Hey! Yeah, a lot of things would have to change, but like you said - that'd actually be really good, haha. I watched a documentary a while ago, called "The House I live in". It's about the 'drugwar' in America. And it really shows how its all about money - find drugdealers and people who take them and lock them up - even make money from it. That's so fucked up. And I guess I understand why people wouldn't want to legalize I don't know... Heroin, Meth. That stuff. But Cannabis for example? Its definitly not worse than tobacco and alcohol - and those are legal lol. I found a comment that someone wrote on youtube, gonna copy it: Reasons why I believe all drugs should be legalized: "1) Freedom of choice, every person should be able to choose what they put into their bodies. 2) Danger with even the most dangerous of drugs typically has more to do with purity and dosages which can be better controlled in regulated markets. 3) Non-commercial markets encourage the lack of reporting help to underfund gun violence, burglaries, gang activity, and violent crime. 4) Illegality creates and encourages a public perception about drug users that never before existed. They lose jobs and are publicly ostracized for something humans have done for thousands of years. They are often cherry picked vices looked at unfairly and not given chances. 5) The study of these drugs and their affects will change. Our understanding of psychology will change as we gain new technologies to better see their affects. Illegality creates barriers to research. 6) They can make you feel good. This is an underrated interpersonal psychology issue. 7) Young people should be educated about how to control and moderate the joy happiness they feel in their lives instead they are taught to just say no, which in some cases can be a downright impossibility. This is similar to the sex education arguments which say to educate and teach birth control over abstinence only. It may be necessary to explain to people when they should focus more on saving money than spending it. Developing better value practices is a part of growing up and substance users face unrelenting charges of skewed values that cigarette smokers, alcohol drinkers, and even other much more expensive risky pastimes can be associated with. 8) There is historical culture of substance use which is traced back to most ancient civilization that will be extinct unless properly preserved. This is a historical issue. 9) Drug illegality is the primary leverage against minorities and nonwhite communities, also, more general speaking communities of poverty and lower middle class. These sub-groups are unfairly targeted and ostracized for the habits of a larger socioeconomic class."
Going to continue in another comment, ran out of space :)
HEY WHATS UP, I HOPE YOUR DOING WELL, HOW ARE YOU ? MY NAME IS VANESSA, AND I CAME ACROSS YOUR POST, FIRST OFF YOU HAVE AMAZING WRITING AND I CAN TELL YOUR A GREAT ARTIST, I CAN SEE YOUR TALENTED, THATS WHAT UP. STAY UP ALRIGHT AND I HOPE YOU GOT A RESPONSE FROM SOMEONE BY NOW BUT IF NOT HERE IT GOES, IM FROM THE SAN FERNANDO VALLEY, MY BOO IS IN AD SEG IN FOLSOM, WELL HOLLER.
HEY THANKS FOR WRITING BACK, ITS GOOD TO HEAR FROM YOU, STAY UP THO. ANYWAYS I FOUND OUT HE WAS PUT IN AD SEG FOR BATTERY WITH SBI. BUT HE SAID IT WASNT SBI THAT HE IS GOING TO FIGHT IT, BECAUSE HE SAID ALL IT WAS , WAS A FIGHT THAT HE NEVER CAUSE A SBI. SOME OTHER FOO DID THAT TO HIM, SO I GUESS HE SAID THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO GIVE HIM A SHU TERM, IDK I HOPE HE GETS OUT OF AD SEG ASAP AND IM HOPING HE CAN GET HIS TIME BACK , IDK IF HE WOULD QUALIFY FOR THE NVSS? WHAT DO YOU THINK? IM SORRY TO HEAR ABOUT YOUR SITUATION, I HOPE EVERYTHING WORKS OUT FOR YOU AND HOPING THAT YOU WILL BE OUT SOON.
Anyway, that’s all for now. Let me know what you think about these questions and topics. It’s always a pleasure to hear your thoughts on them. --Calhoun25
I did not know Stephen Hawking looked at time travel like that. I guess he has no problem with a current destruction of matter; his beef is, as you say, the creation ex nihilo of matter at some time else. As far as I know, your solution seems possible. I think your concept of preserving matter across time, during the travel, can solve the issue. The analogy of the tape recorder helps me understand it. I wonder if there is an asymmetry with relativity. That is, by the force of gravity, one can “travel faster forward in time”; but one cannot “travel backward in time” in any sense. Sounds like a new topic for laypeople like myself to study!
