victim mentality

[kitty]

I was just listening to a talk radio show and they were discussing how blacks in the USA are stuck in a victim mentality that pervents them from succeeding and furthering themselves in our society. I was just wondering what your opinions were on this.


Discuss....

[Dymond]

honestly?? I 100% agree with this. Even many blacks believe this to be true. Its time for blacks to stop blaming 'the man' for keeping them down. They have become dependent on a welfare system and the mentality that says they are entitled to this.

[Lucas]

They invented ebonics got to give em credit for that.

[hoos]

I can see where that happens but I don't think that it is verifiable fact. I see a lot just giving up because of where they are coming from, when the truth is they can get help, and lots of it.

[Furyous]

I can see where that happens but I don't think that it is verifiable fact. I see a lot just giving up because of where they are coming from, when the truth is they can get help, and lots of it.


Ditto.
As a white male coming from an upper class household I was unable to get a penny out of Uncle Sam for my education. I tried to do it on my own, but was unable to afford it. When I turned 25 I was finally eligible for financial aid. There is so much help available for minorities and women, they just have to want it bad enough! The real problem as far as I'm concerned is MOTIVATION! If you're motivated to do something about the situation you're in, you can accomplish anything! Don't believe me? Here are two great examples from different sides of the globe... Martin Luther King Jr. and Ghandi. Both were tired of the way things were going and took it upon themselves to change what it was that they felt was holding them back; and both were extremely successful. Unfortunately for a lot of blacks in America, they've chosen to make people like Louis Farrakhan, a hate monger, their new idols. He is about the last thing I think Martin Luther King Jr. would have ever wanted representing his people. Only you can change your destiny. It's a matter of choice, particularly in America.

[Eyez Neverclear]

I think the proof is in comparing them with every other minority in the US today and what they are doing, where they started, and in some cases where they already are. Asians, Mexicans/Latinos, and more and more Arabs/Indians/Middle Easterners are to me all doing generally and relatively better in the US than blacks are and in far less time here while many have started at about the same level of poverty.

Asians when they first started coming over here came here without a damn thing. Were every bit as hated as the blacks and they worked their asses of being the slaves of the 19th and 20th century building our railroads. They started saving every dime they earned to pass on to future generations to assure they were better off. The poorer Asians still do that today but a huge number of those familes are now middle to upper middle class wealthy after putting their children through college and making sure their kids learned everything they needed to so they could get high paying jobs and not have to live like past generations.

Mexicans/Latinos haven't been doing it as long but they are basically doing the same thing right now. They work their asses of doing whatever needs to be done to be done. They take care of their families. Many of them sending money back to other family members in their home country's. You better damn well believe that in 35-50 years from now they will have flown by the blacks in terms of wealth.

Arabs/Indians/Middle Easterns etc, they are fairly new to the US but the ones that are here work their asses off too and tend to make all the right decisions with their money and so on. You don't run into them wasting their only $20 in Bestbuy on a cd or dvd. They don't "seem" to care about that trivial possessions that most of the rest of the world tend to waste their hard earned money on. There are countless major Universities across the country now that have fast growing populations of these hard workers in their top programs. You don't go to a school and see any of them majoring in criminal justice, or general studies or some other worthless field. They are all in engineering, business, and medical programs and the best ones in the country.

How do blacks even compare to all that? They don't and it'd be an awful sight to even begin to try put anything here.

[odd th0mas]

amazing comments!

i challenge u all to read a book by john griffin called 'black like me'!

[Jimmy James]

Ditto.
As a white male coming from an upper class household I was unable to get a penny out of Uncle Sam for my education. I tried to do it on my own, but was unable to afford it. When I turned 25 I was finally eligible for financial aid. There is so much help available for minorities and women, they just have to want it bad enough! The real problem as far as I'm concerned is MOTIVATION! If you're motivated to do something about the situation you're in, you can accomplish anything! Don't believe me? Here are two great examples from different sides of the globe... Martin Luther King Jr. and Ghandi. Both were tired of the way things were going and took it upon themselves to change what it was that they felt was holding them back; and both were extremely successful. Unfortunately for a lot of blacks in America, they've chosen to make people like Louis Farrakhan, a hate monger, their new idols. He is about the last thing I think Martin Luther King Jr. would have ever wanted representing his people. Only you can change your destiny. It's a matter of choice, particularly in America.

Martin Luther King, Jr. and Gandhi were both born into well-to-do families, as were you, so I don't see the corelation. it's easy to get ahead in life if you're already ahead. if you live in poverty, it's hard to get out of poverty, but I'll Dr. King's words speak for me....

Unidentified Panelist: You've told us what the white man and what the government can do about this very serious situation. What do you think the Negro himself can do? You've been able to get a good education, as have hundreds of thousands of Negroes. Why do some succeed and not others?

Dr. King: Some succeed and not others because the system is stacked against the Negro. And it's all right to say to people, "Lift yourself by your own bootstraps," but it's a cruel jest to say to a bootless man that he ought to lift himself by his own bootstraps. And the fact is that millions of Negroes have been left bootless as a result of poverty, as a result of illiteracy caused by inadequate education and real lack of educational opportunities and as a result of centuries of neglect and hurt. And I think the government and everybody must see that the Negro can't do this job by himself

source: Meet the Press, Aug. 13, 1976. rebroadcast Jan. 15, 2006

[GayAsInHappy]

The easiest way to resolve this question is to take a class or five on social stratification. And I think it's unfair to class any group of people together as failures simply based on race. I spent seven years in Dearborn, MI, and two years in Chicago, where I knew blacks, whites, asians, hispanics, people of Middle Eastern descent, you name it. Some of each ethnicity were rich, some were poor, some were middle class. Some abused welfare and others owned property and businesses and some just worked their asses off to feed the family. I think the real issue is, why do POOR people stay poor? The reasons are so many that you'd have to make a personal study of the variables to really understand.

I liked your response, Tyler.

[VikesWookie]

Wow!!! i can't even count the number of blanket stereotypes in this thread. i think the issue today is more of class than race. if you're poor ( no matter if you're black, white, blue, red... etc.) u get treated that way and it's next to impossible to get out. that's the way it seems to be set up here in the US. my current 401K plan is called the POWERBALL... lol

[Dymond]

*WAIT* you don't think the current system does a good job of keeping people poor? None of these programs are designed to give poor people a hand up..They are meant to subsidize their current way of living. However I call Bullshit on the next to impossible to get out either. You just need to stop thinking of yourself as a victim and dwelling on your circumstances.

[VikesWookie]

Are you contradicting yourself to me Dy? I do think the system keeps people poor. Obviously, you believe the current system keeps the poor where they are. I can name a few programs that give a helping hand out to those in need (ie. EIC, WIC, food stamps, etc...)
The problem with government programs is the access and the ability to jump through the hoops of the system in a timely matter so they don't drop your case.

You can believe what you wish about the "next to impossible" to get out of being poor. The numbers speak for themselves though (90% of the wealth is controlled by 10% of the population) It will always be that way in a capitalist society.

[Dymond]

The problem with everyone of those programs you mentioned is they aren't giving a helping hand..they are just GIVING.. As for getting out of the cycle of povery...what better place to do that than here in the US? I know more than most how hard it is because I was poor growing up. The difference is it never was what my mom was. having no money never defined her as a person. So I tried not to let it do the same for me. I'm not rich by any stretch but I think I'm doing alright. So I ask what keeps a person poor and I believe no matter what the studies say, its a mindset.

