Recreational use of drugs (legal and illegal)

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

xris
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 12:12 pm
@gojo1978,
He fiddles the books as Rome burns.I'm begining to believe his my foil, he actually agrees with all i say but gives the obstinate opposite opinion, to enhance my message.I should be grateful to him really.
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 12:14 pm
@gojo1978,
gojo1978;61966 wrote:
Your "lost productivity" (I feel dirty just typing that) argument doesn't exactly go hand-in-hand with your previously espoused arguments in the name of freedom.

If someone wants to sit around and get stoned rather than working, that's up to them. Seems like a perfectly sensible, not to mention valid, choice.


I wish we could have freedom back. That could then go along with marijuana legalization. What I'm telling you is that we made a conscious decision away from freedom, and now we have to deal with the consequences.
http://www.philosophyforum.com/forum/lounge/general-discussion/4016-recreational-use-drugs-legal-illegal-14.html#post61668

gojo1978;61966 wrote:
Emperor Nero, have you ever been wrong about anything?


Sure. And I am very willing to admit it when I am wrong. But I'm usually right because I from my conclusions depending on the arguments, as opposed to most people, who form arguments to support pre-set conclusions.

I told you I'm fine with marijuana legalization in a libertarian system, sadly you people wanted socialism, here it is, deal with it. You didn't want self reliance, but collectivism, hence self-harm is collective harm.
And we cant legalize something that is harm to others.
 
xris
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 12:18 pm
@EmperorNero,
We cant legalise something that is a harm to others!!!!.Do you think not legalising it, it will solve your problem..im waiting for the figures by the way, the figures you are so woried about..
 
gojo1978
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 12:22 pm
@EmperorNero,
EmperorNero wrote:
I wish we could have freedom back. That could then go along with marijuana legalization. What I'm telling you is that we made a conscious decision away from freedom, and now we have to deal with the consequences.
http://www.philosophyforum.com/forum/lounge/general-discussion/4016-recreational-use-drugs-legal-illegal-14.html#post61668

Sure. And I am very willing to admit it when I am wrong. But I'm usually right because I from my conclusions depending on the arguments, as opposed to most people, who form arguments to support pre-set conclusions.

I told you I'm fine with marijuana legalization in a libertarian system, sadly you people wanted socialism, here it is, deal with it. You didn't want self reliance, but collectivism, hence self-harm is collective harm.
And we cant legalize something that is harm to others.


Yeah, yeah, yeah......


Now, again I repeat:

gojo1978 wrote:
You clearly have ZERO idea what socialism is.

Are you seriously trying to assert that a country where you are thrown into the gutter and left to die because you have no money is a socialist system?

Are you seriously trying to assert that a country where it is legal to blow someone's head off with a .44 Magnum in defense of private property is a socialist system? Are you? Seriously?


Are you seriously trying to assert that?
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 12:23 pm
@gojo1978,
gojo1978;61969 wrote:
Are you seriously trying to assert that a country where you are thrown into the gutter and left to die because you have no money is a socialist system?


Why did you think that? I was suggesting the opposite.
 
gojo1978
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 12:29 pm
@EmperorNero,
EmperorNero wrote:
Why did you think that? I was suggesting the opposite.


Because;

EmperorNero wrote:
Druggies cost us a lot, and because of socialism, us others have to pay that.


EmperorNero wrote:
I told you I'm fine with marijuana legalization in a libertarian system, sadly you people wanted socialism, here it is, deal with it.


Where is the room for misunderstanding there? You DO live in America, yes? Well there it is for you in black and white.



So, AGAIN I ask you, are you seriously trying to assert that the USA is a socialist system?
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 12:30 pm
@The Dude phil phil,
Yes. And I am saying that if it were not, somebody would be thrown in the gutter for drugging himself up.
We bail him out, hence we a harmed.
 
gojo1978
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 12:37 pm
@The Dude phil phil,
I don't know about policies specifically relating to "druggies", but you have already ably demonstrated the imbalance in legislation there, vis-a-vis legality of alcohol and tobacco and illegality of marijuana. Perhaps the authorities don't want drug deaths swamping the statistics, so they get a degree of care that others don't. But I DO know that people who are ill in some other way can go and jump if they don't have cash. Which, in any circumstances, let alone in the richest country in the world, is indefensible. It's just plain sick.

