Why conservatives don't like marijuana

[El_Machinae]

This reminds me of how well we ate as kids, even when we were poor. I'd ask my dad if I could have more, and he'd always say I'd had enough. Ergo, we had enough to eat.

It is statistically impossible that we currently provide the perfect amount of support services so that access to Justice Services are equalized despite wealth. There's either insufficient access or too much balancing. Ergo, if one wants to deny that there's insufficient balancing, then the counter-argument is that there is actually too much. It's just unsaid, unless we live in a magically perfect world.

I think that showing that one theft is a criminal matter and one is a civil matter is broadly sufficient to show that there's an imbalance in that theft relationship. But to suggest that the present resources of legal aid are 'sufficient' just kinda indicates that it's an impossible conversation. I've seen Legal Aid denied to people making $500 too much money that year.

 

[DaggerDigwillow]

This reminds me of how well we ate as kids, even when we were poor. I'd ask my dad if I could have more, and he'd always say I'd had enough. Ergo, we had enough to eat.

It is statistically impossible that we currently provide the perfect amount of support services so that access to Justice Services are equalized despite wealth. There's either insufficient access or too much balancing. Ergo, if one wants to deny that there's insufficient balancing, then the counter-argument is that there is actually too much. It's just unsaid, unless we live in a magically perfect world.

I think that showing that one theft is a criminal matter and one is a civil matter is broadly sufficient to show that there's an imbalance. But to suggest that the present resources of legal aid are 'sufficient' just kinda indicates that it's an impossible conversation. I've seen Legal Aid denied to people making $500 too much money that year.

I’d ask you to further explain your views on not enough justice being provided and what statistics you are using to justify this view. You don’t have to live in a magical world for market forces to respond to demand. Agencies tasked with evaluating the merits of a case presenting legal representation have had no issues with resources in my experience and and I am not aware of any limitation regarding the legal representation side of the equation. Where I have seen problems in the judicial procedures are with the backlog of some courts in handling the proceedings expediently. While we may argue that justice delayed is justice denied this seems a stretch to deny the existence of justice available for anyone. I would not argue that any system is perfectly balanced but rather that such systems should be designed to respond to imbalance which to my knowledge, they are.

“it's an impossible conversation” no it isn’t, now whose trying to end a conversation? Legal aid refused by one resource does not preclude other resources. Being refused a service somewhere does not imply universal denial of that service elsewhere and if such were the case that would speak more to the merits of the legal case presented as the case has been evaluated and refused from multiple independent sources. If some is denied for making too much then the problem isn’t that they aren’t making enough or a matter of poverty.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Also the entire point of universal healthcare is you don't do that "who owes what" accounting, because health needs are so random and unpredictable for any given person and the stakes are so high. Persnickety bill splitting is for restaurants when someone ordered the expensive fish.

Canada supposedly has universal health care.

It's a myth. I can go to the hospital here in Alberta and get treated without paying, but not in any other province or territory.

fwiw, Freedom House, an American liberal thinktank, The Cato Institute, an American libertarian thinktank, and The Heritage Foundation, an American conservative thinktank, all rate the U.S. as "not great, not terrible" in their respective "freedom rankings."

Freedom House gives us an 83 out of 100. Norway, Finland and Sweden scored a 100. New Zealand scored a 99, Canada a 98. I haven't counted, but just eyeballing it, I'd say they rate the U.S. behind ~50 other countries.
The Cato Institute gives us a score of 8.73 out of 10. Again, just quickly skimming their map, they give New Zealand a 9.1, Ireland 8.9, Canada & Finland 8.85, Australia 8.84, Sweden 8.83. Again, we're well behind many countries we'd like to think are at least our peers, or who even look up to us.
The Heritage Foundation ranks us 24th, with an overall score of 72.1 out of 100. They rate Singapore the "most free" country in the world, with a score of 84.4. Switzerland gets an 84.2, Ireland an 82.0, New Zealand 80.6.

All three give us good marks, overall, but among our English-speaking, free-market peers, we're just okay, hardly the "leader of the free world." If an American really wants to celebrate freedom, they'd be better off moving to almost any of the other English-speaking, capitalist countries.

EDIT: World Population Review notes that the Human Freedom Index is co-published by the Cato Institute with Canada's Fraser Institute and the Liberales Institut at the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom in Germany. Wikipedia describes both as libertarian, although I don't know what that means or implies in the contexts of those two countries (I'm not always clear on what libertarianism means in the U.S., either ). It describes the Fraser Institute as "conservative libertarian" and says the Friedrich Naumann Foundation is affiliated with the Free Democratic Party, about whom I know nothing.

Left-wing supporters here don't have a lot of positive things to say about the Fraser Institute.