[VikesWookie]

Let me contradict myself after thought of this.... You're right on the mindset part Dy, but the system, I believe, is set up to keep people where they are. Plus, the system shows people how to be fiscally irresponsible... just look at big brother and its spending.
I think it's next to impossible to get out of the "poor" deal b/c of the society in which I was born. We have twisted ourselves into a have and have-not materialistic people who substitutes want for need at a commercial break. It's because of this why ..... I got high and completely lost my train of thought. lol

[Dymond]

LOL so after all that we actually are in agreement..

[GayAsInHappy]

The problem with everyone of those programs you mentioned is they aren't giving a helping hand..they are just GIVING.. As for getting out of the cycle of povery...what better place to do that than here in the US? I know more than most how hard it is because I was poor growing up. The difference is it never was what my mom was. having no money never defined her as a person. So I tried not to let it do the same for me. I'm not rich by any stretch but I think I'm doing alright. So I ask what keeps a person poor and I believe no matter what the studies say, its a mindset.

Let's solve poverty together by advocating for:

1. Living wages.

2. Free national health care.

3. Equal opportunity education beginning in elementary school.

4. Strengthening access to birth control.

5. Safe and inexpensive public transportation infrastructures.

6. Mentor programs that can handle volume.

7. Safe, affordable housing.

8. Equality in legal representation.

9. After school programs that focus on character building activities.

10. Provide large tax cuts only to businesses that create employment opportunities.

11. The end of NAFTA/CAFTA/outsourcing and the creation of new policies that keep good jobs at home.

12. Legalization of narcotics.

I worked for a woman who contracts with the state of MI for high-volume data processing. They once had over 500 employees, but (illegally) outsourced almost all of their jobs to India. Now only 12 positions remain locally. What do you think happened to the other 488 employees? My former employer has four beachside vacation homes around the world, owns a Jag, a Bentley and a Land Rover. The art in their home is valued at over 3 million dollars.

Having money doesn't necessarily make anyone better at being a human being. But it sure helps the rich to make you think that the people they screw out of jobs and benefits are at fault for their stations in life. Keeps the focus off of them. I personally think that this woman is worse than the laziest alive...she had a position of power that she abused to get ahead. Money certainly doesn't define her as a person. She's a money-grubbing bitch. She CHEATED and got rich. And I am sure she is not alone.

The issue is, in a capitalist society, someone has to be at the bottom for the rich to stay at the top. Our current policies reflect this fact. We are trained to blame the poor, rather than to work for change. If you are against poverty and the accompanying mindset, then DO something about it. Not everyone is as savvy as you. Help a poor person find educational opportunities, drive them to school if they have no transport, offer to baby-sit here and there so they can work an extra job. Mentor a poor kid. Vote for people who want to make a difference. Not everyone has their own bootstraps. Sometimes the bootstrap that you pull yourself up by isn't your own. Sometimes, you need to borrow one.

[the squid of despair]

So leagalization of narcotics will solve poverty? Interesting. I suppose legalizing mob style hits for profit would help too.

[Furyous]

Alright, after reading through the posts I agree with some of you that the stereotypes are pretty heavy. I know a lot of very successful Black Americans that came from nothing. My father always used to tell me that when you sit down and look at the numbers, generally there is a certain percentage of all races that will succeed. The real problem is that only see the ones that are failing on the news! I hafl believe in that, but I don't think that's necessarily true with the Black American community. I have no numbers to prove it either way, so Ill leave that subject alone.
Yes, I came from a higher earning family, but believe me, that wealth was not spread. I chose to make it on my own, and after leaving the household after high school, I made my own way. I conacted the people I needed to contact in order to succeed, and I've made my own way through life. Don't ever make the mistake of assuming that just because someones parents gross a lot of money that they must be well off as well. My last job barely even pamy monthly bills, living in the poorest part of town and often going without meals. I don't care who you are or where you come from. I don't feel sorry for you if you refuse to do something about the situation you're in! moved to Santiago, Chile in order to better my life. I left my girlfriend and her two daughters behind so we could get ahead in life. That was a tough decision, but it's going to pay off. I pulled myself out of the situation I was in and did something about it! Anyone else with any drive could have been afforded the same opportunity, I sought it out and made it a reality!

National helathcare is an absolute joke! Please don't kid yourself into thinking that it could ever succeed. Our healthcare is expensive because we are paying for the healthcare in undeveloped countries as well as our own. It is not cheap to hire the best scientists in order to create new drugs etc. and then when the companies that make those drugs have to sell them at severely discounted rates in other parts of the world, the simple laws of supply and demand dictate that we, the richer nations, are going to have to pay the price. PLUS, when my father got out of medical school he had a heap of debt. Most doctors go to private practice. You have to buy your way into a group, not cheap, and begin to pay back all your living expenses for the past 10 years (in my fathers case) that accumulated while you were in training. Doctors earn the pay they recieve by sacrificing years of their life with very little pay. Trust me, my father finished paying off his school loans when he was 45 years old! Nationalized health care would be disastrous. My father has told me that if it ever became a reality, he'd stop practicing and go teach high school science somewhere (He'd make more under a system like that).
Don't forget that in a capitalistic society, prices are driven by supply and demand. It really is the most pure form of pring in the world. If you think for one minute that our nation could run the system better than the way it is run now, you must be insane. Can you tell me one program that you feel our senators have been able to run better than the private sector? I can't think of anything!
So, now I am prepared to be flamed. Those are my honest opinions. People need to start taking personal responsibility for their own damned lives, and if they don't like where they're at, change it! It should not be my job to do it for them. Let them figure it out the way many of us have had to, when they're ready to change, they will!

[GayAsInHappy]

So leagalization of narcotics will solve poverty? Interesting. I suppose legalizing mob style hits for profit would help too.

Actually, Killaho, I DO believe that the legalization of drugs would help solve a number of problems, including reducing crime and poverty, but only if implemented with the other suggestions I made above. I could outline my position on this but I think I might still have a hard time convincing you. I will assume you have no problem with anything else I said, so I'll just feel good about that.

Oh, and mob-style hits have nothing to do with the "drug wars" as they amount to murder, not self-abuse. That red herring was delicious, by the way.

Furyous, I agree that it would be difficult to switch to a national health care system, and that a lot of doctors would be really pissed off. But we need a safety net for people lacking health insurance (and this is not just an issue of the poor) with no stigmas attached. However that gets done is fine with me, privately or publicly.

Another thing you said was that you had connections that you used to get ahead. If you are surrounded by people without connections, how can you make them? You had an advantage, evidently, by being raised in a home where you had that opportunity. I'm glad for you, but it is not the case for everyone.

It's so easy to judge other people...but in my opinion judgment is an excuse not to get involved and care about others.

[Jimmy James]

[...]
Yes, I came from a higher earning family, but believe me, that wealth was not spread. I chose to make it on my own, and after leaving the household after high school, I made my own way. I conacted the people I needed to contact in order to succeed, and I've made my own way through life. Don't ever make the mistake of assuming that just because someones parents gross a lot of money that they must be well off as well. My last job barely even pamy monthly bills, living in the poorest part of town and often going without meals. I don't care who you are or where you come from. I don't feel sorry for you if you refuse to do something about the situation you're in! moved to Santiago, Chile in order to better my life. I left my girlfriend and her two daughters behind so we could get ahead in life. That was a tough decision, but it's going to pay off. I pulled myself out of the situation I was in and did something about it! Anyone else with any drive could have been afforded the same opportunity, I sought it out and made it a reality!
[...]
you don't understand what I'm trying to say. just because you had to pay for college yourself, and you now support yourself, that doesn't mean you had no help from your family.

I'm going to assume you graduated high school, and up until that point, you were raised by your parents. so you don't know what it's like to have to get a job when you're 14 so your family doesn't get evicted, or to drop out of high school 2 years later so you can work 2 jobs to help your mother pay her bills.

