch.com/story/half-of-americans-are-despe... [1] http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/12/pf/americans-lack-of-savings/ http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/12/pf/americans-lack-of-savings... [2] http://nypost.com/2016/09/27/why-even-half-the-middle-class-is-living-paycheck-to-paycheck/ http://nypost.com/2016/09/27/why-even-half-the-middle-class-...
- prbuckley 9y ago
  I am suggesting people will put political pressure on the government to help pay for treatment as part of the solution. As others here have suggested that if drugs were legalized the tax revenue could fund things like this.
- mmjaa 9y ago
  Some of us have families. Some of us know addicts. Between these sets, there are enough humans willing to take responsibility and help the addict. Your problem?
illumin8 9y ago
Ironically, the AHCA would significantly cut spending on drug rehabilitation programs. So, basically, the GOP are telling their constituents they are going to help them, and then passing legislation that does the opposite. It doesn't surprise me at all. They are in the pockets of big pharma and big healthcare.

prbuckley 9y ago

Omnius 9y ago

> Who do you expect will fund these treatment programs? Well hypothetically there is a ton of money being spent on the war on drugs if drugs were legal that money or even a small portion of it could do wonders for treatment programs.

maxxxxx 9y ago

"Who do you expect will fund these treatment programs? I seriously doubt most addicts are equipped to pay for it." Prosecuting and jailing drug addicts costs a lot of money. You could move that money to treatment.

senorjazz 9y ago
> "Who do you expect will fund these treatment programs? The state should pay as part of the universal health care coverage IMO. Treatment as a cost is cheap. Heroin would be next to nothing to purchase by a government. They can be tapered off or in very serious cases just maintained. When life is no longer 24x7 about finding your next fix, the person can live a relative useful and productive life. They do not need to steal, they do not need to commit crime to fund their habit. They do not need to go to prison where the cost per inmate exceeds by orders of magnitude the cost of treatment
- maxxxxx 9y ago
  No idea why this got downvoted. Because of "universal health care"? The prison system is already universal health care for mental patients and for drug addicts.