So you are definitely saying the USA is a socialist country?
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 12:54 pm
@gojo1978,
gojo1978;61981 wrote:
I don't know about policies specifically relating to "druggies", but you have already ably demonstrated the imbalance in legislation there, vis-a-vis legality of alcohol and tobacco and illegality of marijuana. Perhaps the authorities don't want drug deaths swamping the statistics, so they get a degree of care that others don't. But I DO know that people who are ill in some other way can go and jump if they don't have cash. Which, in any circumstances, let alone in the richest country in the world, is indefensible. It's just plain sick.


In the US, no emergency room can turn down someone who is ill, not even non-citizens. So we all have to pay for the ills of each others. (Actually only half of US citizens pay income tax.)

gojo1978;61981 wrote:
So you are definitely saying the USA is a socialist country?


I am hesitant to call the US socialist. It is a matter of degree, so there is no point where it switches. But they are certainly pretty socialist on the scale. Enough to not call it libertarian.

As for legalizing marijuana, I'm fine with that if it were in a society where I don't have to pay for others uselessness.
 
gojo1978
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 01:10 pm
@EmperorNero,
EmperorNero wrote:
In the US, no emergency room can turn down someone who is ill, not even non-citizens. So we all have to pay for the ills of each others.


Yeah, I thought there was maybe something like that, but wasn't sure.

However, you don't go to an ER with cancer, or any of that sort of disease. Being refused treatment because you can't pay for it is obscene. The problem is that in the US, medical 'care' is operated as a business, which is fundamentally wrong. Medical care is a service. Where it is a privately run business, there is a direct conflict of interest between the care needer and the care provider. I'm broadly in favour of individual liberty myself, but certain things like medical care, water, power, etc. should always remain public services.
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 01:19 pm
@gojo1978,
gojo1978;61988 wrote:
Yeah, I thought there was maybe something like that, but wasn't sure.

However, you don't go to an ER with cancer, or any of that sort of disease. Being refused treatment because you can't pay for it is obscene. The problem is that in the US, medical 'care' is operated as a business, which is fundamentally wrong. Medical care is a service. Where it is a privately run business, there is a direct conflict of interest between the care needer and the care provider. I'm broadly in favour of individual liberty myself, but certain things like medical care, water, power, etc. should always remain public services.


I agree in general. But lets leave the medical care aside, the public still has to pay for those entering the emergency room. (And nobody is prevented from being productive and getting medical care.)

More important are unemployment benefits. If somebody wants to smoke himself unproductive, fine. But then I have to pay for that? How would you like that if the tax system was structured in a way to make you pay for it?
 
gojo1978
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 01:55 pm
@EmperorNero,
EmperorNero wrote:
I agree in general. But lets leave the medical care aside, the public still has to pay for those entering the emergency room. (And nobody is prevented from being productive and getting medical care.)

More important are unemployment benefits. If somebody wants to smoke himself unproductive, fine. But then I have to pay for that? How would you like that if the tax system was structured in a way to make you pay for it?


Hahaha, man..... I live in Britain! If you don't know, do some research on tax in the UK... you will be crapping yourself VERY quickly. When the pound/dollar exchange rate was 1/2 a couple of years ago, petrol (gas) here was basically 10 dollars a gallon!!!!! :eek: And we are a ******* oil-producing nation!!! I know about taxes, believe me! The thing is, it's a BIG bone of contention over here, the ridiculous tax system, but almost to a man, the entire population is vehemently against cutting spending on the NHS, the health system. It's considered sacrosanct. I've never met anyone here who thinks the NHS should be done away with in order to lower taxes.

Also though, a lot of people will not get cover because of 'pre-existing conditions'; that is the flaw of running healthcare as a business. And what about people who work plenty and just don't earn enough to get insurance anyway? It's a bad scene, man.
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 02:06 pm
@gojo1978,
gojo1978;62000 wrote:
Hahaha, man..... I live in Britain! If you don't know, do some research on tax in the UK... you will be crapping yourself VERY quickly. When the pound/dollar exchange rate was 1/2 a couple of years ago, petrol (gas) here was basically 10 dollars a gallon!!!!! :eek: And we are a ******* oil-producing nation!!! I know about taxes, believe me! The thing is, it's a BIG bone of contention over here, the ridiculous tax system, but almost to a man, the entire population is vehemently against cutting spending on the NHS, the health system. It's considered sacrosanct. I've never met anyone here who thinks the NHS should be done away with in order to lower taxes.


