|
On October 18 2011 01:31 Valentine wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2011 01:29 JPP wrote:On October 18 2011 01:20 FabledIntegral wrote:On October 18 2011 01:07 JPP wrote:
It's easy for an individual person to say that "My smoking/drinking/pot doesn't harm anyone", but in reality the costs to society are actually incredibly high.
Take smoking for example. Smoking is one of the leading causes for lung cancer. And treating cancer is seriously expensive. Same goes for alcohol of drugs. A month in rehab costs a lot, and that doesn't even account for the psychological damage for families, relatives and so on.
Personally for me, I will be prejudiced against a drug user, but that doesn't mean that that person can't convince me otherwise. That's like saying that people who eat fast food a lot and are obese have extremely high costs to society because they get heart attacks, etc. While it might be true, I can't really see it as a valid argument. And it's not like you aren't required to disclose that you're a smoker on your health insurance. It is a problem in countries with public health services. It's not like smokers pay more taxes than other people. As for the obesity part, yes that is a problem as well. Over here it was actually being considered that people with lifestyle-caused diseases would be placed father back in the queue for medical attention. At least around here, cigarettes are taxed an insane amount.
Of course cigarettes are taxed, but that doesn't NEARLY cover the costs
|
definitely wrong. a person whose life and head is in proper order and who is knowledgeable about various drugs and the risks involved can take most of them in moderation without there really being much risk involved. the two most important factors in one becoming a drug abuser is state of one's mental wellbeing and one's social status. if you're out of work and depressed, it's almost as easy to become a junkie as it is to become a drunk. especially when your stupid dick of a friend shuns you for smoking pot or sniffing a line of coke, fuck him.
circumstancially i'd steer clear of people i reckon are addicts, but i've come to know drug users as dozens of responsible, productive people to a couple going-nowhere potheads to a few junkies. the last mentioned are a statistical minority as a person involved in a sensible drug subculture (such as clubbers) would know.
|
Marshall Islands3404 Posts
I dont give a shit about other people so don't really know what prejudice is.
|
On October 18 2011 01:51 JPP wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2011 01:31 Valentine wrote:On October 18 2011 01:29 JPP wrote:On October 18 2011 01:20 FabledIntegral wrote:On October 18 2011 01:07 JPP wrote:
It's easy for an individual person to say that "My smoking/drinking/pot doesn't harm anyone", but in reality the costs to society are actually incredibly high.
Take smoking for example. Smoking is one of the leading causes for lung cancer. And treating cancer is seriously expensive. Same goes for alcohol of drugs. A month in rehab costs a lot, and that doesn't even account for the psychological damage for families, relatives and so on.
Personally for me, I will be prejudiced against a drug user, but that doesn't mean that that person can't convince me otherwise. That's like saying that people who eat fast food a lot and are obese have extremely high costs to society because they get heart attacks, etc. While it might be true, I can't really see it as a valid argument. And it's not like you aren't required to disclose that you're a smoker on your health insurance. It is a problem in countries with public health services. It's not like smokers pay more taxes than other people. As for the obesity part, yes that is a problem as well. Over here it was actually being considered that people with lifestyle-caused diseases would be placed father back in the queue for medical attention. At least around here, cigarettes are taxed an insane amount. Of course cigarettes are taxed, but that doesn't NEARLY cover the costs
ahhh not this again ...
A person dying of lung cancer is expensive but more cheap than to pay for his life
smoker cost 300.000 less on average need to search for source again i thought this is common knowlege.
(no pension, no additional health care .....)
|
easy thing: you cannot chose your race, but you can chose not to take drugs.
|
On October 18 2011 01:51 JPP wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2011 01:31 Valentine wrote:On October 18 2011 01:29 JPP wrote:On October 18 2011 01:20 FabledIntegral wrote:On October 18 2011 01:07 JPP wrote:
It's easy for an individual person to say that "My smoking/drinking/pot doesn't harm anyone", but in reality the costs to society are actually incredibly high.
Take smoking for example. Smoking is one of the leading causes for lung cancer. And treating cancer is seriously expensive. Same goes for alcohol of drugs. A month in rehab costs a lot, and that doesn't even account for the psychological damage for families, relatives and so on.