I understand the victim mentality because I had it at one time, and yes, I've pulled myself out of it and evenually bought a house for my mother, but during my early adulthood i was very bitter and felt I got the short end of the stick. it's not an easy thing to pull yourself out of, and I'm watching my younger siblings fall into the same mentality. my sister is 23 years old, and has never held a job for more then a month because she feels the world owes her something and I know she's gonna struggle the rest of her life. that is if she doesn't become a baby factory because section 8 is looking pretty good to her. so now she's gonna bring a child into this world, and she'll probly be on welfare the rest of her life, and then what happens to that child? the circle of life is complete.

I'm not saying you didn't have it rough, I'm saying you weren't born into poverty. maybe you missed a meal while going through college, but you didn't go 3 days without eating when you were 5. victim mentality isn't someone trying to pull themselves out, it's someone who thinks it's impossible.

[Furyous]

I hear what you're saying here TD, but it didn't hold you back. The president of the company I am a licensee of grew up in extreme poverty and chose out. A doctor I know at home also had a similar experience with abusive alcoholic parents as well. It's a mindset. Doesn't matter what side of the tracks your from. Either you'll choose success or not. I know a lot of kids who grew up rich that chose not to continue that cycle as well. They chose to go the other way because it is easier to fail and blame others than to be a success. I think that is something we can both agree on.
BTW my parents sent me off to a boarding school my sophomore year. I was pissed, but pulled through and did graduate. After that I was on my own. I chose to make something of myself. So did you. It's that simple. A decision to not live the way we were living in the past....

[the squid of despair]

Actually, Killaho, I DO believe that the legalization of drugs would help solve a number of problems, including reducing crime and poverty, but only if implemented with the other suggestions I made above. I could outline my position on this but I think I might still have a hard time convincing you. I will assume you have no problem with anything else I said, so I'll just feel good about that.

Oh, and mob-style hits have nothing to do with the "drug wars" as they amount to murder, not self-abuse. That red herring was delicious, by the way.

Furyous, I agree that it would be difficult to switch to a national health care system, and that a lot of doctors would be really pissed off. But we need a safety net for people lacking health insurance (and this is not just an issue of the poor) with no stigmas attached. However that gets done is fine with me, privately or publicly.

Another thing you said was that you had connections that you used to get ahead. If you are surrounded by people without connections, how can you make them? You had an advantage, evidently, by being raised in a home where you had that opportunity. I'm glad for you, but it is not the case for everyone.

It's so easy to judge other people...but in my opinion judgment is an excuse not to get involved and care about others.

Interesting, I think we all would love to hear your master plan. I think one big thing to note, would be the strain on your new free health care system due to drug related illness, overdose, abuse, and death. Since my concept of legalizing murder didn't seem tasty to you how about we legalize something else harmful. How about rape? No wait, that harms others too. Child molesting? No, damn, that will harm kids. Man actually I can't think of anything wrong with legalizing drugs to solve poverty, other than the fact that kids will get the wrong message, more kids and adults will become addicted and dependant on drugs, crack babies will be rampaging the earth, we'll add to police work, violent crime will rise, people will spend their entire pay checks on drugs, people will have a convinient place to steal drugs from, the list goes on. Do you want more? I suppose I could go down your entire list and point out more flaws, in my eyes, if you like.

I actually have a no shit answer if you, or any one else, wants free heath care. Ready for this....
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
Become an illegal immigrant :w00t2:

[GayAsInHappy]

BTW my parents sent me off to a boarding school my sophomore year. I was pissed, but pulled through and did graduate. After that I was on my own.

OMG. :worship:

KH: Go read some books. Go do some field studies. Go to school and extensively study crime and poverty. Get a job in a helping profession. Learn to avoid fallacies. Then come back and talk to me as an intellectual peer in this particular conversation. Your shit-stirring is lame, not to mention boring.

I have a hunch your dream date is Condi Rice.

:bye:

[the squid of despair]

OMG. :worship:

KH: Go read some books. Go do some field studies. Go to school and extensively study crime and poverty. Get a job in a helping profession. Learn to avoid fallacies. Then come back and talk to me as an intellectual peer in this particular conversation. Your shit-stirring is lame, not to mention boring.

I have a hunch your dream date is Condi Rice.

:bye:

What are you talking about? There's nothing debatable any more? I can't question you? I need to go learn about your side and be like minded before we can talk? Sorry, I really don't have the time for night classes right now. Why do you mention things, claim to have a defense, then come back with nothing but insults? Weird.

[Aeon]

teehee..sorry to interject...because i didn't really read everything...but...side note...
most of canada has free health care.

[GayAsInHappy]

What are you talking about? There's nothing debatable any more? I can't question you? I need to go learn about your side and be like minded before we can talk? Sorry, I really don't have the time for night classes right now. Why do you mention things, claim to have a defense, then come back with nothing but insults? Weird.

Absolutely, you are entitled to your opinion and I am always up for an intelligent debate. But, I prefer to avoid bigoted opinions (illegal aliens etc) and scary what-ifs. You made it clear in your first response to me that your "debate" skills consist of comparing things that have nothing to do with each other and later, the doomsday defense. How can I have a discussion with you when you keep doing THAT??? Why waste my time telling you about my ideas when you do nothing but stir invalid fallacies into the pot? If you were seriously interested, I would spend an hour writing my "defense" for you. But you're not. So I'll spend five minutes on this instead.

The only insult I laid on you was Condi, which I see you didn't deny. The rest of my suggestions simply help lay the groundwork for an enlightened discussion about social problem solving.

[the squid of despair]

Absolutely, you are entitled to your opinion and I am always up for an intelligent debate. But, I prefer to avoid bigoted opinions (illegal aliens etc) and scary what-ifs. You made it clear in your first response to me that your "debate" skills consist of comparing things that have nothing to do with each other and later, the doomsday defense. How can I have a discussion with you when you keep doing THAT??? Why waste my time telling you about my ideas when you do nothing but stir invalid fallacies into the pot? If you were seriously interested, I would spend an hour writing my "defense" for you. But you're not. So I'll spend five minutes on this instead.

The only insult I laid on you was Condi, which I see you didn't deny. The rest of my suggestions simply help lay the groundwork for an enlightened discussion about social problem solving.

Great points. Why even bother thinking about the scary "What ifs". Lets just roll the dice hope it works out. I compare things, that are in my eyes, just as outlandish as yours. I'm comparing one extreme to another. You seem to interpret it as a vivious attack on you, when it's not. Next time I'll remember not to question, since you can't or choose not to debate with me. Oh and I'd bone Connie.

P.S. Lame and boring can be considered insulting. ;)

[Mark]

Well i have entered this conversation late so forgive me if i re sate previous arguments

At what point does it not become our fault that something is happening, in 200 years lets just say the situation is the same is it still the white mans fault. I agree with victimization for a short period of time but there gets to be a point where you must say get over it. Segregation has being over for 50 years and slavery for over 100. All other minorty groups have rising above what they started with why should it be any different with them.

[GayAsInHappy]

Great points. Why even bother thinking about the scary "What ifs". Lets just roll the dice hope it works out. I compare things, that are in my eyes, just as outlandish as yours. I'm comparing one extreme to another. You seem to interpret it as a vivious attack on you, when it's not. Next time I'll remember not to question, since you can't or choose not to debate with me. Oh and I'd bone Connie.

P.S. Lame and boring can be considered insulting. ;)

Your responses aren't thoughtful points of debate, as I have previously stated.

Man actually I can't think of anything wrong with legalizing drugs to solve poverty, other than the fact that kids will get the wrong message, more kids and adults will become addicted and dependant on drugs, crack babies will be rampaging the earth, we'll add to police work, violent crime will rise, people will spend their entire pay checks on drugs, people will have a convinient place to steal drugs from, the list goes on.

