6 ms·

No, you seem to be confused as to what voters actually want. Sure we could do drug treatment for less money and more social benefit, but how does that punish th

No, you seem to be confused as to what voters actually want. Sure we could do drug treatment for less money and more social benefit, but how does that punish the baddies? If we give them free treatment and forgiveness, what does that say about me? I was good and they did the bad thing, and yet you want to throw a feast for your prodigal son. Taxes are high enough already, too high to give money to those fallen souls. Or something like that. At least the first half. Most of us here are engineers, scientists, and tech leaders who can see how disruption can make a better system. But a lot of people see the opioid crisis not as health crisis but as a moral dilemma.

rusk 4y ago
Well the key word is “Baddies” we need to stop looking at drug addicts as “bad” but merely sick. The actual “baddies” would lose their funding if you cure the junkies. The problem is the system as it is is profitable for other more socially acceptable “baddies” who stand to lose out. e.g sacklers
- largepeepee 4y ago
  He is pointing out the voters perspective which is valid and rarely reflected on social media since it is innately selfish. At it's core this is a social issue that is swept under the rug for decades since the real solutions requires harsh reform that will likely destroy careers for pursuing it. Drugs are a strong form of control, not just for the peddlers but to appease the masses from their painful reality, something that certain branches might like with AI and stuff reducing the usefulness of labor.
  - rusk 4y ago
    And the reason for that is the drug users as criminals narrative has been promoted by a combination of well meaning misinformed people and mere neerdowell grifters. The solution is to promote this alternative narrative, something which is happening now thanks in part to successful activism and better education, but also an increasing wariness on the part of the public on the true motives behind public drug policy. I don’t think it’s a pure coincidence that this is all happening at the tail end of the opioid pandemic!
- pmoriarty 4y ago
  "we need to stop looking at drug addicts as “bad” but merely sick." The root of the sickness often extends far beyond the individual into society. That's what many people don't want to look at or acknowledge. They insist on casting blame on the victim, and keep creating more victims.
  - rusk 4y ago
    To be honest I think you’re being to kind to the they. Yes there are some people who act out of being misinformed, or fear but there are cyclical people that pump this point of view specially for profit. Look at the sea change now in the US that pharma sent to far and people finally realised a lot of the “drugs bad” schtik was merely PR
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  The chapter in Erewhon from 1872 is interesting. In this strange utopia/dystopia the sick are punished like criminals and the criminals are treated with compassion as if they were sick. Particularly relevant for considering how drug addicts are treated. https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/samuel-butler/erewhon/text/chapter-10 https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/samuel-butler/erewhon/text...
alexvoda 4y ago
> Sure we could do drug treatment for less money and more social benefit, but how does that punish the baddies? If we give them free treatment and forgiveness, what does that say about me? I was good and they did the bad thing, and yet you want to throw a feast for your prodigal son. Taxes are high enough already, too high to give money to those fallen souls. It's ironic that Christianity says they should do exactly that.
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  I don't think it says that. The younger son comes back and yes, a one-off feast is thrown, and the son's betrayal is completely forgiven, but the dad tells the older son that everything he has is his. He doesn't say, "Give your brother some more cash". I don't have a strong position on drug laws, as I don't live in a city that's devastated by drug use. I just wanted to weigh in on the meaning of that parable.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - alexvoda 4y ago
    I argue that in this context money spent on a one time feast can be interpreted as money spent on drug rehab. Rehab after all is meant to be a process, even if lengthy, that results in one no longer being dependent and hopefully not relapsing. Rehab is not a process of feeding the vice (unless there are various corporate interests and the process is perverted). The point is to contrast retribution and discrimination with rehabilitation and empathy. Christianity very much endorses the latter option at least as long as the other is part of the in-group. But maybe the in-group and out-group separation is very much the point of these laws since the war on drugs (started by Nixon) is a direct continuation of slavery after peonage was ended by FDR during WWII.
    - robertlagrant 4y ago
      > the war on drugs (started by Nixon) is a direct continuation of slavery after peonage was ended by FDR during WWII Do you have any justification for this? It seems an utterly bizarre take on the face of it.
citrin_ru 4y ago
> but how does that punish the baddies? I hope we (as humanity) will get over punishment for the sake of punishment. It is a power tool to steer people away from harmful behavior and I don't think we can stop using it altogether anytime soon but it should be used to the extent it actually changes people's behavior - longer sentences not necessary better in this regard than shorter ones in combination with some re-integration program. And if we can prevent antisocial behavior without punishment why not at least try?
seanmcdirmid 4y ago
No, this is Seattle, we don’t want baddies to be punished. We want buses that don’t smell like burnt peanut butter. We want parks without tents, libraries without naked guys running around in crisis, and we’d like it all for some property tax rate that is less than 2%/year. It would also be nice if our grocery stores didn’t shut down due to shoplifting excesses, but that’s a stretch goal.

