The War on Drugs.

[HiAmplidude 10+ year member]

For Ron Paul, it's that he doesn't support government spending in the form educational assistance, which is very important to me because I'm not the type of person that can get a full scholarship to a decent school.

I don't think I've heard any candidate talk about funding scholarships with other people's tax dollars at the Federal level. If you've heard differently, I don't mind being corrected there.

At least with an unaltered, unsubsidized, truly open-market, you have even more opportunity to have scholarship dollars funded in the private sector. Also, more money is made available at the state-level which is mainly where you'd see "government" assistance anyway, right?

Ron Paul is all about accessible quality education. He just thinks we've been failing by doing it the way we have for a long, long time.

I'm pretty sure that in a Ron Paul economy you'd see more educational opportunity (and higher-quality, at that), more wealth, greater job market, stability, and growth.

I was actually on the fence with Dr. Paul's abortion stance, but after reading a LOT more, I realized that it's just his personal position and he doesn't believe it should be an issue regulated at the Federal level at all... and that it was unconstitutional for that to be brought to the Supreme Court (in the form of Roe v. Wade) in the first place and wants to toss it from their control. From that perspective, I can't see how even pro-choice 1-issue voters couldn't see the common sense and logic in it. Why would we want the White House involved in any personal matter? It's crazy... crazy I tell ya.

And... any, and I mean any person (candidate or not) who has the balls to stand up in a crowd of corrupt politicians and remind them that the Federal Reserve is and always has been unconstitutional, and that the IRS needs to be dissolved... wow, wow, wow. Huevos the size of his represented state of Texas. Respect.

 

[SRim23 5,000+ posts]

Wow, I'm quite amazed that Ron Paul is declared a republican too. And most of the democrats do seem to have their major flaws here and there, but I really like Kucinich. He too has a couple views that I don't exactly see eye to eye with, but he seemed like the only plausible candidate until I saw Ron Paul.
http://www2.kucinich.us/issues/drugwar.php

ha ha i know kucinich's niece. shes a skank. we call her banana tami! lol

 

[HitManSE 10+ year member]

ha ha i know kucinich's niece. shes a skank. we call her banana tami! lol

Pics?

 

[wesl56 10+ year member]

Pics?

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/hilarious.gif.02a037aad04aa96f19982b298a3d70a8.gif thats exactly what i was gonna say!!

 

[SRim23 5,000+ posts]

yo know what i can probably find some havent hung out with her in years though so ill keep my eyes open lol

 

[Tiger Bass 5,000+ posts]

I don't think I've heard any candidate talk about funding scholarships with other people's tax dollars at the Federal level. If you've heard differently, I don't mind being corrected there.
At least with an unaltered, unsubsidized, truly open-market, you have even more opportunity to have scholarship dollars funded in the private sector. Also, more money is made available at the state-level which is mainly where you'd see "government" assistance anyway, right?

Ron Paul is all about accessible quality education. He just thinks we've been failing by doing it the way we have for a long, long time.

I'm pretty sure that in a Ron Paul economy you'd see more educational opportunity (and higher-quality, at that), more wealth, greater job market, stability, and growth.

I was actually on the fence with Dr. Paul's abortion stance, but after reading a LOT more, I realized that it's just his personal position and he doesn't believe it should be an issue regulated at the Federal level at all... and that it was unconstitutional for that to be brought to the Supreme Court (in the form of Roe v. Wade) in the first place and wants to toss it from their control. From that perspective, I can't see how even pro-choice 1-issue voters couldn't see the common sense and logic in it. Why would we want the White House involved in any personal matter? It's crazy... crazy I tell ya.

And... any, and I mean any person (candidate or not) who has the balls to stand up in a crowd of corrupt politicians and remind them that the Federal Reserve is and always has been unconstitutional, and that the IRS needs to be dissolved... wow, wow, wow. Huevos the size of his represented state of Texas. Respect.

Budgetary Issues(Back to top)

1) Indicate what changes you support (if any) concerning levels of federal funding for the following categories. Select one number only.

Greatly Decrease a) AIDS Programs

Greatly Decrease b) Arts funding

Greatly Decrease c) Education (K-12)

Greatly Decrease d) Environmental programs

Greatly Decrease e) Housing projects

Greatly Decrease f) Job training programs

Greatly Decrease g) Law enforcement

Greatly Decrease h) Medicaid

Greatly Decrease i) Medicare

Greatly Decrease j) NASA

Greatly Decrease k) Student loan programs

Greatly Decrease l) Welfare (AFDC)

Greatly Decrease m) Other

http://www.vote-smart.org/npat.php?can_id=296#679

I guess it just depends how the federal money is spent in place of all this, but in general BENEFICIAL government is a good thing, especially when it goes towards stuff like law enforcement, education, medicare. And knowing what I know from my economics classes, I really don't see how taking away so much government spending would increase funding from the private sector. I would really be interested in an elaboration on that.

