Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

t1_iufu1fm wrote

I'm not sure this would work. People turn to drugs because their life sucks or they're in pain. Most employers already require drug screens, the focus should be removing pain and instability.

4

t1_iufuocv wrote

It definitely works with alcohol and with smoking. The science is unequivocal. Also, the sin-tax concept is essentially the same thing in reverse, where you tax something so heavily that there is a significant financial penalty to engage in it. It's also arguable that making dealing drugs more risky and difficult increases the price which decreases use.

4

t1_iugjqq1 wrote

This honestly sounds like it only disincentivizes poor people, and doesn't address the root cause. But if you can point me to a source where it was studied, I promise to read it with an open mind.

0

t1_iuglx64 wrote

Yes, but as most people are poor people, this has the greatest impact. Something which is targeted to impact the rich logically doesn't change as many people's behaviour. Smokers for example, are predominantly poor.

4

t1_iugcv1q wrote

The data says otherwise

3

t1_iugl0n5 wrote

What data?

0

t1_iuglskg wrote

The federal government pays military vets for passed drug tests and has reported a lot of success over the years. The legislation in California is said to mirror the feds plan. It’s all in the article

I do want to say I also agree with your statement that combating addiction should also deal with managing pain and economic instability.

4

t1_iuiu8zx wrote

Okay. Go to war, get traumatized. They diagnose you with ptsd and drug you until you become addicted and then pay you for staying off drugs? America’s bizarre

1

t1_iujgnl2 wrote

The program is more related to the use of hardcore drugs, I get what you’re saying and I understand the flaws of the military however the program is specifically successful with getting people off of alcohol and meth. Of course pain management is a whole different subject. I hope I’m not coming off as pro-military or anti-drug.

2

t1_iujzd6p wrote

Even if you were I wouldn’t mind, dude. You do you, thanks for the info.

1

t1_iuhbzz9 wrote

What you're forgetting are the people becoming addicts as a result of medical or psychological intervention. There's an awful lot of that in California, it seems

3

t1_iuhen5d wrote

Yes, opioid treatment can be the start in some cases. Such treatments should also include an addiction treatment program as part of the package since it is a known issue, and use other, less addictive medicine when possible.

3

t1_iuhfhmn wrote

In an ideal world that's how it would have been done. In this one big pharma created various opiates they claimed to be less addictive and incentivised doctors to prescribe them. I hope the support suggested above can help. Opiates are an amazing experience but they ruin lives and kill people, like auto-erotic asphyxiation. I suggest gardening as an alternative to both hobbies.

2