Kids already have conflicting messages about drugs. Alcohol is legal, and in some cases harmful, which appears to be your standard for what should be ILLEGAL so we should ban it. Pot, which is much less harmful than alcohol, is illegal. Cigarettes are extraordinarily dangerous, but legal. Why? Economics. Isn't that confusing? Drugs with label that get you high=not illegal. Drugs with no label that get you high=illegal.

More kids and adults will become dependent? What evidence do you have that legalizing a substance makes more people become dependent? Alcohol and cigarette use is in decline thanks to some low-budget health campaigns and restrictions in advertising. With your reasoning, this could not be the case.

If someone wants to do drugs, they will. People don't use drugs because they are illegal/legal, accessible/inaccessible. They use them because they have a need for something, like relief, control, escape. Same as when your dad comes home after work and has a few cocktails. He doesn't drink because alcohol is legal. He drinks because he wants the effects of the alcohol. The vast majority of people who use substances are casual users. If legal, the vast majority would still be casual users.

The difference is that when illegal, the user faces jail (for using and sometimes for a crime committed to obtain the drug), inhibiting future economic prospects. The user also can face death, as there is no means of controlling the safety of the substance. Imagine that your dad mixes a drink, but there are no restrictions on the ingredients. There is rat poison in the Absolut, and pops dies. Oopsy. Is that a problem of the alcohol, or the lack of regulation?

Decriminalization makes drugs safer and frees up tons of government money. It creates jobs, in drug manufacturing and production. It generates tax revenue. And, it helps us identify those who really ARE addicts, and offer them treatment and other alternatives. For example, Susie uses a LOT of heroin. Her pharmacist, concerned, offers her methadone as a substitute. Susie tries it and discovers that while she no longer experiences euphoria, she feels able to function during the day. The stigma is gone, users are now visible, and as a result we can help if the use becomes severe, just as we attempt with alcoholics.

So, as you can see, crack babies will not be rampaging the earth.

Now, on to your next assumption. How will police work increase? You are now getting your drugs legally from the pharmacy...Violent crime? You no longer have to smack down a granny to pay those ridiculous black market prices. You no longer fight rival gangs for control of said market. The mob got it's foothold in crime during Prohibition, remember? Spend your whole paycheck on drugs? Only if you would have done it illegally, anyway. Some people spend their whole paychecks at the bar. Do we ban alcohol again because of it? Some people spend six bucks a day on cigarettes they can't afford. Is tobacco illegal? No...it's SUBSIDIZED. When it comes to personal choices, and harmful things exist, people will use them if they want to.

How does legalization reduce poverty? It won't, unless there are other measures in place, as I have said, like a living wage and affordable child care, mentorships and educational opportunities. But if we our social institutions promote economic growth, and we take away the attraction of easy money for dealers, less people will engage in the crimes that accompany drug use today. Less people go to jail, and as a result, more viable employees will be able to obtain/sustain employment and be home with their familes, offering guidance, support and love. Heavy users will be easily identifiable, so that we can see that they get treatment if they need it/want it. And we'll have the money to spend on them, because less money will be directed toward an unwinnable war on drugs. It wouldn't happen overnight...big changes take time. But I truly believe the change would come.

I don't take anything you say as a personal affront. I would just like to see some thoughtful, reasonable responses from you. I'm waiting...

[Grendel]

teehee..sorry to interject...because i didn't really read everything...but...side note...
most of canada has free health care.

Sorry for heading back in the posts, but...

Most?

[the squid of despair]

Your responses aren't thoughtful points of debate, as I have previously stated.



Kids already have conflicting messages about drugs. Alcohol is legal, and in some cases harmful, which appears to be your standard for what should be ILLEGAL so we should ban it. Pot, which is much less harmful than alcohol, is illegal. Cigarettes are extraordinarily dangerous, but legal. Why? Economics. Isn't that confusing? Drugs with label that get you high=not illegal. Drugs with no label that get you high=illegal.

Not really. Kids are taught from a young age that drugs are illegal and bad. Alcohol is legal, and in many cases it's harmful or fatal, as the some stats show below. Perhaps it should be illegal, but then it would add to the organized crime, pushers, convictions etc. Same goes for ciggies. Cigarettes also drive the pharmaceutical industry by keeping millions sick every year. How can you argue that making something legal, will control it, make it safer, and fewer people will use it. You named 2 that are legal now, and look how unsafe they are. You would just be adding fuel to the fire. Would penalties be the same when driving? You can still get a DUI if your speeding down the freeway on freebase cocaine, right? I'm not too concerned with pot and I will hear a case for couple others but that's about it.

"According to the CDC report, between 1997 and 2002 a total of 2,335 children died in car crashes involving drunken drivers. Of the children killed, 68percent were riding in a car with a driver who had been drinking."

Alcohol Impaired Driving Statistics

Total Fatalities / Fatality Rates


250,000 people have died in alcohol related accidents in the past 10 years.
Presently 25,000 people are killed each year in alcohol related accidents.
500 people are killed each week in alcohol related accidents.
71 people are killed each day in alcohol related accidents.
One American life is lost every 20 minutes in alcohol related auto crashes.
It is estimated that one out of every two Americans will be involved in an alcohol related accident in his or her lifetime.
In 1994, New Hampshire had 119 total highway fatalities, 42 were alcohol related (or 35.3% of the total). New Hampshire leads the nation with one of the lowest percentages of alcohol related fatalities.

http://www.duipictures.com/statisti.htm

More kids and adults will become dependent? What evidence do you have that legalizing a substance makes more people become dependent? Alcohol and cigarette use is in decline thanks to some low-budget health campaigns and restrictions in advertising. With your reasoning, this could not be the case.

I used a logic called common sense on this one. I might be able to find some statistics that show dependency is related to availability. If more people can get it, more people will use it, and more people will become dependent. Kids will get into their parents stashes and eat it all, just like they find their parents guns and shoot themselves or take it to school.

It's in a slight decline, but I would say it's more fluctuation. This has both ciggies and alcohol.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus05.pdf#068

If someone wants to do drugs, they will. People don't use drugs because they are illegal/legal, accessible/inaccessible. They use them because they have a need for something, like relief, control, escape. Same as when your dad comes home after work and has a few cocktails. He doesn't drink because alcohol is legal. He drinks because he wants the effects of the alcohol. The vast majority of people who use substances are casual users. If legal, the vast majority would still be casual users.

Of course they will. Personally I would use drugs if they were legal, a main deterent for me is that whole jail thing. Another reason I don't use them? Because I can't walk to the corner store and pick some up. I don't live with my father and I have no idea what he does when he gets home. I think it would likely be beer and not a coctail. So we have millions more "Casual users". Thats a million more possibilities for abuse and dependency. It always starts out as casual.

The difference is that when illegal, the user faces jail (for using and sometimes for a crime committed to obtain the drug), inhibiting future economic prospects. The user also can face death, as there is no means of controlling the safety of the substance. Imagine that your dad mixes a drink, but there are no restrictions on the ingredients. There is rat poison in the Absolut, and pops dies. Oopsy. Is that a problem of the alcohol, or the lack of regulation?

If they go to jail they keep the prison guards employed and all other people that work at or for the prison (Keeping workers working). I think we need to make better use of our prisoners, instead of letting them chill out.

People face death every day driving, walking on the side walk, working on a ladder, eating a bowl of oats, etc. If people want to roll the dice with a bad batch of drugs so be it. The government can't reall control an overdose or someone behind the wheel when using. Imagine if you made a bowl of cereal for your kids in the morning, but there are no restrictions on the ingredients. There is rat poison in the cereal, and the kids die. I would actually expect this buying underground products from people. If things become so much safer once the government blesses it, why do hundreds of thousands die every year from the legal highs?