 

[32tl 10+ year member]

Very wrong in most aspects. It was originally illegalized as a racist movement towards mexicans and later on, blacks. Not only that, a few high ranking government officials faced to lose a substantial amount of their investments in DuPont if hemp research and production continued in paper and fiber.
Why is it still illegal today? No idea. There is absolutely no monetary reason not to legalize marijuana and hemp, which is what the government seems to be more concerned with anyways. I'm glad to see that some states like California and whatever that midwest state that was trying to legalize hemp are going around the federal law to try and get shit done.

I don't want to read through this entire thread but I've found enough material to reply to on the first page so excuse me if this has already been gone over.

Marijuana along with several other drugs, including LSD, were illegalized because of their perceived connection, by the government, to revolutionist thoughts and action. People smoked bud, dropped acid, and then realized what a crock of shit the feddies were feeding them. Not good...if you're the government. Free thinking is bad when it conjures thoughts which go against "modern democratic" flair and view.

As far as a few posts I saw before this - legalizing marijuana and leaving the "hard drugs" illegalized may make sense as an easy solution, but there are much bigger problems than that when it comes to drug laws. Human beings have the fundamental right the day they are born into this universe to unto themselves and put into themselves whatever they please, regardless of any subjective (and sometimes, I will admit, objective) opinion that these things in question have negative effects. Drug use is a Situational Crime. This means there is no victim. Robberies, murders, rapes, and gang violence are all a product of the drug war itself, not the drugs.

This person also pointed to the fact that if drugs were legalized we would have a bunch of coke heads running around. This also is very, very false. For starters, I have used cocaine on many occassions. Cocaine is very addictive and I have an addictive personality, yet I do not find myself addicted to this substance. The law plays absolutely no part in my consumption of this drug. (or, perhaps, non-consumption) I don't use cocaine often because I am aware of the risks and the potential for addiction and abuse. To make my point more clear, the problem is not the drug itself, it's the fact that most users of the drug (and this includes many, not just cocaine) are not properly informed! The same would hold true for someone who was not taught how to use a car, or a bike, or a ****ing knife. When people don't know what they should about something, they **** up. The answer, then, is to properly educate our youth and exisiting drug using community on the TRUE affects of psychoactives and the lifestyles they entail. No more of this D.A.R.E. bullshit. This only leads to further misinformation, thus increading the potentional for harder drugs to be abused.

If anyone is interested I gaining an objectional look at drugs, I suggest this book:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1585422274/ref=ord_cart_shr/104-0069002-5627157?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance

And if anyone is interested in learning more about our current power system and how it is so ****ed up, please see:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1888363827/ref=ord_cart_shr/104-0069002-5627157?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance

Maybe all of what I just wrote has already been said, please don't kill me if it has. If anyone wants to know more, I could go for days about this, just ask.

Note: Drug legality, as well as the current state of our democratic society, can be changed! It's not impossible it just takes education and persistence. I'm done, for now.

SWED!!!

 

[HiAmplidude 10+ year member]

http://www.vote-smart.org/npat.php?can_id=296#679
I guess it just depends how the federal money is spent in place of all this, but in general BENEFICIAL government is a good thing, especially when it goes towards stuff like law enforcement, education, medicare. And knowing what I know from my economics classes, I really don't see how taking away so much government spending would increase funding from the private sector. I would really be interested in an elaboration on that.

Very excellent topics! In the question you referenced, note the word "Federal". That is key. State, sales, and local taxes are not unconstitutional and fund many of the programs you might be concerned about. Those wouldn't be affected if Fed stopped funding their bloated and wasteful, nearly useless, programs.

It is very difficult for us to pry our minds from thinking that horribly-inneficient Federal spending on our welfare programs, funded by income tax dollars, is a good thing. It was tough for me to really get too, at first. My aging mother?--forget about it. She's perfectly happy with her entitlement programs from the Fed that I pay a third of the fruits of my labor to fund. Remember, just like in car audio, you don't get something for nothing. That money has to come from somewhere and currently it's coming from the lowest-income-earners in the country.

If you're still in school, it's perfectly understandable that you'd still be in the mind-set of getting something from the government, local/state/Fed, doesn't matter. But, after becoming a full-time working class citizen it becomes very clear that our economy works for career-minded politicians, but not for the people. If you want to lose votes, a sure way to do it is to tell people (the truth) that funding FEMA is a waste of money and the department should go away.

