Kids are a tricky scenario. I do believe in supporting people who can’t actively choose to support themselves, including kids.
How expensive do you estimate this would be on the budget over and above where we already are?
How much do we pay to support unemployable addicts? $0.
How much do we pay to cover somebody else’s AIDs? $0.
Define big. It seems like people only call government big when it does something they don’t agree with.
Who knows, we already pay a lot.
Only that won’t happen. The whole decriminalization agenda is about reducing, not eliminating costs, and even that is debatable.
Again, won’t happen in a modern western nation.
It’s less that, and more that personally, I feel incapable of not caring. I can’t stop people from making bad choices. I also can’t understand not giving a shit about other human beings.
It had nothing to do with that, and I didn’t bring that up first.
Again, what does this mean? Anyone not at your level, or simply lowly drug addicts? And in the meantime, while they make decision after decision leading toward death, how should the rest of the society feel as they deal with the blowback of those poor choices?
“I need to touch grass, meet new people, pick up a new hobby, and enjoy the positives in life”
Blankets. We’ll send them blankets.
Whoa man, them’s fighting’ words.
No kidding!
I told you about my wifes aunt, right?
She came up to visit on what happened to be the anniversary of the battle of Fort Pitt, and brought us all blankets.
She said a few quips about returning the favor, we’re done with them now, etc.
Clever lady!
My data are quite objective as well, having experienced life in the exact same place before and after hard drug legalization. People were doing drugs before that too, they just didn’t gravitate to my town to do them and they didn’t do it in the parks with the full blessing of the state. I don’t need local government stooges to officially count the brazen drug-fueled fuckery of all kinds to believe my lying eyes.
I also have ample reason to doubt the underlying assumptions of a study like that (i.e. what exactly are they counting, how is it reported, convictions vs arrests, and so on…) along with concerns about who is doing the counting. My local government likes things to be about as clear as mud whenever possible.
The legalize drugs in a vacuum success stories are just as nonexistent as the DEI success stories.
So anyways, I appreciate that people utilize big government on both sides of the party coin to regulate others in to their own points of view, and I don’t think anyone is going to change their minds. Most are pro-govt when it suits personal belief, and this is why parties & special interest groups exist.
Regarding DEI in general, I found the irony in intentionally shaping perception & bias from the side who generally tries to fight it funny too: BART Withholding Surveillance Videos Of Crime To Avoid 'Stereotypes' - CBS San Francisco
Both Parties worship Lincoln and propagate the Proposition Nation myth.
Including you. But I don’t think you are explaining the thought correctly. Everyone, except for weirdos who believe in anarchy, is pro government.
Don’t confuse being against a policy as equalling being against government. The problem is simply people are weak and fickle.
Could you elaborate?
It’s a crock of shit. Or more precisely the way it is used is a crock of shit. Thomas Paine was perhaps the greatest proponent of the idea in Revolutionary times, and he did help to inspire it, but once the war was over he was no longer useful and marginalized. Manifest Destiny could be seen as being in opposition to the proposition nation, and it probably more closely aligns with how the Founders really thought. But Manifest Destiny vs the proposition nation is an example of what the newspaper editor in the Man Who Shot Liberty Valance said: when the legend becomes fact, print the legend.
It’s interesting to see how ideals are manipulated over time. Like equal opportunity morphing in to equity.
Or “all men being created equal” morphing from legal equality of freedom to pursue liberty, happiness et cetera to all men literally being created equal. Spend five minutes in public and you’ll definitively see this isn’t true.
Or a conservative view morphing from limited govt intervention in personal lives to a desired nanny state equal in power to leftist policies…. but enacting rules of a church assembly essentially.
Both parties claim Lincolnian ideas and believe in an indivisible union. Both Parties push the idea that the United States was founded for the purpose of ensuring X, Y, Z(whatever the Party is pushing-be it individual rights or equality of outcome) ideals.
And if those ideas are a myth, what was America really started for?
Independence from Great Britain(assuming you’re talking about the USA when you say “America”), and protection from other threats.
While they also wanted to retain their Englishness.
The other part of the myth is that all of the immigrants who have come here, came because of the freedoms and ideals this country seemingly embodies, when the truth is they came for economic reasons. I doubt any of them were aware of the Bill of Rights. All of the illegals invading couldn’t care less about the 1st Amendment. Lincoln saw this nation as some beacon of hope for the world whereas the Founders would have preferred if the world minded its own business.
Perfect