Decriminalization makes drugs safer and frees up tons of government money. It creates jobs, in drug manufacturing and production. It generates tax revenue. And, it helps us identify those who really ARE addicts, and offer them treatment and other alternatives. For example, Susie uses a LOT of heroin. Her pharmacist, concerned, offers her methadone as a substitute. Susie tries it and discovers that while she no longer experiences euphoria, she feels able to function during the day. The stigma is gone, users are now visible, and as a result we can help if the use becomes severe, just as we attempt with alcoholics.

As I said above it does not make drugs safer, look at cigarettes and alcohol. It creates temporary jobs until companies decide it's cheaper to produce out of the country to save some bucks. Of course it will generate tax revenue, most things sold do. How does it help identify addicts? Look at what you say, "Her pharmacist, concerned, offers her methadone as a substitute" Why start with the heroin in the first place? Why not just give out methadone more? Why not just make it easier to get already legal drugs, that have the same effects a illegal ones?

So, as you can see, crack babies will not be rampaging the earth.

Yes they will

Now, on to your next assumption. How will police work increase? You are now getting your drugs legally from the pharmacy...Violent crime? You no longer have to smack down a granny to pay those ridiculous black market prices. You no longer fight rival gangs for control of said market. The mob got it's foothold in crime during Prohibition, remember? Spend your whole paycheck on drugs? Only if you would have done it illegally, anyway. Some people spend their whole paychecks at the bar. Do we ban alcohol again because of it? Some people spend six bucks a day on cigarettes they can't afford. Is tobacco illegal? No...it's SUBSIDIZED. When it comes to personal choices, and harmful things exist, people will use them if they want to.

People+Drugs/Alcohol= Irrationality and unstability. More irrational, unstable people doing bad things= More crime. Sure people would spend their paychecks on drugs, and not only if they were before. Now they have access to it and have become dependent. Do People spend all their money alcohol? Yes. I would have no problem if alcohol or tabacco were banned.

"When it comes to personal choices, and harmful things exist, people will use them if they want to. " Damn now you're opening the gates to all kinds of stuff...

How does legalization reduce poverty? It won't, unless there are other measures in place, as I have said, like a living wage and affordable child care, mentorships and educational opportunities. But if we our social institutions promote economic growth, and we take away the attraction of easy money for dealers, less people will engage in the crimes that accompany drug use today. Less people go to jail, and as a result, more viable employees will be able to obtain/sustain employment and be home with their familes, offering guidance, support and love. Heavy users will be easily identifiable, so that we can see that they get treatment if they need it/want it. And we'll have the money to spend on them, because less money will be directed toward an unwinnable war on drugs. It wouldn't happen overnight...big changes take time. But I truly believe the change would come.

So we give people another habbit then force them into treatment? What if they don't want treatment. by your logic people should be allowed to make personal choices and use harmful things if they exist.

I don't take anything you say as a personal affront. I would just like to see some thoughtful, reasonable responses from you. I'm waiting...

Please see above...

[baldfuck]

Read most of KH and GAIH debate here but not all.

I agree that combined with GAIH's original list of social intervention then legalisation could improve things.

I've been using drugs for over 20 years - there isn't much I haven't tried. The same applies to my whole circle of friends. Drugs have not fucked me up and the reason I believe is because I was not socially impoverished as a child or adult.

I use illegal substances but I also have a degree, a post grad, a job (oooh, i even wear a suit), a car, a family, blah blah. Same story for most of my buddies, except the suit.

My conclusion is that drugs don't necessarily ruin your life. It's when they are combined with poor social circumstances that problems really begin to take hold. The whole drugs are evil sketch is another smoke screeen to keep our eye of the real issues. Like those greedy cheats discussed in GAIH's earlier posts.

[Calienta]

I'm reading A Million Little Pieces by James Frey .... That book would argue your point of view, bald. Basically I would disagree on the basis that a person's mentality and how they react to substances is not dependant on their social circumstances, poor or otherwise. People from all walks of life become addicted to cigarettes, alcohol, crack, gambling (not a substance but it certainly is an addiction and has been outlawed in places), etc etc. There isn't a common denominator with these people in regards to social circumstances, which also means that you cannot rule out anyone either.

I think that you as a person are just not easily addicted to substances, you don't rely on them. You also probably met your friends because of the social circumstances, or because they are like-minded individuals, or because of the casual use of drugs? I doubt you would continue being friends with a crackhead who doesn't wash and is high all the time. You've chosen your friends, and it's not because of the social circumstances that 'all' your friends aren't affected to the same extent, it's simply because these are the friends you've chosen.

[odd th0mas]

I'm reading A Million Little Pieces by James Frey .... That book would argue your point of view, bald. Basically I would disagree on the basis that a person's mentality and how they react to substances is not dependant on their social circumstances, poor or otherwise. People from all walks of life become addicted to cigarettes, alcohol, crack, gambling (not a substance but it certainly is an addiction and has been outlawed in places), etc etc. There isn't a common denominator with these people in regards to social circumstances, which also means that you cannot rule out anyone either.

I think that you as a person are just not easily addicted to substances, you don't rely on them. You also probably met your friends because of the social circumstances, or because they are like-minded individuals, or because of the casual use of drugs? I doubt you would continue being friends with a crackhead who doesn't wash and is high all the time. You've chosen your friends, and it's not because of the social circumstances that 'all' your friends aren't affected to the same extent, it's simply because these are the friends you've chosen.


i wouldnt read that liar. he's a proven fraud! type in james frey + liar into google and see what ya get. or go here...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0104061jamesfrey1.html













.

[Calienta]

Alright I'll look into that. I stand behind the rest of what I said though, as that was not a point of view since starting the book. I've developed that through taking Psychology, etc.

[Dymond]

What was the original subject again?

[the squid of despair]

What was the original subject again?

I think it was something about black people begging for hand outs.

[GayAsInHappy]

Kids already have conflicting messages about drugs. Alcohol is legal, and in some cases harmful, which appears to be your standard for what should be ILLEGAL so we should ban it. Pot, which is much less harmful than alcohol, is illegal. Cigarettes are extraordinarily dangerous, but legal. Why? Economics. Isn't that confusing? Drugs with label that get you high=not illegal. Drugs with no label that get you high=illegal.

Not really. Kids are taught from a young age that drugs are illegal and bad. Alcohol is legal, and in many cases it's harmful or fatal, as the some stats show below. Perhaps it should be illegal, but then it would add to the organized crime, pushers, convictions etc.

Thanks for helping me make that point...illegal ADDS to crime. If we agree on that, then how come we can't agree that legalizing drugs would cut the crime rates?

Same goes for ciggies. Cigarettes also drive the pharmaceutical industry by keeping millions sick every year. How can you argue that making something legal, will control it, make it safer, and fewer people will use it. You named 2 that are legal now, and look how unsafe they are. You would just be adding fuel to the fire. Would penalties be the same when driving? You can still get a DUI if your speeding down the freeway on freebase cocaine, right? I'm not too concerned with pot and I will hear a case for couple others but that's about it.


Yes, the penalties would be the same. And I can absolutely argue that a safer drug would lead to less health complications. My point is that as long as you make some drugs legal (and they all have the potential for harm) and it reduces crime to do so (as we have already agreed) then ALL should be legal or illegal, for that matter. Why cherry pick based on who has the most money invested in the drug?

"According to the CDC report, between 1997 and 2002 a total of 2,335 children died in car crashes involving drunken drivers. Of the children killed, 68percent were riding in a car with a driver who had been drinking."

