Gradfathering Tobacco

[Oleg Bach]

The government allows coke and oxycodone dealers to operate un-impeded..so nicotine is no big deal to them.

[RNG]

The government allows coke and oxycodone dealers to operate un-impeded..so nicotine is no big deal to them.

Assuming that by coke you mean cocaine, what horseshit. Nicotine is legal, although more and more restricted. Coke is illegal. Oxycontine is by prescription only. Get a grip, man.

[Oleg Bach]

Assuming that by coke you mean cocaine, what horseshit. Nicotine is legal, although more and more restricted. Coke is illegal. Oxycontine is by prescription only. Get a grip, man.

You get a grip...as a lawyer once said to me regarding my poor wife getting ripped off for a million bucks.."It is an immoral act, but it is legal". You get with it my friend..I see dozens of poor people that are supposedly on dis-ability and welfare..Oxycodone is prescribe to thousands of them..MOST do not need them..they sell them..and or trade them for other substances..Those that are addicted to them and finally die from "prescription only" dope..usually generate a great profit for big pharma...and YOU the tax payer pay for this ...and YOU do NOT get a cut of the profit.

Having blurted that...IF the government and law enforcement wanted to stop the traffic of cocaine and that nasty de-evolution of the drug..crack...they would have by now..There is no political will to do so..Nicotine is a DRUG..as far as I am concerned ..let the tobacco companies KEEP ALL the profits and stop taxing the shit..The government should not be in the buisness of dope dealing..The are supposed to GOVERN us not harm us.

[bloodyminded]

Folks who think Bush orchestrated 9/11 look at the rest of us who know it was Muslim terrorists and call us "sheeple". I feel your repeated use of the word libertarian to describe anyone who does not fit with your political thinking kinda follows the same gist.

My criticism of stated libertarian arguments "follows the same gist" as the wilder 9/11 conspiracy theories?

Your thesis here might need a little expansion.

[The_Squid]

Your thesis here might need a little expansion.

haha... I'm sure he would, but he has been banned!!

[Pliny]

As for grandfathering tobacco. The Canadian Government by enacting the health care act has opened up a whole array of debates as to what it should and shouldn't legislate to protect us from ourselves and economically run our health care services. It has only been around since the 60's. And was originally just to provide equal service to all. A universal single payer health care system. It didn't intend to just cover non-smokers or people that wear seat belts and motorcycle helmets. As usual, what entitlements the government enacts it eventually can't pay for and the solution is never to cut spending but to create user fees or penalties or waiting lines or reduce service.

I look over at Europe today and the Greek's would rather destroy Greece than give up any entitlements. And the French won't move the retirement age up 2 years to save itself. The Brits announced their cuts and they are huge. It calls for the elimination of 500,000 public sector jobs, cutting 150 billion pounds from the deficit. The Brits aren't rioting, to their credit, but they certainly have to bite the bullet.

Until just this year, the United States never had to worry about the government cutting their health care services or creating line-ups or charging user fees. They certainly had some problems with their old system. But you know what, they could have made changes that would be real improvements. Like an open market for health insurance, increasing competition from State to State, and tort reform. They have entitlements too like medicare and medicaid and they won't give them up. They don't have near the entitlements that some European nations do but they are working on it. The US can now, if they don't repeal Obamacare, look forward to the same debates we today are having.

Why have Americans been so reluctant to vote themselves entitlements? There is the aversion they have to taxation. But perhaps most of them are more forward thinking and know they are headed for where Europe is today - economic and social collapse.

I was thinking that Canadians would blame Americans for just being self-centred, greedy capitalists that have no sense of compassion or feeling of caring for the poor. But when you look at Europe and what it is struggling with today and how they refuse to give up their entitlements, who is greedy and self-centered? Certainly it is the whole generation who expects the next generation to pay their bills.

Americans can maintain their integrity and their forward thinking attitudes but only if they themselves are not selfish and load the next generation with their debts. They will also save themselves this argumentative discussion every time stupidity raises it's head.

[RNG]

You get a grip...as a lawyer once said to me regarding my poor wife getting ripped off for a million bucks.."It is an immoral act, but it is legal". You get with it my friend..I see dozens of poor people that are supposedly on dis-ability and welfare..Oxycodone is prescribe to thousands of them..MOST do not need them..they sell them..and or trade them for other substances..Those that are addicted to them and finally die from "prescription only" dope..usually generate a great profit for big pharma...and YOU the tax payer pay for this ...and YOU do NOT get a cut of the profit.