I think you raised a really interesting question along the way: you said it may not be ethical to time travel. That adds a whole new dimension (pun intended) to the discussion! I don’t think I’ve heard it discussed that much, other than the problems associated with changing the present for the worse. I’m sure there are other ethical problems with time travelling – e.g. it might tend to erode self-control, responsibility, and careful thinking, since people might suppose they can just go back to change any negative or reckless consequences. Maybe time travelling is also ethically wrong, in the same way cloning might be: it’s messing with nature in a way that is impermissible. I would like to hear how else you think time travel and ethics are related.
What do you think about Stephen Hawking’s other work in cosmology? He argued that, rather than describing a cone-shaped beginning, the Big Bang characterizes a shuttlecock-shaped (badminton projectile) beginning. In general, what are your thoughts on the Big Bang? Do you think the universe came into being a finite time ago, or did it just exist eternally into the past? If the universe did come into being a finite time ago, does it have a cause of its beginning? How can something come into being without a cause? These questions seem universally (pun not intended) stimulating, since they border upon metaphysics, religion, meaning of life, and the like.
I have no idea how each case of terrorism plays out. But I did read something interesting about the Charleston Shooter case from last summer. Apparently, the shooter should have been denied his gun, since he had been arrested earlier for something. The mistake involved a clerical error of some sort, and a problem with database access, since the arrest happened in a part of town that falls under a different police jurisdiction, than that of the rest. Sometimes these simple, bottom-level errors stymie successful sharing of information. I have the hope that improvement is possible. Speaking of information gathering, I think Gary Johnson believes that the PATRIOT Act was important when it was passed, but that it should have expired by now. I know some people feel very strongly (and in different ways) about the PATRIOT Act.
Thanks for sharing your intriguing thoughts! They gave me a bit to chew over. I tried looking up that PBS documentary, to get the name. Was it part of the "Take it from Me" series? Anyway, your description of the problem, as illustrated in the documentary, seems spot-on. I have heard most job openings are not in the inner-city; so if one wants to work, she has to spend time and money leaving her neighborhood to (a) find a job, and (b) work there if hired. I had no idea, though, that the distances ranged from 40 to 80 miles (or more)! Apparently, some people drive up to 200 miles each day for work. (This is approximately twice the distance from Chicago to South Bend, IN.) They often work overtime just to afford working – just as you talk about the one lady who lost money going to work.
I wonder whether a feasible solution is igniting local job growth in poor areas. I’ve heard businesses are anxious about opening branches in violent neighborhoods, for fear of robbery. And when businesses are not opening up in these neighborhoods, it becomes more profitable to go into crime. Truly a vicious cycle. Still, I am sure there are people working on jumpstarting local economies. For instance, it is claimed the Obama Library, which is being built in the South Side of Chicago, will help generate healthy business and tourism in its neighborhoods. I am really looking forward to see how it works out.
Given what you said about inmates’ jobs, I decided to look up the federal wage law for correctional facilities. As you probably know, while the federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, the maximum inmate wage is $4.73 a day. As you so described: with regard to that pay regime, it’s more beneficial to not work! Being paid well is not only about finances, but also dignity. I know some people are worried about the financial cost of paying inmates more. Why, though, must the state pay from its pocket? Do they not sell inmates’ products on the market, at typical prices? The state doesn’t have to pay out of taxes; it can pay simply according to revenues, like businesses do. I admit, though, I don’t know what is produced at the typical inmate job. What do you think about this market scheme, in case it’s not being used? If it is used, what’s wrong with the current set-up?
I admire your work ethic – you can’t keep a good man down, as they say. It makes the most sense, for your brain, body, and soul, to prepare yourself with skills, such as building databases and reading the law. It’s like building a fortified house. While building it, you are directed in a meaningful project that is good. The building exercises your brain with planning and creativity, your muscles with heavy-lifting, and your soul with focus and forbearance. After you build the house, you have the good of a strong fortress, in case of inclement weather. This manifests assurance and security.