Someone having a disability is an accident of birth or happenstance. How we as a society treat that person; how the consequences of our culture, economics, and social structure restrict the opportunities available to that person in contrast to another who doesn’t have that disability, is a choice we make, and consequently is not an accident of nature, but a restriction on that person’s freedom.

Here's a recent CBC news article about a young disabled woman forced to live in a dementia ward for 10 years because of reasons that only make sense to the government of Nova Scotia. There's nothing wrong with her cognitive abilities; it's her body that doesn't work right.

She finally won the right to move to an apartment with other similarly disabled younger adults, and you would not believe the carping and bigotry in the comments section. Apparently she should have been grateful to be stuck in hell for 10 years with constantly screaming, occasionally violent people who are most definitely not in their right minds, and decades older than her? I was raised by my grandparents and lived with my dad until he had to go into LTC due to dementia, so I understand a bit of what that must have been like. I'd have gone nuts inside of 10 days, let alone 10 years.

Some people in the various social agencies I deal with are pushing me to agree to go into care. First of all, the waitlist is YEARS long, and it's not cheap. You're at the mercy of nurses' schedules and whether or not they woke up on the wrong side that morning. I already had a taste of some of them deciding to 'straighten me around" and "fix" me (stuff that isn't broken) and ignore what is. I don't want a lifetime of that.

Which is worse the restriction of freedom by nature or by men?

Alright so let us take your conclusion that nature is at fault, let us examine the proposition of the solution proposed by the decisions of society. What if society were to do nothing? Would the individual be worse off than how nature had left them? Alternatively, let us ask how society would do anything? Answering this we must ask what is society? Individuals make up society. If an individual freely decides to help the disabled so much the better for the both of them and their freedom. Yet what if an individual decides not to help the disabled? Should they be forced to help the disabled by other individuals or by the disabled? Is that their choice? Is that not a restriction of their freedom? Furthermore, was this restriction upon the individual forced to assist the disabled a restriction of freedom created by nature or by the decisions of men?

Wow. Y'know what? It's nice that this can be so abstract for you. For me it's a part of daily life. If society did nothing, none of you would ever have known me, because I'd have been dead years before joining this forum. And if the premier of my province hadn't kept her promise in 2012 to boost the benefit I need, I'd have been homeless and likely dead years ago (rent never goes any direction but up, and 75% of my monthly income goes to rent and electricity).

Freedom... during the first year of the pandemic, the disabled transit policy was to only provide rides for health, work, and school. Essential banking in their view was not "essential" even though there actually are some things you still can't do online. They refused to take me.

I never said nature is at fault. Nature is nature. We make choices collectively what to do about nature. A disabled person does not suffer because they are disabled. They suffer because we have constructed a society which consigns them to suffer for the convenience of others.

Even if society miraculously gave me every service I could need, I'd still be in constant pain (I don't remember what it's like to not feel pain or bizarre sensations because my sense of touch doesn't work right). I am not willing to risk becoming dependent on certain types of pain medication and ending up one of the addiction statistics.

 

[DaggerDigwillow]

Wow. Y'know what? It's nice that this can be so abstract for you. For me it's a part of daily life. If society did nothing, none of you would ever have known me, because I'd have been dead years before joining this forum. And if the premier of my province hadn't kept her promise in 2012 to boost the benefit I need, I'd have been homeless and likely dead years ago (rent never goes any direction but up, and 75% of my monthly income goes to rent and electricity).

Freedom... during the first year of the pandemic, the disabled transit policy was to only provide rides for health, work, and school. Essential banking in their view was not "essential" even though there actually are some things you still can't do online. They refused to take me.

Yeah, I'm talking about an idea or concept it tends to be in the abstract. If I get into a personal example or experience it tends to be more concrete and less theoretical. Saddened to hear about your disability but happy you got the help you needed. When I've been homeless it wasn't a lot of fun but also wasn't terrible. There are a lot of charities, religious institutions, and people willing to help in the US as well as a huge network of state and federal-funded programs most of which were not so great to either volunteer with or be assisted by unlike the private options. I've always been kinda shocked and appalled by the entitlement mentality of the homeless crowd I've encountered from both sides of the social ladder. Never experience Canada from that position but most Canadians seem to convey a strong sense of pride or disdain for their social safety net programs. Rent as you might expect dropped significantly for me during periods of homelessness and I've rented shared rooms the size of closets and houses divided up with other people. Even working minimum wage I never really wanted for anything but I've also always been a bit of a miser and content with being uncomfortable. I've lived long periods of my life without internet service, cell service, heat, gas, TV, eating out, medical care, personal transportation, or even plumbing all of which I still see today as luxuries. No matter how much I make or how well I'm doing financially I tend to keep a mentality of poverty. Other than injuries inflicted on me I've had pretty excellent health and I'm grateful for all the wonderful things in my life. Looking back on everything I've got no real complaints and I'm pretty satisfied with the way everything has worked out. I've got a more than wonderful life currently but tomorrow or the day after I may well be on the bottom again walking and hitchhiking my way across the world and that's ok with me. I'll Invictus that too and count my blessing while I do.
Yeah, I remember during the pandemic people were told they couldn't leave to buy groceries or work to feed their families. A lot of unnecessary insanity and suffering.