A huge voter-base is either dependent on government entitlement programs or are ******* who think everyone should get something for nothing if they really really want it. Yet, they might not consider where all that money has to come from and how much greedy, politically-connected "friends" in dark corners are benefitting far more from those programs than the people they're supposedly there for in the first place... not to mention FEMA (for example again) is around 40% efficient with their funds. Compare that to probably 95% efficiency in the Red Cross. FEMA, if in the private sector would be out of business tomorrow. So would Social Security. So would Department of Energy. So would Department of Education. If the government (Fed) didn't have complete control of all that money, it would be in the economy working MUCH harder for us and for you and needy people and companies -- everyone!... except the government and all their buddies (Halliburton, Kraft, Blackwater, and on and on, hrrmmm..)

I know this doesn't answer your question from a technical economics class perspective, but hopefully it does make sense from a common sense perspective. For a defining technical answer, along with law codes, etc, I'm not the right guy. There are some finance/economics gurus on the http://www.ronpaulforums.com forum though. Pretty good folks there. Been lurking.

Great talking points dood!

 

[ThomasG 5,000+ posts]

Ron paul may have lost my vote..

I like how he says no more amnesty and welfare for illegals and to secure our borders tighter i completely agree with that.

But he plans on ending birth right citizenship

 

[wesl56 10+ year member]

To make my point more clear, the problem is not the drug itself, it's the fact that most users of the drug (and this includes many, not just cocaine) are not properly informed! The same would hold true for someone who was not taught how to use a car, or a bike, or a ****ing knife. When people don't know what they should about something, they **** up. The answer, then, is to properly educate our youth and exisiting drug using community on the TRUE affects of psychoactives and the lifestyles they entail. No more of this D.A.R.E. bullshit. This only leads to further misinformation, thus increading the potentional for harder drugs to be abused.

i wrote a paper about this very point a few years ago

 

[IgnoreMe 5,000+ posts]

Ron paul may have lost my vote..
I like how he says no more amnesty and welfare for illegals and to secure our borders tighter i completely agree with that.

But he plans on ending birth right citizenship

so he lost your vote for just 1 issue you disagree with?

i still say hes the best candidate we got considering hes got a proven record of doing what he says hes gonna do, and not being swayed. something you cant say for any of the other candidates. hes probably as close to perfect as we can currently get IMO

 

[SRim23 5,000+ posts]

i dont know , i think that i was properly educated through DARE and other school programs. we watched alot of videos much like the show Intervention. i knew drugs were bad and that you could die from most.

like i said before maybe drugs are just natures way of weeding out the weak. if you are stupid enough to take heroin, crack etc. honestly i could care less if you live.

not once in my life have i ever entertained the idea of smoking a crack rock. i like my teeth and normal life.

 

[HiAmplidude 10+ year member]

Ron paul may have lost my vote..
I like how he says no more amnesty and welfare for illegals and to secure our borders tighter i completely agree with that.

But he plans on ending birth right citizenship

Living in a border-state, myself, and seeing the problems caused by so many people illegally entering our country to have a child for the sole purpose of getting it citizenship so they can start taking home our welfare benefits, this is actually a point that has my support.

 

[IgnoreMe 5,000+ posts]

i dont know , i think that i was properly educated through DARE and other school programs. we watched alot of videos much like the show Intervention. i knew drugs were bad and that you could die from most.
like i said before maybe drugs are just natures way of weeding out the weak. if you are stupid enough to take heroin, crack etc. honestly i could care less if you live.

not once in my life have i ever entertained the idea of smoking a crack rock. i like my teeth and normal life.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/eyebrow.gif.fe2c18d8720fe8c7eaed347b21ea05a5.gif :eyebrow: //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/eyebrow.gif.fe2c18d8720fe8c7eaed347b21ea05a5.gif :eyebrow: //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/eyebrow.gif.fe2c18d8720fe8c7eaed347b21ea05a5.gif

 

[SRim23 5,000+ posts]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/eyebrow.gif.fe2c18d8720fe8c7eaed347b21ea05a5.gif :eyebrow: //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/eyebrow.gif.fe2c18d8720fe8c7eaed347b21ea05a5.gif :eyebrow: //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/eyebrow.gif.fe2c18d8720fe8c7eaed347b21ea05a5.gif

care to elaborate? i mean DARE tought me drugs are bad, they will kill you, here are the drugs and the effects of those drugs, dont do it.

what more is there to teach?

i mean i watched superman as a kid, my mom said people cant fly. if you try to fly you will die. i never did try and jump off a building to see if she was telling me the truth.