Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is heroin everywhere, and I suspect it's been like that for a long time
And if every single locality in the nation is faced with it as a major issue effecting operations of it's society, then it might make sense to tackle it from the federal government.
There is heroin everywhere, and I suspect it's been like that for a long time
Heroin was on it's way down for some time. It's on the rise again because people are resorting to it as a cheaper alternative to prescription painkillers (oxycontin, oxycodone, etc). And the prevalence of synthetic heroin is not helping.
Doctors over prescribed painkillers and now you have people hooked on it. I was prescribed a whole bottle of oxycodone for mild back pain. I didn't take any of it. I'm already hooked on caffeine. I don't need to be hooked on anything stronger than that.
And if every single locality in the nation is faced with it as a major issue effecting operations of it's society, then it might make sense to tackle it from the federal government.
Liberals make the same exact argument for federal gun control
Heroin was on it's way down for some time. It's on the rise again because people are resorting to it as a cheaper alternative to prescription painkillers (oxycontin, oxycodone, etc). And the prevalence of synthetic heroin is not helping.
Doctors over prescribed painkillers and now you have people hooked on it. I was prescribed a whole bottle of oxycodone for mild back pain. I didn't take any of it. I'm already hooked on caffeine. I don't need to be hooked on anything stronger than that.
The prevalence of heroin addiction may have increased, but my point was that heroin never stopped being a problem in urban areas. I know people in Brooklyn who have been battling addiction for years.
That's what makes conservatives not consistent. They only want small government when it comes to economics, and even then only for certain industries.
Telling adults what to put in their bodies is not small government, whether its weed or big gulp soda. The drug industry has too many regulations and should be de-regulated, ditto for FDA approvals and new trials of drugs. It shouldn't take literally billions of dollars for a company to get all of the certifications to bring a drug to the market. There should be no "Schedule" drugs as, among other things, it restricts research on them. DEA should be disbanded, it is a lobbying arm of the cartels. 23andme shouldn't hide YOUR OWN medical DNA information from YOU either just because FDA classifies it as research and not medical advise or whatever. Regulating abortions is not small government either, nor is regulating stem cell research, nor is telling someone who they can or can't marry. Trump tariffs are not small government either. Restricted immigration is not small government as well (actually capitalism encourages free movement of people and competition in the labor market, its good for businesses hiring people), etc etc.
What you are describing is not necessarily a politically philosophy, i.e. not necessarily a liberal or conservative ideology. All the things you talk about are unique matters that have to be dealt with specifically to that matter. It is not inconsistency but pragmatism. You can’t be rigid in your philosophy when dealing with different things. Trump is absolutely not conservative across the board despite the misconception many of his haters seem to have of him.
What you are describing is not necessarily a politically philosophy, i.e. not necessarily a liberal or conservative ideology. All the things you talk about are unique matters that have to be dealt with specifically to that matter. It is not inconsistency but pragmatism. You can’t be rigid in your philosophy when dealing with different things. Trump is absolutely not conservative across the board despite the misconception many of his haters seem to have of him.
So these conservatives should not be saying they are for small government, because clearly they are not. They are only pro-small government, as you said, on a case by case basis... just like the Democrats.
The modern Republican and the modern Democratic parties are both for big government. Democrats are tax-and-spend, and Republicans are borrow-and-spend.
So these conservatives should not be saying they are for small government, because clearly they are not. They are only pro-small government, as you said, on a case by case basis... just like the Democrats.
The modern Republican and the modern Democratic parties are both for big government. Democrats are tax-and-spend, and Republicans are borrow-and-spend.
Jesus. Small government means less regulation, lower taxes. Does not mean no government. And where are you getting that Republicans are borrow and spend?
Liberals make the same exact argument for federal gun control
There are a couple obvious differences, but I'll give you some time to give it independent thought before revealing. I understand that is very challenging for you to comprehend. Nevertheless, I do have a solution to your communist dilemma.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
