In politics most people just critizise each other, but what did your local government actually do a good job on?

  • TrickedPrivacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    In Britain we prescribed addicts heroin and had around 1,000 users, since we’ve pushed them from the prescription pad to the black market, we’ve over 300,000 problematic users, stealing from shops, selling their bodies in a desperate attempt to fund their criminal addiction and often seen clutching strong cans of lager in a desperate attempt to fight off withdrawals.

    We used to be champions of this problem.

    • cricket97@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      The solution to heroin addicts is not giving them free heroin. Sure it reduces some of the negative externalities temporarily but only because you are subsidizing their addiction. Drug addiction is a permanent drain on resources until you quit. making someone else pay for it is not a solution

      • Darthjaffacake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think mandatory care is the way to go, if the government knows that you have an addiction it seems silly to do anything but make sure you have the tools to quit and have no option but to quit. People will do whatever is convenient, path of least resistance and all, there’s just no incentive for an addict to report themselves if they’re gonna be thrown in prison for it.

        • twelvefloatinghands@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Mandatory care has the same incentive against self reporting though?

          Do we have any data on relapse rates from this vs non-mandatory methods? My guess would be high recidivism if the person is released back into the exact same circumstances in which they started using in the first place.

      • twelvefloatinghands@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Permanently. And “quit” seems like too light a word for the herculean task of getting clean. They deserve all the help we can give. That it essentially removes all the negative externalities should make this a no-brainer.

        • cricket97@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          giving drugs to a drug addict is not helping them, sorry. and giving them money doesn’t remove all negative externalities, that is a ridiculous statement. It just makes them less desperate for cash, they are still in a full blown addiction being controlled by the drugs.

            • cricket97@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Why don’t you give them your money? Go minimize harm in your local community.

              Addicts quit because they hit rock bottom. They get to a point where they cannot sustain their lifestyle. You will be preventing them from ever getting to that point and they will be able to sustain their addiction indefinitely. Until the money runs out and they are more addicted than when they started. Free money never lasts forever.

          • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Perhaps it would be better if you didn’t spoke about things you understand shit about

            • cricket97@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Good comment bro. Bet you felt smart writing that. Go give all your money to drug addicts bro its what the science says is best