Alcohol Impaired Driving Statistics

Total Fatalities / Fatality Rates

250,000 people have died in alcohol related accidents in the past 10 years.
Presently 25,000 people are killed each year in alcohol related accidents.
500 people are killed each week in alcohol related accidents.
71 people are killed each day in alcohol related accidents.
One American life is lost every 20 minutes in alcohol related auto crashes.
It is estimated that one out of every two Americans will be involved in an alcohol related accident in his or her lifetime.
In 1994, New Hampshire had 119 total highway fatalities, 42 were alcohol related (or 35.3% of the total). New Hampshire leads the nation with one of the lowest percentages of alcohol related fatalities.

http://www.duipictures.com/statisti.htm[/COLOR]

Thank goodness that drug related deaths are so few comparativelyhttp://www.csdp.org/research/1238.pdf

More kids and adults will become dependent? What evidence do you have that legalizing a substance makes more people become dependent? Alcohol and cigarette use is in decline thanks to some low-budget health campaigns and restrictions in advertising. With your reasoning, this could not be the case.

I used a logic called common sense on this one. I might be able to find some statistics that show dependency is related to availability. If more people can get it, more people will use it, and more people will become dependent. Kids will get into their parents stashes and eat it all, just like they find their parents guns and shoot themselves or take it to school.

It's in a slight decline, but I would say it's more fluctuation. This has both ciggies and alcohol.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus05.pdf#068

Can't just use common sense. Must use data. At this point, the data is/are inconclusive. I can't deny the possibility that more people would use drugs. But I'm not so sure that more people would ABUSE drugs. I think there are straight up weed people and "anything goes" people. Heroin addicts obviously didn't care much about the legality when they started using, so those people will buy whether it's legal or not. I don't want to use heroin, and I still wouldn't even if I could.

And the risk of kids eating the parent's stash will be present either way.

If someone wants to do drugs, they will. People don't use drugs because they are illegal/legal, accessible/inaccessible. They use them because they have a need for something, like relief, control, escape. Same as when your dad comes home after work and has a few cocktails. He doesn't drink because alcohol is legal. He drinks because he wants the effects of the alcohol. The vast majority of people who use substances are casual users. If legal, the vast majority would still be casual users.

Of course they will. Personally I would use drugs if they were legal, a main deterent for me is that whole jail thing. Another reason I don't use them? Because I can't walk to the corner store and pick some up. I don't live with my father and I have no idea what he does when he gets home. I think it would likely be beer and not a coctail. So we have millions more "Casual users". Thats a million more possibilities for abuse and dependency. It always starts out as casual.

See above.

The difference is that when illegal, the user faces jail (for using and sometimes for a crime committed to obtain the drug), inhibiting future economic prospects. The user also can face death, as there is no means of controlling the safety of the substance. Imagine that your dad mixes a drink, but there are no restrictions on the ingredients. There is rat poison in the Absolut, and pops dies. Oopsy. Is that a problem of the alcohol, or the lack of regulation?

If they go to jail they keep the prison guards employed and all other people that work at or for the prison (Keeping workers working). I think we need to make better use of our prisoners, instead of letting them chill out.

I'm not going to look up the stats but I have read that there are more prisoners in jail for drug related offenses than employees of prisons needed to monitor those numbers.

People face death every day driving, walking on the side walk, working on a ladder, eating a bowl of oats, etc. If people want to roll the dice with a bad batch of drugs so be it. The government can't reall control an overdose of someone behind the wheel when using. Imagine if you made a bow of cereal for your kids in the morning, but there are no restrictions on the ingredients. There is rat poison in the cereal, and the kids die. I would actually buying underground products from people. If things become so much safer once the government blesses it, why do hundreds of thousands die every year from the legal highs?

The highs themselves are dangerous, no doubt. But they are more dangerous when the ingredients are uncontrolled. You are correct in saying that you roll the dice in consuming any harmful substance.

Decriminalization makes drugs safer and frees up tons of government money. It creates jobs, in drug manufacturing and production. It generates tax revenue. And, it helps us identify those who really ARE addicts, and offer them treatment and other alternatives. For example, Susie uses a LOT of heroin. Her pharmacist, concerned, offers her methadone as a substitute. Susie tries it and discovers that while she no longer experiences euphoria, she feels able to function during the day. The stigma is gone, users are now visible, and as a result we can help if the use becomes severe, just as we attempt with alcoholics.

As I said above it does not make drugs safer, look at cigarettes and alcohol. It creates temporary jobs until companies decide it's cheaper to produce out of the country to save some bucks

That's why I said we need to keep jobs in the country.

Of course it will generate tax revenue, most things sold do. How does it help identify addicts? Look at what you say, "Her pharmacist, concerned, offers her methadone as a substitute" Why start with the heroin in the first place? Why not just give out methadone more? Why not just make it easier to get already legal drugs, that have the same effects a illegal ones?

The goal is to identify people who abuse substances, and encourage them to make safer choices. This is something that can only be chosen by the individual. A pharmacist knows who uses what, that's how it helps. It also helps to remove the stigma of drug abuse, so that people will feel more comfortable asking for help if they need it.

So, as you can see, crack babies will not be rampaging the earth.

Yes they will

No they won't.

Now, on to your next assumption. How will police work increase? You are now getting your drugs legally from the pharmacy...Violent crime? You no longer have to smack down a granny to pay those ridiculous black market prices. You no longer fight rival gangs for control of said market. The mob got it's foothold in crime during Prohibition, remember? Spend your whole paycheck on drugs? Only if you would have done it illegally, anyway. Some people spend their whole paychecks at the bar. Do we ban alcohol again because of it? Some people spend six bucks a day on cigarettes they can't afford. Is tobacco illegal? No...it's SUBSIDIZED. When it comes to personal choices, and harmful things exist, people will use them if they want to.

People+Drugs/Alcohol= Irrationality and unstability. More irrational, unstable people doing bad things= More crime. Sure people would spend their paychecks on drugs, and not if they were before. Now they have access to it and have become dependent. People spend all their money alcohol, yes. I would have no problem if alcohol or tabacco were banned.

Again you assume without data.

"When it comes to personal choices, and harmful things exist, people will use them if they want to. " Damn now you're opening the gates to all kinds of stuff...


I don't see how...I'm saying that people do what they want regardless of legality, if they are so inclined.

How does legalization reduce poverty? It won't, unless there are other measures in place, as I have said, like a living wage and affordable child care, mentorships and educational opportunities. But if we our social institutions promote economic growth, and we take away the attraction of easy money for dealers, less people will engage in the crimes that accompany drug use today. Less people go to jail, and as a result, more viable employees will be able to obtain/sustain employment and be home with their familes, offering guidance, support and love. Heavy users will be easily identifiable, so that we can see that they get treatment if they need it/want it. And we'll have the money to spend on them, because less money will be directed toward an unwinnable war on drugs. It wouldn't happen overnight...big changes take time. But I truly believe the change would come.

So we give people another habbit then force them into treatment? What if they don't want treatment.

We don't "give" them the habit. They choose the habit as they do already. And if they don't want treatment, ok. Just like we give people the choice now, with the exception of court orders for crimes committed under the influence.

by your logic people should be allowed to make personal choices and use harmful things if they exist.

I believe strongly in personal choices. As you said...cars can be harmful, but we make the choice to use them. Processed foods can be harmful, but we make the choice to use them. Some prescription drugs have known side effects, but we use them anyway. ANYTHING can be harmful when abused. The point is that illegality of substances leads to more crime. As we already agreed.

[baldfuck]

...Basically I would disagree on the basis that a person's mentality and how they react to substances is not dependant on their social circumstances, poor or otherwise.
People from all walks of life become addicted to cigarettes, alcohol, crack, gambling (not a substance but it certainly is an addiction and has been outlawed in places), etc etc. There isn't a common denominator with these people in regards to social circumstances, which also means that you cannot rule out anyone either.

