Phatscotty wrote:The deal is that people who are addicted to drugs and have had their lives destroyed by drugs are being enabled to continue the reckless behavior, in this instance.
You keep claiming that anyone who is addicted to drugs has had their life destroyed by drugs. You should try to claw your way out of your ignorance when you get a chance...maybe this link can help you with that:
http://www.runcornandwidnesweeklynews.c ... -27086372/Phatscotty wrote:PLAYER57832 wrote:Phatscotty wrote:We want to encourage Independence and liberty.
We don't want to bailout drug addicts with cash.
I don't really want to bail out anyone, but sometimes we have to do what is expedient. Doing otherwise is "cutting of your nose to spite your face".
how is bailing out a drug addict with more cash expedient?
Because it costs less of that tax money you keep whining about.
Night Strike wrote:Dukasaur wrote:Phatscotty wrote:The deal is that people who are addicted to drugs and have had their lives destroyed by drugs are being enabled to continue the reckless behavior, in this instance.
And people who are addicted to watching TV and having their lives destroyed by sloth are being enabled to continue their reckless behaviour, and people who are addicted to going down to the local massage parlour and give all their money to the rub-and-tug girls are being enabled to continue their reckless behaviour, and so on, and so on, and so on....
This is the point you've completely avoided from the opening bell... why are you obsessing about cutting people off for doing drugs and not for doing a thousand and one other idiotic self-destructive behaviours?
Because doing drugs is illegal. When you give a blank check to people, the least you can do is make sure they aren't spending it on illegal activities. Just because those other things are stupid for people on welfare to be doing doesn't mean they are illegal.
It's pretty sad that the current line of reasoning against this policy is that A) We can't do it because we aren't doing it to other people and B) We can't do it because people are doing other unhealthy things. What ever happened to stopping ILLEGAL activities?
Why don't you care about the illegal activities when it involves OTHERS who are recieving that "blank government check".
Phatscotty wrote:Night Strike wrote:Dukasaur wrote:Phatscotty wrote:The deal is that people who are addicted to drugs and have had their lives destroyed by drugs are being enabled to continue the reckless behavior, in this instance.
And people who are addicted to watching TV and having their lives destroyed by sloth are being enabled to continue their reckless behaviour, and people who are addicted to going down to the local massage parlour and give all their money to the rub-and-tug girls are being enabled to continue their reckless behaviour, and so on, and so on, and so on....
This is the point you've completely avoided from the opening bell... why are you obsessing about cutting people off for doing drugs and not for doing a thousand and one other idiotic self-destructive behaviours?
Because doing drugs is illegal. When you give a blank check to people, the least you can do is make sure they aren't spending it on illegal activities. Just because those other things are stupid for people on welfare to be doing doesn't mean they are illegal.
It's pretty sad that the current line of reasoning against this policy is that A) We can't do it because we aren't doing it to other people and B) We can't do it because people are doing other unhealthy things. What ever happened to stopping ILLEGAL activities?
Nobody who does not have a serious drug problem will be hurt. Please join me in understanding that drug addicts on welfare are the
people who need help the most.
You keep claiming that taking more taxes hurts people. You keep claiming that you believe that freedom is more important than governmental control. Yet you keep holding to this position that goes against both of those claims.
john9blue wrote:Night Strike wrote:Just because I don't think like you doesn't mean I automatically don't think.
yes it does.
liberals are all smart, and all smart people agree with each other on every aspect of politics, so if you are conservative you are dumb. qed
BigBallinStalin is a liberal? Geez, I WAS gone a long time.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.