5 ms·

I see a story about man who deliberately made a series of selfish high risk decisions and continued to do so with no regard for his future or his role in societ

I see a story about man who deliberately made a series of selfish high risk decisions and continued to do so with no regard for his future or his role in society. I've done the same, to an extent - but if I ended up homeless at any point I would not have expected society to pay for my continued foolishness. There's no doubt that welfare in some form is ideal for a modern society, but people should recognize that willingness to work is tied to desire for survival/comfort and willingness to work for most people decreases as the welfare floor increases. Forcing someone to work for those who do not contribute to society is theft. There is no reason to believe that the average person will commit to pursuits beneficial for the collective if his needs are guaranteed to be met regardless of his willingness or ability to participate.

Pfhreak 6y ago
> Forcing someone to work for those who do not contribute to society is theft. This is a terrible way to think about a functioning society. Taxes are not theft, and we absolutely should be supporting those who do not 'contribute to society'. What about folks with mental illnesses, physical impairments, advanced age, pregnancy, recovering from injuries, drug/alcohol addiction, or any other number of reasons why someone might need to have us all cover for them? Why is it any different in this case?
- apta 6y ago
  > What about folks with mental illnesses, physical impairments, advanced age, pregnancy, recovering from injuries, drug/alcohol addiction Drug and alcohol addition are definitely not in the same group as the rest.
  - danShumway 6y ago
    Given how much we now know about the history of the opioid epidemic, how much we now know about how cigarettes/alcohol have been advertised throughout recent history and what the motivations were behind those advertisements, I feel like this is a particularly naive comment. Nobody gets up in the morning and says, "gee, I'd really like to introduce a high-cost, crippling dependency in my life." Understanding that and treating drug abuse like a physical/social disease has turned out to be a surprisingly effective social policy. It's not clear to me why addicted people should be treated differently than anyone else in any other challenging situation. Certainly once someone is addicted to a drug, there are obvious biological forces preventing them from quitting cold-turkey.
    - apta 6y ago
      > Nobody gets up in the morning and says They don't, yet they "drink casually" or "do drugs casually". There's a reason certain religions ban intoxicating substances. Alas, people like to play with fire, then things go wrong, yet society still thinks that it's ok to keep marketing those dangerous substances. If society actually wants to fix the issue, there is a solution, but it doesn't sit well with the greedy and foolish.
      - danShumway 6y ago
        Again, you're ignoring nearly a decade of modern research into how addiction happens, and the social infrastructures that have been deliberately set up by both dealers and drug/alcohol/pharmaceutical companies to get people addicted. You say yourself: > yet society still thinks that it's ok to keep marketing those dangerous substances If you're acknowledging that society is pushing people into drugs, doesn't it kind of make sense to hold society responsible for getting them out? ---- But even ignoring the causes of addiction, your suggestion that we ban alcohol/drugs also doesn't have anything to do with whether we should help people who are physically addicted now. Okay, cool, let's ban heroin. It already is illegal, but whatever. We'll super-ban it. Even after the super-ban, we're still going to need to help the people who are addicted right now -- people who are suffering from both a biological and psychological dependency that is outside of their control to fix on their own. > people like to play with fire If you ride your bike without a helmet and accidentally suffer a brain injury, should society help you, even though you ignored safety advice? If you get distracted in your car and crash, should society help you, even though you weren't paying attention? Is your position that only people with birth defects have a legitimate claim to support/grace? When I was a young kid, my brother and I use to go out in the woods and pretend sword fight with sticks, even though our parents told us this was a stupid, dangerous thing to do. We got lucky, nothing ever happened. But if one of us had accidentally stabbed an eye out, would we have been entitled to any kind of social support? I still don't see anything that would make a drug addiction different from those scenarios.
        apta 6y ago
        > and the social infrastructures that have been deliberately set up by both dealers and drug/alcohol/pharmaceutical companies to get people addicted. I indirectly mentioned that in my post. There is a solution to this problem, but it doesn't sit well with the foolish and the greedy. There is a vested interest that it doesn't get solved. > Okay, cool, let's ban heroin. It already is illegal, but whatever. We'll super-ban it. Should also add alcohol to the list. > I still don't see anything that would make a drug addiction different from those scenarios. It's very different. In the activities you mentioned, there is a positive outcome involved, or it is a natural part of growing up (kids do stupid things, but that's where the role of the parents come in). Whereas in doing drugs and alcohol, the risk/benefit ratios are so skewed, it's irrational to engage in them in the first place.
  - Pfhreak 6y ago
    Why not? Addiction is basically an illness, whose causes are broad, and breaking an addiction requires a lot of support.
    - apta 6y ago
      Because they consciously and purposely got themselves into it. They played with fire and got burnt. It's not like they woke up in some zombie state and started drinking and doing drugs. Many people abstain from drinking, gambling, etc. precisely because we know the outcomes, and it works.
chkaloon 6y ago
If you believe the humans roughly follow a bell curve in terms of success/work ethic/conscientiousness/mental health/ability to get your sh*t together, pick your metric, there will always be some tail on the bell curve who legitimately can't hold it together. The trick is finding the sweet spot. Help too much, and disincentives become a drag on society. Help too little, and campers in the park and crazy guys waving needles around become a drag on society.