I think that you as a person are just not easily addicted to substances, you don't rely on them. You also probably met your friends because of the social circumstances, or because they are like-minded individuals, or because of the casual use of drugs? I doubt you would continue being friends with a crackhead who doesn't wash and is high all the time. You've chosen your friends, and it's not because of the social circumstances that 'all' your friends aren't affected to the same extent, it's simply because these are the friends you've chosen.

I see your point but I think its true that on the whole the majority of people who take drugs and get fucked up will have a poor social background while the majority of people who get into drugs but dont get fucked up will come from a better background.

As for the 'addicitive personality' I really do disagree. I could get addicted just as easily as anyone but I wont let it happen - this is easier to control the older I get.

And the friends I have today were friends before we all got into narcs.

As for the argument elsewhere in this thread about decrimilisation reducing crime I would be a months wages that it would work. Its mad to think that a kilo of sugar costs about £0.80 while a kilo of heroin costs £10,000. If it were produced legally it could probably be produced for a max of £5 per kilo. Thats 1000 grams. 1000 grams = 2 maybe 3 years supply for most heroin users. Thats £5 to supply a 2 year habit. As things stand 1 gram will be about £30 which will last 1 to 2 days.

[kitty]

I see your point but I think its true that on the whole the majority of people who take drugs and get fucked up will have a poor social background while the majority of people who get into drugs but dont get fucked up will come from a better background.

As for the 'addicitive personality' I really do disagree. I could get addicted just as easily as anyone but I wont let it happen - this is easier to control the older I get.

And the friends I have today were friends before we all got into narcs.

As for the argument elsewhere in this thread about decrimilisation reducing crime I would be a months wages that it would work. Its mad to think that a kilo of sugar costs about £0.80 while a kilo of heroin costs £10,000. If it were produced legally it could probably be produced for a max of £5 per kilo. Thats 1000 grams. 1000 grams = 2 maybe 3 years supply for most heroin users. Thats £5 to supply a 2 year habit. As things stand 1 gram will be about £30 which will last 1 to 2 days.

I dont have much time to get into it atm, but I would like to point out that the only reason that statistics point to people from poor social backgrounds having a higher drug abuse ratio is because of the fact that any drug abuse in more wealthy social backgrounds is generally kept secret. I work in the substance abuse field and see this all the time. We see just as many people from wealthy backgrounds as poor. I have to say that it is much easier for the wealthy to receive treatment for this issue in hopes of recovery though, and that the poor clients tend to fall in the cracks of the system...usually going to use again.

The only big difference in drug use between the classes tends to be the type of drug that they use.

[Furyous]

Ive got a quick solution for anyone that wants free health care and semi-legalized drugs. MOVE TO CANADA!
BTW good luck trying to get in to see a specialist, particularly if you need one ASAP. The system in Canada sucks balls. PLUS, since when did people start deciding that they shouldn't have to work to make their way through life.
Life's expensive, find a way to pay for it! Stop depending on the government to figure it out for you and go out and do something for yourself!

/end rant

[GayAsInHappy]

Thanks for the advice...and I'm really glad you made it through boarding school alive. I hear those joints are ROUGH!

[Furyous]

Ahh true ignorance at it's very best.

Let me tell you something about my boarding school. It was a very strict school with very little money. We lived in small little cells (bars on the windows and all) and were very disciplined. A hug longer than three seconds with a person of the opposite sex would get you kicked out of school etc... The place was a piece of shit school, but at the time my parents were very religious, and wanted their kids to go to school with other kids from their religion. It was no school like you see on TV, trust me!

It's funny how people tend to jump to conclusions about such things. You assume that because my father's a doctor, I must be rich. You assume that the school I went to must have had marble floors and golden toilets. None of which is based in reality, only assumptions.

My father has never practiced medicine for the money. He still lives month to month on his pay check just like you do. His partners live a different life, but are not as well respected as my father. He'll see patients who can't afford to pay him for free etc...

So much for those assumptions, huh? Really, the best thing you could probably do is learn to live in the society that's in front of you right now. Stop protesting and go make a difference somewhere, or move somewhere where you think they've "got it right".

I spent a year of my life teaching English amongst other things at three different schools in the Peruvian Andes for $50/month. I also spent 6 months in Afghanistan setting up a computer network at the Medical University of Kabul and negotiating a hospital takeover with the Red Cross (I was payed $600/month there, but believe it or not, the cost of living in Kabul is extremely high). The hospital now is the most advanced hospital between Iran and India, and is serving the wealthy and the poor on a sliding scale pay system.

I can honestly say that I've made a difference in this world. What have you done with your life other than complain about what the government isn't doing for you? Actions speak louder than words! Stop complaining about what it is that people aren't doing for you and go out and actually make a difference. It'll make you happy! :)

[GayAsInHappy]

Sweetheart, I volunteered for Meals On Wheels (delivered food for the elderly) in the worst parts of Detroit and I can guarantee your boarding school did not compare. As far as the other things I've done/am doing for the poor, I'm not going to sit here and toot my horn.

I'm not complaining about my life. My family is loaded. For all intents and purposes, I'm loaded. And because of it, I have had opportunities that the people I'm talking about will NEVER HAVE. Did I take full advantage of every opportunity? No. But I'm not sitting here whining because I hated piano lessons. I'm sorry you didn't like your boarding school. But you can't compare it to the ghetto or the rural poor and the hopelessness that comes from generations of poverty and limited prospects. I mean, you can, but it doesn't resonate with me because it feels like apples and oranges.

We just have different outlooks on social structure and the causes of inequality...I think we're stuck with the opinions we already have.

[Quaker]

Ahh true ignorance at it's very best. WOW can you say that again..... :rolleyes:

Sweetheart, I volunteered for Meals On Wheels (delivered food for the elderly) in the worst parts of Detroit and I can guarantee your boarding school did not compare. As far as the other things I've done/am doing for the poor, I'm not going to sit here and toot my horn.


Wow i LOVE you (your posts) :D!!

Just got done with an internship at a foster care agency serving Wayne, Washtenaw and Livingston counties (in MI) and Furyous I have to say your posts have made me laugh to no end.... For the life of me i can't understand how you'd even begin to compare your life to anyone else's... especially the population being discussed in this thread.... "but but i had to go to a... BAD boarding school.... :cry:" Good lord!

Please stop trying to compare your oh so hard life to others that you really -as you've shown- know nothing about... and on top of that telling them how they 'should' be living. Your really a big part of the problem.... and people like you.... as the first few pages of this thread have shown.

[Dymond]

Honestly guys I actually believe in alot of what Furyous is saying. You really have two choices in life, believe you are the victim and blame your circumstances on the world around you or choose to believe you make your own choices, make your own destiny and move forward. I was poor growing up, I ate government cheese, I was a crime statistic, but I didn't let those things in my life define me. I could have chosen to blame the world, my dad, the government. But in the end I know, its me and the opportunities are there. I believed in a better life and made one for myself.

[GayAsInHappy]

Dy, I agree that opportunities exist. What I'm concerned about is that not everyone has equal ACCESS to the opportunities for a variety of reasons, some self-inflicted, some not so much. You gotta give me that.

I'll give you a reading list if you wanna know more about people trying to make their lives better under overwhelming odds against them :)

[Aeon]

What a fucking joke this whole thread turned into...

wahwahwah

i have money...my family had money... but i am not a spoiled rich kid.....look at all the good i am doing with my life.
seems to me all of you need to get over yourselves.

For your information..
Canada's health care system is not bad at all...
furious i'm intesersted to know where you live in canada, that you can make such a statement...
where i live we have to pay for health care but...families of low income are granted a subsidy...according to income..
other provinces do not have to pay on a ongoing basis...(it's more like it's taken outta your taxes.)

