Other than semantic nonsense U still haven't addressed the issue at hand, which is par for your course. Again u merely pronounced yur side of the issue and called every1 else idiots.
Other than semantic nonsense U still haven't addressed the issue at hand, which is par for your course. Again u merely pronounced yur side of the issue and called every1 else idiots.
Other than semantic nonsense U still haven't addressed the issue at hand, which is par for your course. Again u merely pronounced yur side of the issue and called every1 else idiots.
Oh I dont think that is at all the case.
I stated my point and outside of ClubDirt, all other replies are reactive and not about my point regarding social cost vs social benefit.
The fact that there are other similar vices does not validate or invalidate my point, I just like to stay on the topic as was started originally. That does not seem to be such a tough thing to do but so far I have not seen much in the way of topic related debate.
Quote Originally Posted by shiek:
Other than semantic nonsense U still haven't addressed the issue at hand, which is par for your course. Again u merely pronounced yur side of the issue and called every1 else idiots.
Oh I dont think that is at all the case.
I stated my point and outside of ClubDirt, all other replies are reactive and not about my point regarding social cost vs social benefit.
The fact that there are other similar vices does not validate or invalidate my point, I just like to stay on the topic as was started originally. That does not seem to be such a tough thing to do but so far I have not seen much in the way of topic related debate.
A good debater would have noted the social benefits of pot and then explained how the costs outweighed the benefits. You did neither but did pronounce that u were correct and every1 else was an idiot. Also, as this is a gambling site of course it would be relevant to address why the social benefits of gambling outweigh the costs and then contrast it to pot.
A good debater would have noted the social benefits of pot and then explained how the costs outweighed the benefits. You did neither but did pronounce that u were correct and every1 else was an idiot. Also, as this is a gambling site of course it would be relevant to address why the social benefits of gambling outweigh the costs and then contrast it to pot.
A good debater would have noted the social benefits of pot and then explained how the costs outweighed the benefits. You did neither but did pronounce that u were correct and every1 else was an idiot. Also, as this is a gambling site of course it would be relevant to address why the social benefits of gambling outweigh the costs and then contrast it to pot.
A good debater would have noted the social benefits of pot and then explained how the costs outweighed the benefits. You did neither but did pronounce that u were correct and every1 else was an idiot. Also, as this is a gambling site of course it would be relevant to address why the social benefits of gambling outweigh the costs and then contrast it to pot.
you seem to have a fault in dictating with new laws will some how fix a problem . It does not. tobacco use is down, How was this done, It was done by education and taxes, regulation and showing exactly what happens inside the lunge tissue of an avg smoker, then with information Humans decided on individual level not to smoke a Tobacco.
it was not done with making it illegal and a propaganda false narrative attack, it was done by reforming the choice an individual made.
when Alcohol became illegal it began an explosion of crime and alcohol use . when it became legal alcohol use diminished.
A lot of times I can't make heads or tails of the point you're trying to make but at times you do provide a gem like this and I agree with your point entirely.
Gotta go pee!
Quote Originally Posted by nature1970:
you seem to have a fault in dictating with new laws will some how fix a problem . It does not. tobacco use is down, How was this done, It was done by education and taxes, regulation and showing exactly what happens inside the lunge tissue of an avg smoker, then with information Humans decided on individual level not to smoke a Tobacco.
it was not done with making it illegal and a propaganda false narrative attack, it was done by reforming the choice an individual made.
when Alcohol became illegal it began an explosion of crime and alcohol use . when it became legal alcohol use diminished.
A lot of times I can't make heads or tails of the point you're trying to make but at times you do provide a gem like this and I agree with your point entirely.
Ok, obviously truth to the idea that use has been impacted by information.
But we would have to consider that laws restricting use of tobacco in public, by or around minors, in apartments (allowing owners to place such restrictions), etc. have, at the very least, encouraged smokers to address their addiction, which has reduced the number of smokers.
Ok, obviously truth to the idea that use has been impacted by information.
But we would have to consider that laws restricting use of tobacco in public, by or around minors, in apartments (allowing owners to place such restrictions), etc. have, at the very least, encouraged smokers to address their addiction, which has reduced the number of smokers.
Ok, obviously truth to the idea that use has been impacted by information.