 

[Senethro]

More freedoms for me, less protections for you.

 

[DaggerDigwillow]

More freedoms for me, less protections for you.

Protection from what?

 

[Senethro]

Protection from what?

If you consider healthcare a luxury, I'm not going to be able to give you reasonable examples.

 

[Arwon]

It's a myth. I can go to the hospital here in Alberta and get treated without paying, but not in any other province or territory.

I must admit when I first learned Canadian public healthcare was a province level system and people needed like paid travel insurance just to access reciprocal care in the rest of the country I was astounded. That seems like a horrible deal for the small and poorly resourced territories and smallest and poorest provinces in particular.

On the other hand I was also very surprised when I learned that criminal law is federal level in Canada, hence why sex work and drug reform are only possible federally. You think two Westminster federations would work pretty much the same but nope apparently not.

Australian healthcare can get pretty expensive with gap payments with any sort of chronic conditions and the system almost forces us to get supplementary private insurance to avoid lifelong tax penalties... but man at least it's the same funding and identity cards anywhere you might move.

 

[DaggerDigwillow]

If you consider healthcare a luxury, I'm not going to be able to give you reasonable examples.

Well if you are privileged enough to feel entitled to healthcare I can't say I'm surprised.

 

[Senethro]

Well if you are privileged enough to feel entitled to healthcare I can't say I'm surprised.

This is one of those criticisms that make me feel warm inside lol

 

[Arwon]

Well if you are privileged enough to feel entitled to healthcare I can't say I'm surprised.

This is the most America brained thing I've seen posted here in weeks

 

[DaggerDigwillow]

This is one of those criticisms that make me feel warm inside lol

It isn't a criticism. I understand where you are coming from and I understand why you couldn't defend your position to someone who doesn't accept your values.

Update: Let me try to explain so you can better understand what I mean.
I've had the same response from people who believe in religious values I don't agree with or ideological positions I don't agree with and that's ok.
You don't have to substantiate your personal values to me just don't expect me to agree with your values if you can't substantiate them to people who don't agree with your values.

 

[sophie]

lol why would any human feel entitled to living and not dying. amazing stuff.

 

[Gorbles]

It isn't a criticism. I understand where you are coming from and I understand why you couldn't defend your position to someone who doesn't accept your values.

This is not mutually-exclusive with criticising said position, despite your claim.

I understand what you mean by values; doesn't mean I'm not critical of them. I fully understand your inability to defend them when typed plainly and explicitly, hence this roundabout you have going on

 

[DaggerDigwillow]

This is not mutually-exclusive with criticising said position, despite your claim.

I understand what you mean by values; doesn't mean I'm not critical of them. I fully understand your inability to defend them when typed plainly and explicitly, hence this roundabout you have going on

I didn't say it was mutually exclusive in fact I clarified my position because it wasn't which I wouldn't need to do if it was mutually exclusive. Does that not make sense to you?

 

[DaggerDigwillow]

lol why would any human feel entitled to living and not dying. amazing stuff.

You've touched on the source of the abortion debate, euthanasia/assisted suicide, and a myriad of other topics while also seemingly conflating healthcare and living. Do you want to go down this path?

 

[Senethro]

Healthcare comes so quickly after the Oxygen --> Shelter range of needs that I don't think I can defend it in terms that expand much further than Pain Bad, No Pain Good. Its that essential.

 

[Senethro]

You've touched on the source of the abortion debate, euthanasia/assisted suicide, and a myriad of other topics while also seemingly conflating healthcare and living. Do you want to go down this path?

I don't think you should do this because it might look like you're trying to bring in every subject under the sun in order to throw up a smokescreen.

 

[DaggerDigwillow]

Healthcare comes so quickly after the Oxygen --> Shelter range of needs that I don't think I can defend it in terms that expand much further than Pain Bad, No Pain Good. Its that essential.

Nobody is obligated by compulsion or force to alleviate your pain that they didn't cause. A healthcare worker isn't your slave.
Likewise, police officers aren't obligated to protect you by placing themselves in danger. A firefighter isn't obligated to put his life in jeopardy to save you from a fire.
This sense of entitlement amuses me.

 

[DaggerDigwillow]

I don't think you should do this because it might look like you're trying to bring in every subject under the sun in order to throw up a smokescreen.

Which of those are you claiming isn't healthcare?