The Recreational Drug Thread (punk, Kiss, quote, youtube)

[joyboyo53]

Originally Posted by toretorden

I'm pretty sure old timers like Galileo Galilei and Charles Darwin wouldn't fully agree with you on this statement and I find it puzzling to say the least .. but yeah, maybe that's off-topic here.

originally the church was about the only place you could get an education. both the people you just named are from the last 500 years and specifiically refer to christianity. theyre has been a long history (tens of thousands of years) of religion before that in which temples of all kinds of dieties were run by 'priest' that were more along the lines of engineers and scientist. we all know that in the last mellinium certain relgious beliefs have withheld scientific progression, but BEFORE that they were one of the only places in which people began to exercise scientific though. once again off-topic.

[Guybrush]

^There's a lot of things to tackle here, for example the generalization "religion" and the fact that science is a relatively recent concept seen in the light of milennia, but since it's off-topic - if you make a thread I'll happily discuss it further.

About the Ron Paul video, I didn't see it because I have no audio. I can add that I'm extremely skeptical to him in general, but I'll bite my tongue before I know what he has to say.

In regards to the rest of your post, we have really good health care in Norway and aside from smoking being outlawed in pubs, I never felt they were restricting my life much. If you do have free healthcare, it is true that tax-payers pay for some of the treatment needed to help people who get sick from drug abuse. Addictive and dangerous drugs like heroin can turn a net giver to the society into a net taker and since it ruins people's lives, I think it makes sense to outlaw it. For every suffering addict, the drug has negative effects on an individual level and for the society as a whole .. and this goes for all countries, not just the more socialistic ones.

I think somewhere, there's a good balance point between left and right - between control and freedom. A good society should lift everyone up. A bad one generates conflict and pits people against eachother. I don't mind giving up my freedom to do heroin if it benefits everyone.

[joyboyo53]

here is a little article outlining a few of the problems concerning universal health care. maybe things are different in norway, but something inside me doubts it.


1) Reduces patient incentives to find the best possible prices for the best possible services/products available.

Patients in the U.S. who receive "free" (taxpayer-funded) health care have no incentive to conserve their health care dollars. Care is "free" so they visit the doctor's office several times a month or request "free" prescriptions for over-the-counter medication such as Tylenol.

2) Reduces physician incentives to provide competitive care and reduces drug companies' incentives to provide new drugs and treatments.

With no incentive to provide quality care, physicians and nurses leave the government-monopolized area for better opportunities in a freer country. Shortages result. Drug companies are hindered by price controls and regulations and soon cease research and development of new medication. In the U.S., start-up drug companies cannot afford to run the FDA gauntlet, so the market is dominated by a few established corporations.

3) Steals from your wallet to pay for my health care.

Yes, you do have a right to health care, just as you have a right to food, shelter and property. However, you have no "right" to force others to provide these things for you - All "free" medical care is subsidized through taxes stolen from other people.

4) The quality of "free" health care will deteriorate and the average citizen will get sicker.

As the poor and middle-class wait in agony for simple procedures, those with resources can travel to other countries for treatment.

5) Destroys your privacy.

Suddenly your problems are mine and mine are yours. If you eat unhealthy foods or drive a motorcycle without a helmet, I have a direct interest in your business - you are going to see a provider on my tax dollars. Your neighbors might support government bans on smoking, "unsafe" sex or other "risky" behaviors to reduce costs. Politicians will use the federal bureaucracy to force you and your family to comply with programs such as the "New Freedom Commission on Mental Health".

6) Destroys your liberty.

When you blindly support a system that bestows power on politicians and bureaucrats, they will receive their orders from those with the most money - and this will not be you, your friends or your family. The power of government will be used against you as you are forced to use medicines or accept treatments from well-connected health care companies.

A quick search shows that pharmaceutical companies donated $152,437,727 to political campaigns since 1990. Who do you think has the ear of those elected politicians?

Conversely, if government power is eliminated (e.g., abolish the FDA - whose restrictions benefit the most powerful companies by eliminating most competition), those same companies would have to use their funds and resources to sell their drugs to the most people in the least expensive, most reliable and safest way. They would need to outperform their competitors to get your money - otherwise they lose business.

[Guybrush]

^Is that your text or someone elses? It looks like part propaganda to me and a bit pompous, naive and judgmental. Take the line "when you blindly support a system" for example.

I can't say I regard any of those points to be problems in this country. Generally, I'd say it's working very well for us, much better than what you guys seem to have going for you in the US. Instead of debating every point in another subject which is essentially off-topic, I'll leave it at that unless you wanna start a new thread. Then I'll happily discuss health care and politics.

[likuidcoka]

Noone will ever agree on politics and religion..real talk, but we can count on people enjoyin weed.lol..ok carry on.. Makes for an interesting read.

[joyboyo53]

Originally Posted by toretorden

^Is that your text or someone elses? It looks like part propaganda to me and a bit pompous, naive and judgmental. Take the line "when you blindly support a system" for example.

