Submitted by pirate_republic t3_yhpbcl in nottheonion
Comments
saintofhate t1_iugipyt wrote
Plus how much money would they save if it's successful with it. People staying out of prison and getting employment? Sounds like a win.
moehoward3 t1_iugm751 wrote
Do they have to prove that they are addicts somehow?
I mean, dude, I've got this monkey on my back and I was eyeing a new Tesla.
Government paying people to do the right thing goes hand-in-hand with not punishing them for doing the wrong thing.
saintofhate t1_iugogdn wrote
How is rewarding people for being good, the same as not punishing people when they're bad? If you're not punishing bad people that's a reward....
South_Data2898 t1_iugnc7x wrote
That makes absolutely no sense.
ThatRealBiggieCheese t1_iugd8pq wrote
Seeing California is the worlds 5th largest economy (I think it’s still top 5 at least), Money won’t be an issue
Skatcatla t1_iuifpb4 wrote
4th actually. It DID overtake Germany.
MacaroniEast t1_iugzfo6 wrote
It’s about to overtake Germany
pokeybill t1_iuf75h6 wrote
"California to incentivize drug addiction recovery"
Better headline than the blunt spin from Faux news - this strategy is used to great effect by the VA to help veterans overcome addiction, there's no reason a state with resources like California cannot pursue the same program.
AlternativeFormer559 t1_iuhbtz1 wrote
"Faux news"? You sound like a French trump! À Dieu ne plaise!
[deleted] t1_iuitwi0 wrote
[removed]
ShotPut4668 t1_iugab6x wrote
It's targeted as fuck. Already says it's for 1000 people who obviously meet a certain criteria. And is another potential tool in a wider arsenal of measures.
But ya, shoot it down immediately guys!
filmAF t1_iuf0l57 wrote
fox news is not the onion?
[deleted] t1_iuf1w08 wrote
[deleted]
Cheshire_Khajiit t1_iuf5p6z wrote
Well I’m sure this is a completely fair assessment of the proposal. /s
Digitizer4096 t1_iufaj49 wrote
r/foxfiction
DennisHakkie t1_iuhjndp wrote
How about just legalizing all types of Drugs? Portugal did it… It flipping works
SleepyWaffle t1_iuiu14e wrote
Or like in Amsterdam where you can take drugs and have someone take care of you while tripping. That’s some first world shit
Free_Breakfast687 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.
GetlostMaps 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.
Free_Breakfast687 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.
GetlostMaps 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.
Free_Breakfast687 t1_iugnavb wrote
I do notice that you haven't linked a source.
GetlostMaps t1_iugwxqn wrote
For which part? Isn't this stuff covered in your high school system?
TheBigNook t1_iugcv1q wrote
The data says otherwise
Free_Breakfast687 t1_iugl0n5 wrote
What data?
TheBigNook 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.
SleepyWaffle 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
TheBigNook 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.
SleepyWaffle t1_iujzd6p wrote
Even if you were I wouldn’t mind, dude. You do you, thanks for the info.
AlternativeFormer559 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
Free_Breakfast687 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.
AlternativeFormer559 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.
BadApple___ t1_iufrkiq wrote
Fuck yeah!!
zanderkerbal t1_iuj0p70 wrote
Not the worst idea. One of the reasons it's so hard to quit drugs is that having a shitty life makes you more dependent on drugs to find any happiness but having a drug addiction makes your life go to shit. Very few people are strong enough to break that cycle by sheer force of will alone, stepping in and giving them money to improve their quality of life sure helps.
Commubot t1_iugnoc9 wrote
Dude. Living in Southern California myself, I'm almost at the point where I'LL pay addicts to stay sober. Fuckin epidemic of crazy down here
Skatcatla t1_iuifnl0 wrote
So they can afford to buy more drugs?
VanillaCupcake999 t1_iuimoln wrote
Idiotic drug addicts don’t care about money unless it buys their drugs. So the money will go to the dealers back up to the distributor back up to the suppliers. Maybe that’s their plan all along?
keep_username t1_iuhm56n wrote
Let’s print more dollars to pay for that shit too. Free dollars for everyone!
[deleted] t1_iuezvq1 wrote
[deleted]
BraceThis t1_iufxv9c wrote
Me too! Me too!
[deleted] t1_iuf5d9x wrote
[deleted]
TheBigNook t1_iugcygx wrote
Prove it, we have data from the feds that says otherwise
Eirikur_da_Czech t1_iuf3zsu wrote
This reminds me of when London started paying people to bring in rat tails as an attempt to control the rat problem.
The rat problem got worse of course because people started breeding rats for the tails.
bland_jalapeno t1_iufb0lj wrote
I would be very surprised if people started an expensive crack addiction just to get paid money to stop it.
Something like this has already been successful keeping vets off the booze.
Eirikur_da_Czech t1_iufw4r1 wrote
How are they supposed to prove that they’re addicted? Show their receipts? You think someone desperate wouldn’t do crack to get money?
Wiley_Applebottom t1_iuhdmlm wrote
So I guess the solution for those literally desperate enough to start a life destroying habit just to make enough money to survive is to just let them die. Right bucko?
[deleted] t1_iuhhbya wrote
[removed]
Eirikur_da_Czech t1_iuf3tyb wrote
Damn I’m about to become a recovering addict
Somestooge t1_iuezvw4 wrote
Yep, because giving money to drug addicts always results in them not spending it on drugs.
TheBigNook t1_iuf07qh wrote
It’s extremely successful when the fed pays military vets to stay sober so I think you don’t know what you’re talking about lmao a Republican co-authored the legislation to top it off so the legislature isn’t some partisan BS.
Free_Breakfast687 t1_iufulxw wrote
Consider cost of living.
What does lodging cost? if the person gains that amount, they might pay for lodging instead.
What does food cost? If the person gains that amount, they might pay for food instead.
How much can you realistically gain from recycling cans and panhandling all day? Not enough to buy food for any lasting quantity of time, you say? Yeah, they're likely going to get high to forget how badly their life sucks.
windshieldwaves t1_iuf0bva wrote
>A program covering 1,000 people could cost as much as $286,000, a pittance in California's total operating budget of more than $262 billion.
Sounds pretty much like it won't be that expensive to see if it works. You have to take drug tests. Besides this stuff is from 2021 OP, but I don't think you care