Having blurted that...IF the government and law enforcement wanted to stop the traffic of cocaine and that nasty de-evolution of the drug..crack...they would have by now..There is no political will to do so..Nicotine is a DRUG..as far as I am concerned ..let the tobacco companies KEEP ALL the profits and stop taxing the shit..The government should not be in the buisness of dope dealing..The are supposed to GOVERN us not harm us.

So your wife is/was really stupid. And we're supposed to care?

[Pliny]

And in addition perhaps a little understanding of psychopolitics will help to explain the Libertarian's political aversion to Psychiatry. Psychopolitics

[bloodyminded]

And in addition perhaps a little understanding of psychopolitics will help to explain the Libertarian's political aversion to Psychiatry. Psychopolitics

Since the number of libertarians who are aware of this paranoid conspiracy theory can be counted on one hand, I don't think any of this has anything to do with the "libertarian's political aversion to Psychiatry."

[Pliny]

Since the number of libertarians who are aware of this paranoid conspiracy theory can be counted on one hand, I don't think any of this has anything to do with the "libertarian's political aversion to Psychiatry."

Whatever,bloodyminded. It is no secret that programs such as MK-Ultra existed or that Siberia was the home of political prisoners. It was psychiatrists that studied behavior for Hitler and determined who were "useless-eaters". That little booklet may seem to you to be a paranoid conspiracy theory but we ignore it at our peril. Psychiatry is about controlling behavior, not restoring control of behavior to the individual. It is thus a useful tool to the politician, let alone to the psychiatrist himself.

[bloodyminded]

Whatever,bloodyminded. It is no secret that programs such as MK-Ultra existed or that Siberia was the home of political prisoners. It was psychiatrists that studied behavior for Hitler and determined who were "useless-eaters". That little booklet may seem to you to be a paranoid conspiracy theory but we ignore it at our peril. Psychiatry is about controlling behavior, not restoring control of behavior to the individual. It is thus a useful tool to the politician, let alone to the psychiatrist himself.

The idea that Western psychiatry is deeply suspect because of communist infiltration of brainwashing techniques--and that "Western decadence," a Soviet propaganda favourite with which you appear to be in agreement--are a part of contemporary psychiatry meant to destroy Western culture....

Yes, I consider this a paranoid conspiracy theory. And we ignore it at the behest of our rational selves, not "at our peril."

The Red Menace is done, Pliny; and if the Cold Warriors who cherish that epic battle between Good and Evil (plagiarized from children's tales) wish to bring it back...well, luckily it ain't going to happen.

On the upside, they've always got the absurdist "War on Terror" to retrofit their favoured paradigm; though I admit that this "war" isn't taking hold of the imaginations of policy wonks (far less the general public) as much as the Manichean-minded would hope.

[Pliny]

The idea that Western psychiatry is deeply suspect because of communist infiltration of brainwashing techniques--and that "Western decadence," a Soviet propaganda favourite with which you appear to be in agreement--are a part of contemporary psychiatry meant to destroy Western culture....

Yes, I consider this a paranoid conspiracy theory. And we ignore it at the behest of our rational selves, not "at our peril."

The Red Menace is done, Pliny; and if the Cold Warriors who cherish that epic battle between Good and Evil (plagiarized from children's tales) wish to bring it back...well, luckily it ain't going to happen.

On the upside, they've always got the absurdist "War on Terror" to retrofit their favoured paradigm; though I admit that this "war" isn't taking hold of the imaginations of policy wonks (far less the general public) as much as the Manichean-minded would hope.

You obviously know nothing about psychiatry.

[bloodyminded]

You obviously know nothing about psychiatry.

I know nothing about the structural integrity of the World Trade Center Towers, either, and yet I feel pretty confident they weren't exploded by a secretive Jewish cabal within the US government.

Psychiatry is not a Communist plot designed to weaken us.

[Pliny]

Psychiatry is not a Communist plot designed to weaken us.

As I thought, an admission of a lack of knowledge and a repetition of the same myopic and simplistic view that substitutes for knowledge.

Psychiatry's value to tyrannical governments and it's willingness to serve tyranny is fairly apparent in our history and should be vigilantly watched, as the Libertarian astutely recognizes.