I can't say I regard any of those points to be problems in this country. Generally, I'd say it's working very well for us, much better than what you guys seem to have going for you in the US. Instead of debating every point in another subject which is essentially off-topic, I'll leave it at that unless you wanna start a new thread. Then I'll happily discuss health care and politics.

quit replying to the part of my post that is offtopic and then say "if you create a thread about this i will happily discuss it there" after injecting your offtopic opinion. if you want to start a thread about it, do it... your the one who replied to my original comment that was ontopic by replying to the part where i was comparing it to something else.

ps. your right, all the wealthy foreigners goto norway when they have health problems, they stay the hell outta the US...

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

all it takes is a quick gander at the 'cocaine cowboys' wars in the late '70s/early '80s and you'll see how beneficial passing legislation against drug use is. the fact of the matter is that people want to do heroin, so they're going to do it, whether the government says it's okay or not. i'm not one for taking the easy route and choosing between the lesser of two evils, but in the case of drug use, it seems we have to.

its not the case though. the best example for all of this is the netherlands. they have, by a large percentage, far less drug users than america where it is illegal. the proper way to solve the situation is by taking care of the DEMAND, not the supply. you have to educate people properly so that there is a decreased demand.

so its ok for us to just ship the drug casualties over to mexico? im sure they appreciate that, more and more people die everyday because increasingly dangerous people are in control of the supply, as opposed to a government which could tax and regulate it. im not for the legalization of cocaine in any stretch of the imagination, but obviously the drug war is a failed attempt by focusing on the wrong variable in the equation.

[Guybrush]

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

all it takes is a quick gander at the 'cocaine cowboys' wars in the late '70s/early '80s to see how beneficial passing legislation against drug use really is.

What war? What cowboys? .. Oh right, you're in America. I'm not. I'm not saying that invalidates your argument, but you yankees have a tendency to think everywhere else is just a state in the US of A. Whatever doesn't work for you doesn't necessarily not work for us.

Originally Posted by jgd85

quit replying to the part of my post that is offtopic and then say "if you create a thread about this i will happily discuss it there" after injecting your offtopic opinion. if you want to start a thread about it, do it... your the one who replied to my original comment that was ontopic by replying to the part where i was comparing it to something else.

ps. your right, all the wealthy foreigners goto norway when they have health problems, they stay the hell outta the US...

I will quit because I did just make a thread about it (or at least a thread where such a topic may not be off-topic).

Society, politics, social contracts and more!


I'm all for the dope-talk from here.

[joyboyo53]

Originally Posted by toretorden

What war? What cowboys? .. Oh right, you're in America. I'm not. I'm not saying that invalidates your argument, but you yankees have a tendency to think everywhere else is just a state in the US of A. Whatever doesn't work for you doesn't necessarily not work for us.

people in the united states think that way because you nords tend to forget the areal extent and GDP of our country is equivalent to that of all of europe, and a population that is 1/2 the size. but i agree, apples to oranges.

thanks for starting the thread btw.

edit - sorry if that came off a bit pompous, it was meant soley to point out why americans tend to see things as you described.

[Guybrush]

Originally Posted by jgd85

edit - sorry if that came off a bit pompous, it was meant soley to point out why americans tend to see things as you described.

No worries, man .. Us non-americans see a lot of "this is what it's like" when it sometimes only applies to the US and not really ourselves because we are not americans. If I write about what things are like in Norway, I specify that that's what it's like here .. I find americans often don't!

[sleepy jack]

There's way too much to respond to before I have to head back to school >.<. Is it cool with everyone if I take the war on drugs related posts (well discussion ones in general) and create a separate thread for them so in the future we won't have to worry about wading through all this stuff?

Also in regards to religion a few pages back. Religion is a dangerous thing. I only have some knowledge about ancient religions but in this day and age - and even before this (well I'd say for the past several thousand years) - it is nothing more than a block in the road to progression. By its very nature faith calls for the suspension of rational and critical thinking and many Evangelicals (something I have a major problem with, the idea of running around converting people and telling them you know better when you don't and they're ruining their lives pisses me off to no end) are aware that Science and Religion can't coexist anymore. You know George W. Bush (I'm not going to talk strictly about America toretorden (: ) - and I don't think many would argue he was indeed very religious (he believed Jesus talks to him personally and chose him to be president) completely cut Science funding during his eight years in the White House. Religion gets in the way of scientific progression. Christians want Creationism taught in schools alongside Evolution. That isn't something that's positive. If anything is holding us back nowadays it's religion.

I could go on more and I didn't really get to respond to anything drug-related but I have to leave. I will quickly add this though. I've already stated that the best way to combat drug usage is through education. Cigarette smoking has taught us this. Who's more likely to smoke nowadays an educated college student or a high school drop out? Personally I see more of the latter as smokers and the people smart enough to know how bad smoking is bad for them (I'd include myself in this) are aware and don't care.

I wouldn't be for outlawing drug usage, but in regards to certain drugs I would be for outlawing their production. In the same way I'd be against outlawing some prescription medicine with a negative side-effect that outweighs the positive aspects. I stand by the best way to combat drug usage being education, prevention and rehabilitation though.