Personally for me, I will be prejudiced against a drug user, but that doesn't mean that that person can't convince me otherwise. That's like saying that people who eat fast food a lot and are obese have extremely high costs to society because they get heart attacks, etc. While it might be true, I can't really see it as a valid argument. And it's not like you aren't required to disclose that you're a smoker on your health insurance. It is a problem in countries with public health services. It's not like smokers pay more taxes than other people. As for the obesity part, yes that is a problem as well. Over here it was actually being considered that people with lifestyle-caused diseases would be placed father back in the queue for medical attention. At least around here, cigarettes are taxed an insane amount. Of course cigarettes are taxed, but that doesn't NEARLY cover the costs
Taxed + Health insurance here is more expensive for smokers^^.
|
On October 18 2011 01:56 JustPassingBy wrote:
easy thing: you cannot chose your race, but you can chose not to take drugs.
yeah, only that looking for various ways to get intoxicated is a trait that most intelligent life on earth share, and using ways "alternative" to alcohol to do that became something the public consider wrong only since the church&state decided it is. why would that be, is there something inherently immoral or unethical in using intoxicants we call drugs?
|
On October 18 2011 01:45 BlackFlag wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2011 01:07 JPP wrote:
It's easy for an individual person to say that "My smoking/drinking/pot doesn't harm anyone", but in reality the costs to society are actually incredibly high.
Take smoking for example. Smoking is one of the leading causes for lung cancer. And treating cancer is seriously expensive. Same goes for alcohol of drugs. A month in rehab costs a lot, and that doesn't even account for the psychological damage for families, relatives and so on.
Personally for me, I will be prejudiced against a drug user, but that doesn't mean that that person can't convince me otherwise. Don't forget all the young soccer players and people who are skiing! They often break bones, have stuff with their knee (that takes veeery long to heal properly). Those are really high costs because the operations are expensive, they can't go to work, work less effective because they might have pain etc. But in the end, they live a long life because their organs are healthy through all the sport, but their body is damaged which means they are getting pension a long time, and because they live so long they gotta often see doctors. Also there are studies that say that fat smokers are the cheapest to society because all the smoking health problems come when they are older, and until then the work normally and pay into the pension funds. But then they die statistically 10 years earlier than "healthy" people, which means that they get MUCH less pension and in medicinal costs are propably the same because they have a short time of high medical attention while the "healthy" ones have a long time of lower medical attention (which goes up with age).
So you say it's a bad thing that people who do sports live longer? Physical exercise is essential to the physical and mental well-being of a person. The positives far outweigh the negatives.
As for the second part, I would like to see the source.
|
There some hughe corelletions between smoking weed and having ADHS (if not medikated with retalin)
Those people for example are all feeling much better stoned becouse its like a natural medikation
retalin works much different and could be considered dangerous as well...
Those people most likely drink less to nothing alcohol...
In my opinion it should be easy like getting retalin to get weed for those people and i would love to see it respected as retalin when it comes to society...
|
"drug use is a quantifiable phenomenon that causes a noticeable decrease of perception, critical thought, and the like, making discrimination against drug users justified."
False : /
Ever heard of cocaine? LSD? Does LSD decrease your perception? QUITE the opposite. It will always depend on the person, and the drug of choice, and how they choose to use it.
|
On October 18 2011 02:10 JPP wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2011 01:45 BlackFlag wrote:On October 18 2011 01:07 JPP wrote:
It's easy for an individual person to say that "My smoking/drinking/pot doesn't harm anyone", but in reality the costs to society are actually incredibly high.
Take smoking for example. Smoking is one of the leading causes for lung cancer. And treating cancer is seriously expensive. Same goes for alcohol of drugs. A month in rehab costs a lot, and that doesn't even account for the psychological damage for families, relatives and so on.
Personally for me, I will be prejudiced against a drug user, but that doesn't mean that that person can't convince me otherwise. Don't forget all the young soccer players and people who are skiing! They often break bones, have stuff with their knee (that takes veeery long to heal properly). Those are really high costs because the operations are expensive, they can't go to work, work less effective because they might have pain etc. But in the end, they live a long life because their organs are healthy through all the sport, but their body is damaged which means they are getting pension a long time, and because they live so long they gotta often see doctors. Also there are studies that say that fat smokers are the cheapest to society because all the smoking health problems come when they are older, and until then the work normally and pay into the pension funds. But then they die statistically 10 years earlier than "healthy" people, which means that they get MUCH less pension and in medicinal costs are propably the same because they have a short time of high medical attention while the "healthy" ones have a long time of lower medical attention (which goes up with age). So you say it's a bad thing that people who do sports live longer? Physical exercise is essential to the physical and mental well-being of a person. The positives far outweigh the negatives. As for the second part, I would like to see the source.
for you its a good thing only you are more likely to cost more over time...
And probably you die on cancer anyway there are a lot of cancer cases if you get older even if you havent smoked at all...
|
|
|
On October 18 2011 00:53 RoosterSamurai wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2011 00:51 TheGlassface wrote:
Wow @ responses.