Ok, I mentioned that in case you don't care because it's not your money. In a way: "Sure, let rich people pay for it, not my problem."

gojo1978;62000 wrote:
Also though, a lot of people will not get cover because of 'pre-existing conditions'; that is the flaw of running healthcare as a business. And what about people who work plenty and just don't earn enough to get insurance anyway? It's a bad scene, man.


I'm not entirely opposed to governmental health care. Well, our current governments would probably run it highly ineffective.
I'm just saying with it go certain freedoms, we have to wear a helmet when driving a motorcycle and we can't smoke marijuana.
Or what alternative do you propose?
 
xris
 
Reply Fri 8 May, 2009 02:38 pm
@EmperorNero,
Give me the figures you have had long enough research time...you dont know, do you? All this hot air and you cant tell me ..
 
gojo1978
 
Reply Sat 9 May, 2009 10:11 am
@EmperorNero,
EmperorNero wrote:
Ok, I mentioned that in case you don't care because it's not your money. In a way: "Sure, let rich people pay for it, not my problem."


Rich people wouldn't exist without poor people. That is a fact. The poor are completely within their rights to expect rich people to pay for their healthcare.
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Sat 9 May, 2009 10:17 am
@gojo1978,
gojo1978;62185 wrote:
Rich people wouldn't exist without poor people. That is a fact. The poor are completely within their rights to expect rich people to pay for their healthcare.


That's quite a sentence. But let's not get side-tracked. Most people agree on health care.
More important are the other 99% of the giant government.
Governor's Budget - Department Index By Name

May I ask, if there were a lot of savings with abolishing motorcycle helmet laws, for example because it saves gas, would you be for abolishing the laws? Why?
 
xris
 
Reply Sat 9 May, 2009 11:41 am
@EmperorNero,
EmperorNero wrote:
That's quite a sentence. But let's not get side-tracked. Most people agree on health care.
More important are the other 99% of the giant government.
Governor's Budget - Department Index By Name

May I ask, if there were a lot of savings with abolishing motorcycle helmet laws, for example because it saves gas, would you be for abolishing the laws? Why?
Why do you shift from one subject to another exactly the time you are loosing the debate..Answer my question by the way or admit you dont know..Dont ask what question just look back and work it out yourself.
 
gojo1978
 
Reply Sat 9 May, 2009 12:35 pm
@EmperorNero,
EmperorNero wrote:

May I ask, if there were a lot of savings with abolishing motorcycle helmet laws, for example because it saves gas, would you be for abolishing the laws? Why?


Eh? :perplexed:

How would abolishing motorcycle helmet laws save gas? Please, PLEASE tell me you don't mean that it takes less gas to be burned in order to carry a person around minus helmet!

As xris says, though, you do chop and change subject rather than answer questions.
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Sat 9 May, 2009 12:51 pm
@gojo1978,
gojo1978;62192 wrote:
Eh? :perplexed:

How would abolishing motorcycle helmet laws save gas? Please, PLEASE tell me you don't mean that it takes less gas to be burned in order to carry a person around minus helmet!


I asked what if. Yes, what if that was calculated to be a lot of money. Plus the cost of enforcing the laws, the cost on the legal system, etc. Wearing no helmet is natural. Why are you for keeping a irrational law?
 
xris
 
Reply Sat 9 May, 2009 01:35 pm
@EmperorNero,
EmperorNero wrote:
I asked what if. Yes, what if that was calculated to be a lot of money. Plus the cost of enforcing the laws, the cost on the legal system, etc. Wearing no helmet is natural. Why are you for keeping a irrational law?
I would suggest if you wore a helmet and stopped talking so much gassies nonsense we would be half way to the moon before tea, are you sure your not puffing some skunk?
 
 

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/10/2024 at 02:21:04