this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2024
285 points (98.0% liked)

News

23267 readers
3444 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Fine, then people should be allowed to receive their paychecks if they use drugs as long as they are open to treatment options.

Fair, right?

[–] evergreen@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Yes. That's literrally what the measure says. That's what we voted for.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The measure puts that same restriction on employee paychecks on all businesses in the city? Really?

[–] evergreen@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Uh, where are you seeing that? That's not part of the measure, as far as I can tell.

https://voterguide.sfelections.org/local-ballot-measures/measure-f

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No, it isn't. That's my point. Everyone else is given money without such preconditions. No matter how severe their drug addiction. Only the desperate have such placed on them.

[–] evergreen@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah and sure, its a fair point. Honestly curious though, do you think we should just cut out the middle man drug lords then and just provide the addicted with the fent directly? Like just consider it part of the welfare if that's what they want? Why force them to deal with with stuff that can be cut, adulterated, or what have you?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Considering the drug war has been a total failure, maybe we shouldn't worry about so-called drug lords. And weaning people off of an addictive substance slowly can be quite effective, so yes, giving them a specific amount of fentanyl under the care of a doctor could certainly be a treatment option. And, again, they have legitimate pain issues which they will not be able to afford to deal with because they're the poorest of the poor and those people don't get care for chronic issues they can't pay to deal with... so they'll probably just go back to using anyway.

We've been focusing on the drug war and not on the nation's healthcare issues for decades. What has it gotten us?

[–] evergreen@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I only mentioned drug lords because, well, theyre just another obstacle between the addicted and the thing they're addicted to. May as well remove it, and give them a guaranteed quality product. I'd be 100% on board for treating their chronic pain issues. Nobody should have to live with that and I agree, it's a factor that could lead to them returning to using again.

I just wonder though, what happens if they want more than you can give them? How do you wean them off? Is the goal to even wean them off? What stops them from just going somewhere else and buying more than what you give them?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

If they want to buy more, shouldn't that be their choice? Currently, we just imprison them for doing that. It's like arresting someone for attempting suicide. That's not going to make them less suicidal.

It's very unlikely that you will be able to get someone to quit long-term if they don't want to. So why punish them for it?

[–] evergreen@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Oh I see. When you said paychecks, I thought you were referring to the welfare checks, and that they will still receive them even while using. That is what I said that the measure provides for.

And no, it doesn't apply to money earned from working at a job because the money people earn at their jobs is not taxpayer money being given with the intent to help someone get back on their feet, like welfare is.