I mean, wow.
There are good and bad people of all kinds. Everyone uses drugs, from caffeine to alcohol to meth to opiates to ADHD medication. I personally have met meth addicts who maintained a 6 figure income and family. I've met an alcoholic who graduated cum laudi, who happened to write all of his finals on mescaline. I've also seen a man robbed over a 20 sack of weed and personally been at the hands of several bad encounters with addicts.
Don't blame the drug, blame the person.
Wow. I really did not expect what I saw here.
Not everyone uses drugs/alcohol of some kind.
Aspirin is a drug.
Caffeine is a drug.
Any kind of medication for disorders, also drugs.
So, you're right but it's a minority. A very small minority. Most people don't even know they're using some kind of drug every day.
|
My perception of people who use drugs depends on the sort of drugs they use and the frequency they do them. For the most part, I don't mind people experimenting with nearly any drug, but if somebody uses a drug on a regular basis, then my opinion of the person is severely negatively impacted due to the fact that basicaly every addiction has negative effects ranging from bad to disastrous.
|
Drugs are bad in most cases, I've tried different types of drugs just because I think each different drug is a type of experience. That being said I disrespect people in school who abuse stimulants, because I've tried them and seen how powerful they are.
|
Its funny how many people are saying they wouldnt want to be around people who smoke pot, because I guarantee you, if you live in the US at least, we all are every day. Its just because they read things like this OP and dont want to disclose it to anybody that youd never know.
|
Depends. In the USA Marijuana is technically "illegal" in most of the country and I wouldn't really freak out too much if someone told me they toked up once in awhile. Not my thing, but hey, w/e.
Harder drugs thought...that's a whole new ball game. Fuck that shit.
|
I think if you want to make a poll like this you need a separate one for Marijuana.
My opinion of a crackhead and a pothead aren't congruant.
|
My quoted text came from the OP dood O . O was trying to argue against it. The point of my post was basically this: The fundamental failure of the war on drugs was the fact that for a looooong time, the government simply slumped EVERY drug we had yet discovered into the "Drugs are bad, mm,'kay?" column. Leading people to believe that things like hallucinogenics, marijuana, and many others are equally detrimental to your mind and your health as say alcohol, opiates, cocaine, tobacco, etc. The general population simply believed all of this because, hey -- its the government -- they MUST know a lot of stuff about stuff!
What changes have been made in modern day? People are beginning to actually UNDERSTAND how drugs effect the mind, body, and the people around you.
In short, yes, the viewpoint that "A drug user is BY DEFINITION a slower, less efficient, less mentally stable, less healthy individual who is a complete drag on our society." IS false and is always going to change from person to person, drug to drug.
The sooner we learn to take EACH AND EVERY drug for what it ACTUALLY is the sooner our drug laws can make sense and we can stop wasting thousands of dollars keeping non-violent offenders behind bars.
Moldwood, over and out.
|
Another TL poll that really depresses me 
Drugs aren't by necessity bad. Drug users aren't by necessity bad. It's like anything else: what matters is what you do with them. Some people, like myself, use drugs like marijuana or alcohol to help themselves relax or relieve some stress. Or they use drugs like ecstasy or cocaine to make social occasions more fun. Or they use drugs like mushrooms or LSD to experience other states of consciousness, and to broaden their perspective.
Other people abuse drugs. It's abuse when there are severe negative consequences for themselves or others due to their use, but they continue to use anyway.
Other people are ADDICTS, and these people are psychologically ill. As for drug addicts, if they don't desire to change and they don't directly harm anyone other than themselves, they should be left alone to use drugs as they please. But professional medical help should be available, just like with any other illness, to see them cured when they wish to fight their addiction. All addictions are harmful, however, not just drug addictions.
My father was a drug abuser and a first class addict. For years my family crumbled under the crushing weight of his alcohol, cocaine, and crack addictions. My sisters and I saw and dealt with things that no child should ever have to. It was not his only addiction, however. He was also addicted to money, status, and success. He fueled his drug addiction from money he earned as a partner at a prestigious international law firm. His addiction to his career meant he was never around when he was sober, and his addiction to drugs meant was never sober when he was around.
Today he is finally clean. But it wasn't the years and years and years of hitting rock bottom again and again and again. It wasn't finally losing his license to practice law, nor was it spending years in prisons. It was a desire to change his outlook on the world, professional medical help, and diligently following through on his recovery, despite many slips. Addiction is a sickness. It's victims should not be looked down upon, nor reviled. They should be pitied, and treated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