Edited October 22, 2010 by Pliny

[eyeball]

And in addition perhaps a little understanding of psychopolitics will help to explain the Libertarian's political aversion to Psychiatry.

This is really really weird.

So who or what would libertarians suggest that mentally ill people turn to for help?

[bloodyminded]

This is really really weird.

So who or what would libertarians suggest that mentally ill people turn to for help?

Perhaps the Scientologists. They oppose psychiatry as well.

[bloodyminded]

As I thought, an admission of a lack of knowledge and a repetition of the same myopic and simplistic view that substitutes for knowledge.

Simplistic view? you're the one suggesting we read up on how the entire field is a communist plot to subvert "Western moral values"!

Psychiatry's value to tyrannical governments and it's willingness to serve tyranny is fairly apparent in our history and should be vigilantly watched, as the Libertarian astutely recognizes.

Of course psychological knowledge is used to serve tyranny. It's also used by the PR industry to sell us wars..and has worked quite successfully on yourself, among others. It's used in interrogation, both civilian and military. It's used to sell us tampons and SUVs.

I wasn't arguing against the truism.

I was arguing against the idea that the field of psychiatry is itself a communist plot of subversion, part of the project to make us weak and decadent.

[Shwa]

It's used to sell us tampons and SUVs.

As I was driving home last night, in my brand new Buick Enclave, with a box of Kotex on the seat beside me, I couldn't help but reflect appreciatively on my recent visit with the shrink.

You know, because it all makes sense now.

Edited October 23, 2010 by Shwa

[Pliny]

Simplistic view? you're the one suggesting we read up on how the entire field is a communist plot to subvert "Western moral values"!

Of course psychological knowledge is used to serve tyranny. It's also used by the PR industry to sell us wars..and has worked quite successfully on yourself, among others. It's used in interrogation, both civilian and military. It's used to sell us tampons and SUVs.

I wasn't arguing against the truism.

I was arguing against the idea that the field of psychiatry is itself a communist plot of subversion, part of the project to make us weak and decadent.

Sorry I had the wrong argument. I was not arguing about a communist plot. I cited that booklet as an example of how psychiatry is used by tyrannical governments in general.

[Pliny]

This is really really weird.

So who or what would libertarians suggest that mentally ill people turn to for help?

Firstly, it should be pointed out that the argument is psychiatry and politics are not a good combination not that people avoid psychiatry.

Having said that, from what I know I think family, church or community are better places to seek help. Psychiatrists know how to make people quiet and submissive but that's about it. They certainly don't understand behavior. If you have no money you are deemed mentally ill if you have money you are deemed eccentric. There is far too much subjective leeway in the profession.

[eyeball]

Firstly, it should be pointed out that the argument is psychiatry and politics are not a good combination not that people avoid psychiatry.

Okay, but just bear in mind that 1 in 5 Canadians will suffer a mental illness at some point in their life. No sector is immune, politicians get sick too.

Having said that, from what I know I think family, church or community are better places to seek help.

Maybe in short-lived cases where treatment is relatively easy, but my experience is that family, church or community are notoriously fickle and unreliable especially when it comes to long-term or incurable disease. More often than not families are torn apart by mental illness despite their communities. As for a church I think that's the last place I'd send a deluded person, but that's just me.

A good part of my community shuns and fears mental illness to the extent it blocked the establishment of a facility to help people who live with mental illness all the time. Mixing politics with psychiatry to me is when NIMBY's go around town and exploit the psychological fear that people have of mental illness to get their petition signed.

Psychiatrists know how to make people quiet and submissive but that's about it. They certainly don't understand behavior. If you have no money you are deemed mentally ill if you have money you are deemed eccentric. There is far too much subjective leeway in the profession.

There has to be some leeway given the subjective nature of mental illness, but you're wrong to conclude they don't have a handle on behaviour.

In no other field, except perhaps leprosy, has there been as much confusion, misdirection and discrimination against the patient, as in mental illness… Down through the ages, they have been estranged by society and cast out to wander in the wilderness. Mental illness, even today, is all too often considered a crime to be punished, a sin to be expiated, a possessing demon to be exorcised, a disgrace to be hushed up, a personality weakness to be deplored or a welfare problem to be handled as cheaply as possible.

Source

I would suggest the Libertarian disdain for psychiatrists is rooted in the same good old fashioned fear and loathing that has been reserved for the mentally ill down through the ages. It's probably the welfare aspect that bugs you the most, you just don't want to have to pay for helping anyone is all.