As far as leagalizing drugs...You do not do that...you decriminalize it...
issue tickets for people who get busted for holding.
And take out the Big Guys who traffic it...
that way less small time dealers are going to jail...

as far as blacks or chinesse or white women looking for a hand out..
i got nothing to say on that subject, perhaps i am not smart enough to come up with a conclusion for that...

[baldfuck]

What a fucking joke this whole thread turned into...

wahwahwah

i have money...my family had money... but i am not a spoiled rich kid.....look at all the good i am doing with my life.
seems to me all of you need to get over yourselves.

A bit unfair, they were just defending themselves, not bigging themselves up.

[Dymond]

as far as blacks or chinesse or white women looking for a hand out..
i got nothing to say on that subject, perhaps i am not smart enough to come up with a conclusion for that...


UM..wasn't that what this thread was actually about?

[Furyous]

Hey, sorry to cause such an uproar.

AEON
I worked in a hospital for four years as a radiology file room clerk/technician assistant. Several of the doctors I worked with came from Canada and I had many long discussions with them over their feelings on the system in Canada. None of them thought it would improve the system we already have in place in the US. I also have had many discussions about socialized health care with my dad who also feels the same. I only ever met one doctor who liked the idea and she was American, and had never worked in the system in Canada.

I used to believe in what a lot of your are saying as well, and on some level, I'd like to see the world treat people more fairly, but I've accepted the reality that there's only one person that can do anything about the situation I'm in. ME.

Is me, telling the people you are talking about, how to live, any different than you doing so with your Social Work Program Quaker? We come from different schools of thought, that's all.

The problem as I see it with setting up more govt programs to fix everyone's problems is that they never really seem to get much accomplished. Most government programs are set up in order for some senator to gain more votes, and usually consist of handing things out. Instead of finding a solution to the problem they put a bandaid on it.

A great philosopher once said:
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
Lao Tzu

I abslolutely agree. You come up with a program that will do just that, and I'll vote for you for President GAIH, and you for Vice Prez Quaker. Seriously, that's all I truly was intending to get at. I'm tired of liberals loudly speaking out about a broken system, yet never offering valid solutions. You wanna sound off about the lousy system? Give me a working solution, and I'll hop on board!
:orign:

[GayAsInHappy]

A bit unfair, they were just defending themselves, not bigging themselves up.

You took the words out of my mouth. Nobody is crying here.

[Puppy Dogs and Ice Cream]

Are you contradicting yourself to me Dy? I do think the system keeps people poor. Obviously, you believe the current system keeps the poor where they are. I can name a few programs that give a helping hand out to those in need (ie. EIC, WIC, food stamps, etc...)
The problem with government programs is the access and the ability to jump through the hoops of the system in a timely matter so they don't drop your case.

You can believe what you wish about the "next to impossible" to get out of being poor. The numbers speak for themselves though (90% of the wealth is controlled by 10% of the population) It will always be that way in a capitalist society.

i tend to disagree when i see people driving lexuses and have 30,000 dollars in chains and jewlry using food stamps at the quicky mart

[Aeon]

Perhaps me saying that you should get over yourselves was the wrong choice of words....

It appeared to me that they were saying even though our families have money..we still give all that we can...( i can hear the violins now) and in someway that makes one better than the other...or at least equal. Using your good deeds as a form of defence is kinda sad to me.

And... furi...
Your doctors went to the states because (and i know you will understand this) they want MORE money....it's more about the doctors and less about the patients in most cases....So... your second hand conversations with what the health system is like out here proves that you know absolutly nothing about it, other than, what you heard in your "extensive" conversations.. Would you like a Star magazine to read now? Supposedly its the "end of the world"..and well.... if they say it's true, well then, it must be....

This thread was started by asking if minorities put themselves in a victim frame of mind..(.my mistake...)..

i choose not to generlize people by color, race or creed..and i do not assume that i know what goes on in their minds...

however some pigheaded people think that they can predict what a whole nation is like and what goes on in peoples heads..because they saw it on tv ... and talked to joe blow about it. What a sad way to live.

you like quotes here are a couple for you....

""we are all equally wise - and equally foolish."" albert einstein


""I'm not sure I want popular opinion on my side -- I've noticed those with the most opinions often have the fewest facts."" Bethania McKenstry (http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Bethania_McKenstry/)

""I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him."" Galileo Galilei (http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Galileo_Galilei/)

so in saying that...i will exit this conversation, (it is likely that you will percieve this to be to your benieft.)..because it useless to debate with one that knows everything and is always right.

[Knuckles]

Wow!!! i can't even count the number of blanket stereotypes in this thread. i think the issue today is more of class than race. if you're poor ( no matter if you're black, white, blue, red... etc.) u get treated that way and it's next to impossible to get out. that's the way it seems to be set up here in the US. my current 401K plan is called the POWERBALL... lol

i agree but its not jst in the US this happens ive a few pals that r poor and people (espeicialy the police and teachers) take one look at their clothes and other things and label them before even getting to know them.

[St.Michael]

Whats with the whole idea with blacks wanting to be given money for slavery? I forgot the term for it and i'm too lazy at the moment to look it up but I feel this is outrageous! Most of them weren't even alive when slavery was legal and weren't slaves themselves so what entitles them to the money? Because their black?

Thats crazier than me saying "I'm irish and I wish to be paid by the british government for the potatoe famine", seeing as how the british had the popery act, it "forbade Irish Catholics to pass the family landholdings on to a single son. As a result of this law, the practice of subdividing plots among the male children of a family, though diminishing, was still widely practised in the poorer areas of the country. The use of the potato and subdivision produced two interlinked side-effects; with increased food energy the number of surviving male heirs was quickly increasing, while with the prospect of inheriting a landholding, heirs married young and produced large families — hence increasing subdivision into smaller estates for their own heirs."

Oh yea I think I remembered the term, restitution. I want my restitution!! And until I get it i'm going to do absolutely nothing.


There called stereotypes for a reason.


p.s I know the british weren't soley responsible for the potatoe famine as I believe it was a fungus, but you get my point.

[Jimmy James]

yeah, i think reparations are silly. there is no longer any slaves alive, so no one should get any reparations. the thing is, General Sherman, after his march to the see awarded slaves who had joined the march 40 acres and a mule along the coast, but Andrew Johnson reversed Sherman's field order a few months later, giving the land back the original white land holders.

Sherman only granted the land because there were 40,000 freed slaves travelling with his army, and once he reached Savannah, there was nowhere left for them to go. and a mule was never part of the deal, the army just left them when they withdrew after the war.

[St.Michael]

yeah, i think reparations are silly. there is no longer any slaves alive, so no one should get any reparations. the thing is, General Sherman, after his march to the see awarded slaves who had joined the march 40 acres and a mule along the coast, but Andrew Johnson reversed Sherman's field order a few months later, giving the land back the original white land holders.

Sherman only granted the land because there were 40,000 freed slaves travelling with his army, and once he reached Savannah, there was nowhere left for them to go. and a mule was never part of the deal, the army just left them when they withdrew after the war.


Yea thats it, reparations...right? Anyway it wasn't his land to give in the first place.

[VikesWookie]

i tend to disagree when i see people driving lexuses and have 30,000 dollars in chains and jewlry using food stamps at the quicky mart

Obviously, they are into illicit activities...

Why are you taking their inventory?... stay outta their biz... lol

[Dymond]

Obviously, they are into illicit activities...

Why are you taking their inventory?... stay outta their biz... lol

I've seen this personally myself which begs for a whole new thread I think. My issue is watching a guy using Food Stamps to buy Steaks when I'm behind him using my minimum wage paycheck to buy generic mac and cheese.