"14 Years After Decriminalizing All Drugs, Here's What Portugal Looks Like In 2001, the Portuguese government did something that the United States would find entirely alien. After many years of waging a fierce war on drugs, it decided to flip its strategy entirely: It decriminalized them all.
If someone is found in the possession of less than a 10-day supply of anything from marijuana to heroin, he or she is sent to a three-person Commission for the Dissuasion of Drug Addiction, typically made up of a lawyer, a doctor and a social worker. The commission recommends treatment or a minor fine; otherwise, the person is sent off without any penalty. A vast majority of the time, there is no penalty.
Fourteen years after decriminalization, Portugal has not been run into the ground by a nation of drug addicts. In fact, by many measures, it's doing far better than it was before. (...) By 1999, nearly 1% of the population was addicted to heroin, and drug-related AIDS deaths in the country were the highest in the European Union, according to the New Yorker.
But by 2001, the country decided to decriminalize possession and use of drugs, and the results have been remarkable. Drug use has declined overall among the 15- to 24-year-old population, those most at risk of initiating drug use, according to Transform.
There has also been a decline in the percentage of the population who have ever used a drug and then continue to do so. Drug-induced deaths have decreased steeply. HIV infection rates among injecting drug users have been reduced at a steady pace, and has become a more manageable problem in the context of other countries with high rates. And a widely cited study published in 2010 in the British Journal of Criminology found that after decriminalization, Portugal saw a decrease in imprisonment on drug-related charges alongside a surge in visits to health clinics that deal with addiction and disease.
Not a cure but certainly not a disaster: Many advocates for decriminalizing or legalizing illicit drugs around the world have gloried in Portugal's success. They point to its effectiveness as an unambiguous sign that decriminalization works."
You are so right, Randy! Love never fails! God loved us when we were, humanly speaking, unlovable. He made that choice! We must make that choice, also. 1 Corinthians 13
I am truly curious though, and my questions come as a result of a recent piece I heard on the radio. This is in no way meant to be disparaging.
For the long term prisoners, past a point, how compassionate is the release? Truly.
I'll use the example of a 75 year old man who has been in cpsince his 20's. At this point, it is very clear that any recidivism is probably approaching the probability of zero. But, the person that is shoved on the streets would seem to me (an outsider) to have nothing beyond the freedom it self going for them. Without contributing to social security, that man has no form of income besides the state. Medicare/Medicaid is a crap shoot for senior citizens to my mind (I worked in nursing homes for a long time), and the way that population is treated is often quite poor,
Does there come a point for a prisoner when the life inside is actually preferred to the unknown outside (and again, this is true curiosity, I do. It mind being educated)
I correspond with a man on these blogs who murdered a friend in cold blood, chopped him to pieces and desecrated the corpse. He's in his 40's now, and thinks he deserves a chance out side the walls. I disagree, as prison is literally all he has known.
RSS
Yeah, a lot of things would have to change, but like you said - that'd actually be really good, haha.
I watched a documentary a while ago, called "The House I live in". It's about the 'drugwar' in America. And it really shows how its all about money - find drugdealers and people who take them and lock them up - even make money from it. That's so fucked up.
And I guess I understand why people wouldn't want to legalize I don't know... Heroin, Meth. That stuff. But Cannabis for example? Its definitly not worse than tobacco and alcohol - and those are legal lol.
I found a comment that someone wrote on youtube, gonna copy it:
Reasons why I believe all drugs should be legalized:
"1) Freedom of choice, every person should be able to choose what they put into their bodies.
2) Danger with even the most dangerous of drugs typically has more to do with purity and dosages which can be better controlled in regulated markets.
3) Non-commercial markets encourage the lack of reporting help to underfund gun violence, burglaries, gang activity, and violent crime.
4) Illegality creates and encourages a public perception about drug users that never before existed. They lose jobs and are publicly ostracized for something humans have done for thousands of years. They are often cherry picked vices looked at unfairly and not given chances.
5) The study of these drugs and their affects will change. Our understanding of psychology will change as we gain new technologies to better see their affects. Illegality creates barriers to research.
6) They can make you feel good. This is an underrated interpersonal psychology issue.