Edited October 23, 2010 by eyeball

[Pliny]

Okay, but just bear in mind that 1 in 5 Canadians will suffer a mental illness at some point in their life. No sector is immune, politicians get sick too.

Did someone pass you that information to exploit people's fear of mental illness or to get their petition signed?

We all may have our moments at some point in our lives but once psychiatry steps in it is for the rest of your life.

Maybe in short-lived cases where treatment is relatively easy, but my experience is that family, church or community are notoriously fickle and unreliable especially when it comes to long-term or incurable disease. More often than not families are torn apart by mental illness despite their communities. As for a church I think that's the last place I'd send a deluded person, but that's just me.

Of course if it is easier to foist problems off on the government, people will do that if that is an option.

I know it is a difficult situation for people around those who do not seem sane. Really, what we are looking at is people who are a danger to themselves or others or do not have the faculties to sustain themselves.

Your citation at the end

In no other field, except perhaps leprosy, has there been as much confusion, misdirection and discrimination against the patient, as in mental illness… Down through the ages, they have been estranged by society and cast out to wander in the wilderness. Mental illness, even today, is all too often considered a crime to be punished, a sin to be expiated, a possessing demon to be exorcised, a disgrace to be hushed up, a personality weakness to be deplored or a welfare problem to be handled as cheaply as possible.

is indicative of the fact we do not understand behavior.

A good part of my community shuns and fears mental illness to the extent it blocked the establishment of a facility to help people who live with mental illness all the time. Mixing politics with psychiatry to me is when NIMBY's go around town and exploit the psychological fear that people have of mental illness to get their petition signed.

Well, that's not what I call mixing politics and psychiatry. It is funding it because that is all that politics can do and it often funds things for it's own rather than the public's interest.

There has to be some leeway given the subjective nature of mental illness, but you're wrong to conclude they don't have a handle on behaviour.

Your citation tells us there is much confusion in the area and we are far from understanding it. If we mistake it as being the result of electro-chemical reactions in the brain then that excludes volition of any nature.

I would suggest the Libertarian disdain for psychiatrists is rooted in the same good old fashioned fear and loathing that has been reserved for the mentally ill down through the ages. It's probably the welfare aspect that bugs you the most, you just don't want to have to pay for helping anyone is all.

You would rather just off load the problem to government.

You should read the UN address of the first Chairman of the WHO Dr. Brock Chisholm.

The re-interpretation and eventually eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of child training... these are the belated objectives of practically all effective psychotherapy.

Address to the UN

Perhaps you will agree with Dr. Chisholm's presumptive intellectual elitism and agree he shall determine what's right and wrong.

[eyeball]

Did someone pass you that information to exploit people's fear of mental illness or to get their petition signed?

No...when petitioners came knocking they said people should be afraid of weirdos in the bushes and needles in the streets.

We all may have our moments at some point in our lives but once psychiatry steps in it is for the rest of your life.

Nonsense, if anything most people suffer their entire life without ever seeking out a psychiatrist. The stigma drives them to bottle everything up, some succeed at doing so, and some blow up.

Of course if it is easier to foist problems off on the government, people will do that if that is an option.

Society will also just let their fears govern their actions.

I know it is a difficult situation for people around those who do not seem sane. Really, what we are looking at is people who are a danger to themselves or others or do not have the faculties to sustain themselves.

That's right.

Your citation at the end is indicative of the fact we do not understand behavior.

No, it's an indication that families, churches and societies don't have the faculties to sustain people who can't sustain themselves - most are still crippled by their fear, loathing and ignorance.

Well, that's not what I call mixing politics and psychiatry. It is funding it because that is all that politics can do and it often funds things for it's own rather than the public's interest.

Technically it was a mix of psychology and politics but in this case politicians were swayed by the psychology of the petitioners.

Your citation tells us there is much confusion in the area and we are far from understanding it. If we mistake it as being the result of electro-chemical reactions in the brain then that excludes volition of any nature.

The citation is just one small part of a much larger document. Did you read it?

You would rather just off load the problem to government.

What would you do other than ignore it?

You should read the UN address of the first Chairman of the WHO Dr. Brock Chisholm.

Address to the UN

Perhaps you will agree with Dr. Chisholm's presumptive intellectual elitism and agree he shall determine what's right and wrong.

I doubt it.