But we would have to consider that laws restricting use of tobacco in public, by or around minors, in apartments (allowing owners to place such restrictions), etc. have, at the very least, encouraged smokers to address their addiction, which has reduced the number of smokers.
All true but off the point. It is obvious and irrefutable that the widescale acceptance and use of ANYTHING increases the impact on minors, no question at all and it is impossible to say otherwise. The issue about cigs is in addition to visual exposure and outside use, for a VERY long time there was legal marketing to kids...you know what I am talking about, those candy cigs and how commercials were allowed about saying smoking is safe and all that crap...for sure that increased use and acceptance.
Minors are open sponges and absorb all of the activities around them and are much more likely to try or do something if they see it done and accepted around them. I think anyone that tries to suggest otherwise is just not at all thinking and is ignoring fact.
The impact of severely negative ads about smoking is likely, that happened in part from the very very strong marketing of the negative aspects of smoking, I dont think the cost matters much as stupid kids will spend money if they want the vice...I do think the heavy negative ads about smoking impacts for sure. I also think the same issues with regards to cig smoking exist for any smoking, thus exist and are likely worse for pot than for cigs.
But...the issue isnt what else we should police and restrict. It is an easy deflection away from the core issue and a fallback excuse for those in support of it.
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:
Ok, obviously truth to the idea that use has been impacted by information.
But we would have to consider that laws restricting use of tobacco in public, by or around minors, in apartments (allowing owners to place such restrictions), etc. have, at the very least, encouraged smokers to address their addiction, which has reduced the number of smokers.
All true but off the point. It is obvious and irrefutable that the widescale acceptance and use of ANYTHING increases the impact on minors, no question at all and it is impossible to say otherwise. The issue about cigs is in addition to visual exposure and outside use, for a VERY long time there was legal marketing to kids...you know what I am talking about, those candy cigs and how commercials were allowed about saying smoking is safe and all that crap...for sure that increased use and acceptance.
Minors are open sponges and absorb all of the activities around them and are much more likely to try or do something if they see it done and accepted around them. I think anyone that tries to suggest otherwise is just not at all thinking and is ignoring fact.
The impact of severely negative ads about smoking is likely, that happened in part from the very very strong marketing of the negative aspects of smoking, I dont think the cost matters much as stupid kids will spend money if they want the vice...I do think the heavy negative ads about smoking impacts for sure. I also think the same issues with regards to cig smoking exist for any smoking, thus exist and are likely worse for pot than for cigs.
But...the issue isnt what else we should police and restrict. It is an easy deflection away from the core issue and a fallback excuse for those in support of it.
then we are expressing the core problem, does dictating law cause lasting effect, or by modifying individuals to be better informed choices
a better approach to improve soicity,
strong central government vs individuals given knowledge to modified unwanted behavior . both to lead to a better more secured area for prosperity growth.
then we are expressing the core problem, does dictating law cause lasting effect, or by modifying individuals to be better informed choices
a better approach to improve soicity,
strong central government vs individuals given knowledge to modified unwanted behavior . both to lead to a better more secured area for prosperity growth.
Okay Wallstreet, right to the point. How does legalizing pot for adults have any bearing on kids, since they wont be able to get that legal pot and will still have to keep getting illegal pot, if they want to use it.
So basically what your saying is you dont want adults to have legal pot.
Somebody gonna have to explain to me how legal pot hurts our kids.
Wouldnt it be better to have it legal, so that it gets taxed, instead of us non smokers having to pay taxes for law enforcement and jails going after pot? This is really a no brainer, legalize it and let whoever the hell wants to smoke it, smoke it. Legalizing certainly is going to create more kids smoking it, thats a fact
Okay Wallstreet, right to the point. How does legalizing pot for adults have any bearing on kids, since they wont be able to get that legal pot and will still have to keep getting illegal pot, if they want to use it.
So basically what your saying is you dont want adults to have legal pot.
Somebody gonna have to explain to me how legal pot hurts our kids.
Wouldnt it be better to have it legal, so that it gets taxed, instead of us non smokers having to pay taxes for law enforcement and jails going after pot? This is really a no brainer, legalize it and let whoever the hell wants to smoke it, smoke it. Legalizing certainly is going to create more kids smoking it, thats a fact