7) Young people should be educated about how to control and moderate the joy happiness they feel in their lives instead they are taught to just say no, which in some cases can be a downright impossibility. This is similar to the sex education arguments which say to educate and teach birth control over abstinence only. It may be necessary to explain to people when they should focus more on saving money than spending it. Developing better value practices is a part of growing up and substance users face unrelenting charges of skewed values that cigarette smokers, alcohol drinkers, and even other much more expensive risky pastimes can be associated with.
8) There is historical culture of substance use which is traced back to most ancient civilization that will be extinct unless properly preserved. This is a historical issue.
9) Drug illegality is the primary leverage against minorities and nonwhite communities, also, more general speaking communities of poverty and lower middle class. These sub-groups are unfairly targeted and ostracized for the habits of a larger socioeconomic class."
Going to continue in another comment, ran out of space :)
IM FROM THE SAN FERNANDO VALLEY, MY BOO IS IN AD SEG IN FOLSOM, WELL HOLLER.
SOME OTHER FOO DID THAT TO HIM, SO I GUESS HE SAID THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO GIVE HIM A SHU TERM, IDK I HOPE HE GETS OUT OF AD SEG ASAP AND IM HOPING HE CAN GET HIS TIME BACK , IDK IF HE WOULD QUALIFY FOR THE NVSS? WHAT DO YOU THINK?
IM SORRY TO HEAR ABOUT YOUR SITUATION, I HOPE EVERYTHING WORKS OUT FOR YOU AND HOPING THAT YOU WILL BE OUT SOON.
--Calhoun25
I think you raised a really interesting question along the way: you said it may not be ethical to time travel. That adds a whole new dimension (pun intended) to the discussion! I don’t think I’ve heard it discussed that much, other than the problems associated with changing the present for the worse. I’m sure there are other ethical problems with time travelling – e.g. it might tend to erode self-control, responsibility, and careful thinking, since people might suppose they can just go back to change any negative or reckless consequences. Maybe time travelling is also ethically wrong, in the same way cloning might be: it’s messing with nature in a way that is impermissible. I would like to hear how else you think time travel and ethics are related.
What do you think about Stephen Hawking’s other work in cosmology? He argued that, rather than describing a cone-shaped beginning, the Big Bang characterizes a shuttlecock-shaped (badminton projectile) beginning. In general, what are your thoughts on the Big Bang? Do you think the universe came into being a finite time ago, or did it just exist eternally into the past? If the universe did come into being a finite time ago, does it have a cause of its beginning? How can something come into being without a cause? These questions seem universally (pun not intended) stimulating, since they border upon metaphysics, religion, meaning of life, and the like.
I have no idea how each case of terrorism plays out. But I did read something interesting about the Charleston Shooter case from last summer. Apparently, the shooter should have been denied his gun, since he had been arrested earlier for something. The mistake involved a clerical error of some sort, and a problem with database access, since the arrest happened in a part of town that falls under a different police jurisdiction, than that of the rest. Sometimes these simple, bottom-level errors stymie successful sharing of information. I have the hope that improvement is possible. Speaking of information gathering, I think Gary Johnson believes that the PATRIOT Act was important when it was passed, but that it should have expired by now. I know some people feel very strongly (and in different ways) about the PATRIOT Act.
Thanks for sharing your intriguing thoughts! They gave me a bit to chew over.
I tried looking up that PBS documentary, to get the name. Was it part of the "Take it from Me" series? Anyway, your description of the problem, as illustrated in the documentary, seems spot-on. I have heard most job openings are not in the inner-city; so if one wants to work, she has to spend time and money leaving her neighborhood to (a) find a job, and (b) work there if hired. I had no idea, though, that the distances ranged from 40 to 80 miles (or more)! Apparently, some people drive up to 200 miles each day for work. (This is approximately twice the distance from Chicago to South Bend, IN.) They often work overtime just to afford working – just as you talk about the one lady who lost money going to work.
