http://www.businessweek.com/articles/201...alth-issue

The first thing I always, always, look for is the sample size of whatever the hell is being approached or claimed as a solutions.

Quote:turned the tiny state of about 627,000

^^Or about the size of Minneapolis and St. Paul.

How can this scale to 330 million Americans? It probably can't.

This is not a criticism of them doing it - good luck Vermont, it will be interesting to watch.

Sounds interesting, but who will pay for it? The non addicts that take responsibility for their actions, that's who! I am all for it, just as long as no Federal Money goes to it and the recipients have to repay the cost or at least 50% of it.

Losers!!

(08-26-2014 08:53 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The first thing I always, always, look for is the sample size of whatever the hell is being approached or claimed as a solutions.

Quote:turned the tiny state of about 627,000

^^Or about the size of Minneapolis and St. Paul.

How can this scale to 330 million Americans? It probably can't.

This is not a criticism of them doing it - good luck Vermont, it will be interesting to watch.

Last I checked a state is still a state regardless of population. At the very least it is a good test study and gives us some legal cases to look at.

VT has been doing some pretty interesting stuff lately and is quietly implementing a number of very liberal ideas.

(08-26-2014 09:11 AM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  Sounds interesting, but who will pay for it? The non addicts that take responsibility for their actions, that's who! I am all for it, just as long as no Federal Money goes to it and the recipients have to repay the cost or at least 50% of it.

Losers!!

who knows, maybe similar with the Colorado contraception story it could end up saving the taxpayers money if it works.

There is no war on drugs John. Drugs are illegal for a reason.

(08-26-2014 09:17 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  There is no war on drugs John. Drugs are illegal for a reason.

And our resident troll appears...

Participating in heroin is a bad choice period. Now we are enabling and glorifying it? Don't ask don't tell type of mentality doesn't work well.

Case in point, the media makes it out to be such a tragedy that Phillip Seymour ______, whatever his name was accidently "overdosed". It was illegal for the fat troll to be "dosing" in the first place. Its not like he stumped his toe or forgot to reapply sunscreen, it's a crime!

(08-26-2014 09:28 AM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  Participating in heroin is a bad choice period. Now we are enabling and glorifying it? Don't ask don't tell type of mentality doesn't work well.

Case in point, the media makes it out to be such a tragedy that Phillip Seymour ______, whatever his name was accidently "overdosed". It was illegal for the fat troll to be "dosing" in the first place. Its not like he stumped his toe or forgot to reapply sunscreen, it's a crime!

your first paragraph is total BS, but I do agree with the second one.

I have a very different view on most recreational drugs that are not that big of a deal, in my opinion, such as weed and cocaine. As for heroine and meth though, those drugs destroy lives and poison entire communities.

(08-26-2014 09:33 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I have a very different view on most recreational drugs that are not that big of a deal, in my opinion, such as weed and cocaine. As for heroine and meth though, those drugs destroy lives and poison entire communities.

I agree except for coke, which is a tough one. I'm on the fence there.

(08-26-2014 09:11 AM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  Sounds interesting, but who will pay for it? The non addicts that take responsibility for their actions, that's who! I am all for it, just as long as no Federal Money goes to it and the recipients have to repay the cost or at least 50% of it.

Losers!!

We pay to throw drug offenders in jail too. There is always a societal cost to drugs, whether it be treatment or enforcement.

It'll be interesting to see whether treating drug offenders is less expensive than prosecuting and jailing drug them.

You pay for your child to go to school as well. It is the same fixed cost if he or she fails out or makes the all A honor roll like my son.

Winners win and losers lose. It is a zero sum game. Takers take!

(08-26-2014 09:36 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-26-2014 09:33 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I have a very different view on most recreational drugs that are not that big of a deal, in my opinion, such as weed and cocaine. As for heroine and meth though, those drugs destroy lives and poison entire communities.

I agree except for coke, which is a tough one. I'm on the fence there.

Wow. Really? Ever known somebody that was into coke? It has the potential to be every bit as bad as heroine or meth plus it's used to make crack.

It has more to do with the person using coke than it does the drug itself.

We've probably all known somebody who managed to screw up their life with weed or alcohol. Coke is the same thing. The number of people I've known who have used it and gone on and come off it proves this to me.

(08-26-2014 09:57 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(08-26-2014 09:36 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-26-2014 09:33 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I have a very different view on most recreational drugs that are not that big of a deal, in my opinion, such as weed and cocaine. As for heroine and meth though, those drugs destroy lives and poison entire communities.

I agree except for coke, which is a tough one. I'm on the fence there.

Wow. Really? Ever known somebody that was into coke? It has the potential to be every bit as bad as heroine or meth plus it's used to make crack.

Yep. It wasn't until college that I knew several people who did it and saw a recreation side of it that was a lot different than how it gets portrayed in pop culture.