2 simple new laws that would drasticly cut crime and reduce taxes

Mr. Obvious wrote:

also, nobody I work with gets a physical check any more. They all have direct deposit or receive monthly deposits onto an electronic benefits card, depending on the benefit.

So, the answer is no, you have no knowledge of how our social services system work and you have absolutely no idea about the practical implementation of your suggestions (particularly the costs which I see you ignored completely except for one flip statement at the beginning).

Where did this part come from? I posted once here and I simply said that nobody I know working for the government has been drug tested.

Of course I am in favor of government support of habitual drug users! You're not!? Needle exchange programs, rehab, condoms, free clinics, job training programs, halfway houses, those are just some of the things off the top of my head that we should be doing more of for "habitual drug users." What we wind up doing is throwing these drug users in prison. Google how much that costs the taxpayer. It's not cheap. Then they get out of prison and they have no hope of ever getting a meaningful job. Then they're stuck on the government dole.

Do you want a bunch of HIV-infected, drug addled felons wandering your streets after your government stops all support? Or would you rather the government provide some affordable housing, some health care, some birth control, and a little food and try to get them a meaningful job?

Here's one simple new law to drastically cut crime and reduce taxes:

EXECUTE CRIMINALS

drug tests? wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

also, nobody I work with gets a physical check any more. They all have direct deposit or receive monthly deposits onto an electronic benefits card, depending on the benefit.

So, the answer is no, you have no knowledge of how our social services system work and you have absolutely no idea about the practical implementation of your suggestions (particularly the costs which I see you ignored completely except for one flip statement at the beginning).

Where did this part come from? I posted once here and I simply said that nobody I know working for the government has been drug tested.

Sorry, I menat to respond to Social Reform in America and simply posted to the last response. Not directed at you.

Social Reform In America wrote:

Or put even more plainly, should your tax dollars go to support people who choose to do drugs.

Support the people? Yes. Support the habit? No. The main problem I have with your questioning is you're looking for a simple "yes/no" answer to a very complex question. According to your logic, a person who became addicted to drugs as a 13 year old getting a freebee who is now 20 and struggling with (trying to overcome) the addiction (failing these hypothetical drug tests) would be cut off from all government aid for 10 years. This addiction is not a choice at this point. That's my problem with your argument.

Say, for the sake of argument, that doing drugs is a choice for addicts. Take away government money and where are they going to go to support themselves? They're not going to go for the job at the gas station. They'll end up in gangs, increasing the amount of crime.

Interesting this topic came up. I just finished the book Freakonomics. Easy read, but fun and interesting. According to this economist, drug and crime problems would most certainly increase with the enactment of the proposals you are suggesting.

Patrolling for Idiots wrote:

Of course I am in favor of government support of habitual drug users! You're not!? Needle exchange programs, rehab, condoms, free clinics, job training programs, halfway houses, those are just some of the things off the top of my head that we should be doing more of for "habitual drug users." What we wind up doing is throwing these drug users in prison. Google how much that costs the taxpayer. It's not cheap. Then they get out of prison and they have no hope of ever getting a meaningful job. Then they're stuck on the government dole.

Do you want a bunch of HIV-infected, drug addled felons wandering your streets after your government stops all support? Or would you rather the government provide some affordable housing, some health care, some birth control, and a little food and try to get them a meaningful job?

I would rather a 3rd obvious choice -- have your HIV-injected, drug addled felons locked up in jail where they belong and where they won't bother me. It may be expensive to house them there but at least I don't have to worry about them (1) robbing my house, (2) mugging me, (3) begging for money from me or (4) killing me while they attempt to drive.

THANK YOU ALL FOR TAKING PART IN MY RESEARCH PAPER ON THE DIFFERENT SIDES OF DIFFICULT SOCIAL ISSUES - MESSAGE BOARD EFITION.

This ended up being pretty much what I expected going in. Some strong opinions, name calling, some trying to use logic, some completely emotional.

I'll report back the grade I get.

Thanks again, unwhitting lab rats. ;-)

ordersofmagnitude wrote:

Here's an even simpler question.

Do you think people who feel they have no other option will resort to crime or just sit in a corner and slowly fade away?

There are lots of laws that would magically solve all our problems. How about "execute" everyone at retirement age". That would eliminate social security costs and lots of medicare/medicaid.

There's an ethical side to the whole "make up a law, solve the problem" thing that seems to have eluded many folks on this thread.

Why not just go all the way - Start (and finish) a global nuclear war. No more people, no more problems.

Well, that's what we do now. So I take it you're happy with the way things are?

Social Reform In America wrote:

Thanks again, unwhitting lab rats. ;-)

Yikes. Don't forget to proof-read that paper.

efition? Really?

Why stop there? Unemployed for 52 weeks, time for execution. I just solved the lack of jobs problems. And if you score in the bottom 10% on standardized testing, lets kill you also. Hey I just solved our educational crisis also. If you get cancer or anything else, lets kill you also. I just solved Health care. Once you turn 70, lets kill you also. Social security and Medicare are solved also.

simple wrote:

Here\'s one simple new law to drastically cut crime and reduce taxes:

EXECUTE CRIMINALS

Social Reform In America wrote:

Some strong opinions, name calling, some trying to use logic, some completely emotional.

On letsrun?!?! How could you possibly have predicted that? You must be some kind of clairvoyant.

Executing criminals alone would improve all the other problems. You compare criminals with the sick/old/uneducated/unemployed, that is so offensive. How about a real argument to a policy of executing criminals?

Get rid of the ability for anyone to sue a doctor for malpractice. Doctors take out millions of dollars in insurance to make sure if they make a mistake, they have the money to pay. Health care costs are much higher because of this. Only in extreme cases should there be the ability to sue, and that should come directly out of the doctor's pocket.

I think your plan of executing all criminals is great. While we're at it, I think the ruling class should randomly attack the slave class once a year. A smattering of random murders keeps the underlings in line.

Let's continue this discussion!

Siberian Tiger wrote:

Get rid of the ability for anyone to sue a doctor for malpractice. Doctors take out millions of dollars in insurance to make sure if they make a mistake, they have the money to pay. Health care costs are much higher because of this. Only in extreme cases should there be the ability to sue, and that should come directly out of the doctor's pocket.

You know, my friend was complaining about this. He said he has to pay $24,000 a year in malpractice insurance. That's insane!!!

He makes $530,000 a year. Pay it out of your pocket, and you still come out ahead of 99.99% of Americans.

This from a current med student.

simple wrote:

Executing criminals alone would improve all the other problems. You compare criminals with the sick/old/uneducated/unemployed, that is so offensive. How about a real argument to a policy of executing criminals?

Wow! Really good idea!!

this thread is actually pretty damn funny.

The 'I just solved Health Care' line above was a classic.