I wonder whether a feasible solution is igniting local job growth in poor areas. I’ve heard businesses are anxious about opening branches in violent neighborhoods, for fear of robbery. And when businesses are not opening up in these neighborhoods, it becomes more profitable to go into crime. Truly a vicious cycle. Still, I am sure there are people working on jumpstarting local economies. For instance, it is claimed the Obama Library, which is being built in the South Side of Chicago, will help generate healthy business and tourism in its neighborhoods. I am really looking forward to see how it works out.
Given what you said about inmates’ jobs, I decided to look up the federal wage law for correctional facilities. As you probably know, while the federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, the maximum inmate wage is $4.73 a day. As you so described: with regard to that pay regime, it’s more beneficial to not work! Being paid well is not only about finances, but also dignity. I know some people are worried about the financial cost of paying inmates more. Why, though, must the state pay from its pocket? Do they not sell inmates’ products on the market, at typical prices? The state doesn’t have to pay out of taxes; it can pay simply according to revenues, like businesses do. I admit, though, I don’t know what is produced at the typical inmate job. What do you think about this market scheme, in case it’s not being used? If it is used, what’s wrong with the current set-up?
I admire your work ethic – you can’t keep a good man down, as they say. It makes the most sense, for your brain, body, and soul, to prepare yourself with skills, such as building databases and reading the law. It’s like building a fortified house. While building it, you are directed in a meaningful project that is good. The building exercises your brain with planning and creativity, your muscles with heavy-lifting, and your soul with focus and forbearance. After you build the house, you have the good of a strong fortress, in case of inclement weather. This manifests assurance and security.
In 2001, the Portuguese government did something that the United States would find entirely alien. After many years of waging a fierce war on drugs, it decided to flip its strategy entirely: It decriminalized them all.
If someone is found in the possession of less than a 10-day supply of anything from marijuana to heroin, he or she is sent to a three-person Commission for the Dissuasion of Drug Addiction, typically made up of a lawyer, a doctor and a social worker. The commission recommends treatment or a minor fine; otherwise, the person is sent off without any penalty. A vast majority of the time, there is no penalty.
Fourteen years after decriminalization, Portugal has not been run into the ground by a nation of drug addicts. In fact, by many measures, it's doing far better than it was before. (...)
By 1999, nearly 1% of the population was addicted to heroin, and drug-related AIDS deaths in the country were the highest in the European Union, according to the New Yorker.
But by 2001, the country decided to decriminalize possession and use of drugs, and the results have been remarkable.
Drug use has declined overall among the 15- to 24-year-old population, those most at risk of initiating drug use, according to Transform.
There has also been a decline in the percentage of the population who have ever used a drug and then continue to do so. Drug-induced deaths have decreased steeply.
HIV infection rates among injecting drug users have been reduced at a steady pace, and has become a more manageable problem in the context of other countries with high rates. And a widely cited study published in 2010 in the British Journal of Criminology found that after decriminalization, Portugal saw a decrease in imprisonment on drug-related charges alongside a surge in visits to health clinics that deal with addiction and disease.
Not a cure but certainly not a disaster: Many advocates for decriminalizing or legalizing illicit drugs around the world have gloried in Portugal's success. They point to its effectiveness as an unambiguous sign that decriminalization works."
Love never fails!
God loved us when we were, humanly speaking, unlovable. He made that choice!
We must make that choice, also.
1 Corinthians 13
I am truly curious though, and my questions come as a result of a recent piece I heard on the radio. This is in no way meant to be disparaging.
For the long term prisoners, past a point, how compassionate is the release? Truly.
I'll use the example of a 75 year old man who has been in cpsince his 20's. At this point, it is very clear that any recidivism is probably approaching the probability of zero. But, the person that is shoved on the streets would seem to me (an outsider) to have nothing beyond the freedom it self going for them. Without contributing to social security, that man has no form of income besides the state. Medicare/Medicaid is a crap shoot for senior citizens to my mind (I worked in nursing homes for a long time), and the way that population is treated is often quite poor,
Does there come a point for a prisoner when the life inside is actually preferred to the unknown outside (and again, this is true curiosity, I do. It mind being educated)
I correspond with a man on these blogs who murdered a friend in cold blood, chopped him to pieces and desecrated the corpse. He's in his 40's now, and thinks he deserves a chance out side the walls. I disagree, as prison is literally all he has known.
Am I in the wrong here?