Pfhreak 6y ago

> Forcing someone to work for those who do not contribute to society is theft. This is a terrible way to think about a functioning society. Taxes are not theft, and we absolutely should be supporting those who do not 'contribute to society'. What about folks with mental illnesses, physical impairments, advanced age, pregnancy, recovering from injuries, drug/alcohol addiction, or any other number of reasons why someone might need to have us all cover for them? Why is it any different in this case?

apta 6y ago
> What about folks with mental illnesses, physical impairments, advanced age, pregnancy, recovering from injuries, drug/alcohol addiction Drug and alcohol addition are definitely not in the same group as the rest.
- danShumway 6y ago
  Given how much we now know about the history of the opioid epidemic, how much we now know about how cigarettes/alcohol have been advertised throughout recent history and what the motivations were behind those advertisements, I feel like this is a particularly naive comment. Nobody gets up in the morning and says, "gee, I'd really like to introduce a high-cost, crippling dependency in my life." Understanding that and treating drug abuse like a physical/social disease has turned out to be a surprisingly effective social policy. It's not clear to me why addicted people should be treated differently than anyone else in any other challenging situation. Certainly once someone is addicted to a drug, there are obvious biological forces preventing them from quitting cold-turkey.
  - apta 6y ago
    > Nobody gets up in the morning and says They don't, yet they "drink casually" or "do drugs casually". There's a reason certain religions ban intoxicating substances. Alas, people like to play with fire, then things go wrong, yet society still thinks that it's ok to keep marketing those dangerous substances. If society actually wants to fix the issue, there is a solution, but it doesn't sit well with the greedy and foolish.
    - danShumway 6y ago
      Again, you're ignoring nearly a decade of modern research into how addiction happens, and the social infrastructures that have been deliberately set up by both dealers and drug/alcohol/pharmaceutical companies to get people addicted. You say yourself: > yet society still thinks that it's ok to keep marketing those dangerous substances If you're acknowledging that society is pushing people into drugs, doesn't it kind of make sense to hold society responsible for getting them out? ---- But even ignoring the causes of addiction, your suggestion that we ban alcohol/drugs also doesn't have anything to do with whether we should help people who are physically addicted now. Okay, cool, let's ban heroin. It already is illegal, but whatever. We'll super-ban it. Even after the super-ban, we're still going to need to help the people who are addicted right now -- people who are suffering from both a biological and psychological dependency that is outside of their control to fix on their own. > people like to play with fire If you ride your bike without a helmet and accidentally suffer a brain injury, should society help you, even though you ignored safety advice? If you get distracted in your car and crash, should society help you, even though you weren't paying attention? Is your position that only people with birth defects have a legitimate claim to support/grace? When I was a young kid, my brother and I use to go out in the woods and pretend sword fight with sticks, even though our parents told us this was a stupid, dangerous thing to do. We got lucky, nothing ever happened. But if one of us had accidentally stabbed an eye out, would we have been entitled to any kind of social support? I still don't see anything that would make a drug addiction different from those scenarios.
      - apta 6y ago
        > and the social infrastructures that have been deliberately set up by both dealers and drug/alcohol/pharmaceutical companies to get people addicted. I indirectly mentioned that in my post. There is a solution to this problem, but it doesn't sit well with the foolish and the greedy. There is a vested interest that it doesn't get solved. > Okay, cool, let's ban heroin. It already is illegal, but whatever. We'll super-ban it. Should also add alcohol to the list. > I still don't see anything that would make a drug addiction different from those scenarios. It's very different. In the activities you mentioned, there is a positive outcome involved, or it is a natural part of growing up (kids do stupid things, but that's where the role of the parents come in). Whereas in doing drugs and alcohol, the risk/benefit ratios are so skewed, it's irrational to engage in them in the first place.
- Pfhreak 6y ago
  Why not? Addiction is basically an illness, whose causes are broad, and breaking an addiction requires a lot of support.
  - apta 6y ago
    Because they consciously and purposely got themselves into it. They played with fire and got burnt. It's not like they woke up in some zombie state and started drinking and doing drugs. Many people abstain from drinking, gambling, etc. precisely because we know the outcomes, and it works.

chkaloon 6y ago

If you believe the humans roughly follow a bell curve in terms of success/work ethic/conscientiousness/mental health/ability to get your sh*t together, pick your metric, there will always be some tail on the bell curve who legitimately can't hold it together. The trick is finding the sweet spot. Help too much, and disincentives become a drag on society. Help too little, and campers in the park and crazy guys waving needles around become a drag on society.