rusk 4y ago

Well the key word is “Baddies” we need to stop looking at drug addicts as “bad” but merely sick. The actual “baddies” would lose their funding if you cure the junkies. The problem is the system as it is is profitable for other more socially acceptable “baddies” who stand to lose out. e.g sacklers

largepeepee 4y ago
He is pointing out the voters perspective which is valid and rarely reflected on social media since it is innately selfish. At it's core this is a social issue that is swept under the rug for decades since the real solutions requires harsh reform that will likely destroy careers for pursuing it. Drugs are a strong form of control, not just for the peddlers but to appease the masses from their painful reality, something that certain branches might like with AI and stuff reducing the usefulness of labor.
- rusk 4y ago
  And the reason for that is the drug users as criminals narrative has been promoted by a combination of well meaning misinformed people and mere neerdowell grifters. The solution is to promote this alternative narrative, something which is happening now thanks in part to successful activism and better education, but also an increasing wariness on the part of the public on the true motives behind public drug policy. I don’t think it’s a pure coincidence that this is all happening at the tail end of the opioid pandemic!
pmoriarty 4y ago
"we need to stop looking at drug addicts as “bad” but merely sick." The root of the sickness often extends far beyond the individual into society. That's what many people don't want to look at or acknowledge. They insist on casting blame on the victim, and keep creating more victims.
- rusk 4y ago
  To be honest I think you’re being to kind to the they. Yes there are some people who act out of being misinformed, or fear but there are cyclical people that pump this point of view specially for profit. Look at the sea change now in the US that pharma sent to far and people finally realised a lot of the “drugs bad” schtik was merely PR
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
The chapter in Erewhon from 1872 is interesting. In this strange utopia/dystopia the sick are punished like criminals and the criminals are treated with compassion as if they were sick. Particularly relevant for considering how drug addicts are treated. https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/samuel-butler/erewhon/text/chapter-10 https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/samuel-butler/erewhon/text...

alexvoda 4y ago

> Sure we could do drug treatment for less money and more social benefit, but how does that punish the baddies? If we give them free treatment and forgiveness, what does that say about me? I was good and they did the bad thing, and yet you want to throw a feast for your prodigal son. Taxes are high enough already, too high to give money to those fallen souls. It's ironic that Christianity says they should do exactly that.

robertlagrant 4y ago
I don't think it says that. The younger son comes back and yes, a one-off feast is thrown, and the son's betrayal is completely forgiven, but the dad tells the older son that everything he has is his. He doesn't say, "Give your brother some more cash". I don't have a strong position on drug laws, as I don't live in a city that's devastated by drug use. I just wanted to weigh in on the meaning of that parable.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- alexvoda 4y ago
  I argue that in this context money spent on a one time feast can be interpreted as money spent on drug rehab. Rehab after all is meant to be a process, even if lengthy, that results in one no longer being dependent and hopefully not relapsing. Rehab is not a process of feeding the vice (unless there are various corporate interests and the process is perverted). The point is to contrast retribution and discrimination with rehabilitation and empathy. Christianity very much endorses the latter option at least as long as the other is part of the in-group. But maybe the in-group and out-group separation is very much the point of these laws since the war on drugs (started by Nixon) is a direct continuation of slavery after peonage was ended by FDR during WWII.
  - robertlagrant 4y ago
    > the war on drugs (started by Nixon) is a direct continuation of slavery after peonage was ended by FDR during WWII Do you have any justification for this? It seems an utterly bizarre take on the face of it.

citrin_ru 4y ago

> but how does that punish the baddies? I hope we (as humanity) will get over punishment for the sake of punishment. It is a power tool to steer people away from harmful behavior and I don't think we can stop using it altogether anytime soon but it should be used to the extent it actually changes people's behavior - longer sentences not necessary better in this regard than shorter ones in combination with some re-integration program. And if we can prevent antisocial behavior without punishment why not at least try?

seanmcdirmid 4y ago

No, this is Seattle, we don’t want baddies to be punished. We want buses that don’t smell like burnt peanut butter. We want parks without tents, libraries without naked guys running around in crisis, and we’d like it all for some property tax rate that is less than 2%/year. It would also be nice if our grocery stores didn’t shut down due to shoplifting excesses, but that’s a stretch goal.