patrick.net

Robber Baron Elite Scum says

Collect partially used cigarettes while wearing latex gloves from public ashtrays outside of shopping, malls, stores, busy sidewalks and outside of bars, pubs and night clubs Also collect cigarette butts and extract some of the left over tobacco inside of it and fill it up inside the partially used cigarettes.

We all do this, but it's hard because a lot of them are in urinals and toilets, which adds the additional hassle of drying them out before rerolling the tobacco.

You are mean to us. Wouldn't a tax cut fix everything, so that you had enough money and could make our lives better?

HydroCabron says

We all do this, but it's hard because a lot of them are in urinals and toilets, which adds the additional hassle of drying them out before rerolling the tobacco.

Beggars can't be choosers.

HydroCabron says

You are mean to us.

No shit.

HydroCabron says

Wouldn't a tax cut fix everything, so that you had enough money and could make our lives better?

Sure. But why would I? I'm scum. hahahahaha

Liberals like to legalize all the drugs in the world. Consequences of that would be astronomically tragic, but doesn't stop them from wanting it. Because they want their oompa loompa and they want it now, spoiled kids who grew up with too much self-esteem and no boundaries.

FortWayne says

Liberals like to legalize all the drugs in the world. Consequences of that would be astronomically tragic, but doesn't stop them from wanting it. Because they want their oompa loompa and they want it now, spoiled kids who grew up with too much self-esteem and no boundaries.

That's simply not true, countries that decriminalized drugs saw addiction rates stay the same or decline while saving a lot of money for the budget. There are a bunch of right-wing conservatives who also advocate decriminalization. If you support personal responsibility and liberty in all other parts life, the right to ingest whatever you see fit is no different. The war on drugs has been killing far more people than it has saved, and it is distorting the free market prices and promoting corruption. Also drug use is higher in poor families than in affluent ones.

FortWayne says

Liberals like to legalize all the drugs in the world. Consequences of that would be astronomically tragic

i think it's libertarians who want to legalize all the drugs. and they do have the point the people should be responsible for their own choices. the government should not have the right to tell adults what they can or cannot do to their own bodies.

liberals are generally into legalizing marijuana, not cocaine or heroin. i don't think the consequences of that would be at all tragic, except perhaps for the prison guards' union and the beer distributors, both of whom spend a lot of cash lobbying to make sure it doesn't happen. amsterdam has basically legalized pot, and the place still functions just fine. better, in fact, because they get a slew of pot-tourists who go there to smoke in the open.

high-ranking conservatives generally hate drugs because they are rightly afraid that legalized drugs would loosen employer control of their worker bees and cut into profits.

i think it's libertarians who want to legalize all the drugs. and they do have the point the people should be responsible for their own choices. the government should not have the right to tell adults what they can or cannot do to their own bodies.

I would go farther. The medical mafia severely limits drug treatments that work for some and for those who are seeking alternatives by effectively banning anything not approved as a dangerous drug. And it's not just snake-oil cures, some are solidly backed by peer-reviewed studies, but as with everything even science is much politics these days. There is no reason to deny anybody the drug of their choice. Just thinking how much treatments for serious illnesses have been delayed by the criminalization of cannabis is an outrage.

high-ranking conservatives generally hate drugs because they are rightly afraid that legalized drugs would loosen employer control of their worker bees and cut into profits.

Pat Robertson wants to legalize cannabis and there are more and more non-libertarian-leaning conservatives advocating it.

i think it's libertarians who want to legalize all the drugs. and they do have the point the people should be responsible for their own choices. the government should not have the right to tell adults what they can or cannot do to their own bodies.

That is a good point, didn't think of it that way. I'm just grouchy today.

Mell says

That's simply not true, countries that decriminalized drugs saw addiction rates stay the same or decline while saving a lot of money for the budget. There are a bunch of right-wing conservatives who also advocate decriminalization. If you support personal responsibility and liberty in all other parts life, the right to ingest whatever you see fit is no different. The war on drugs has been killing far more people than it has saved, and it is distorting the free market prices and promoting corruption. Also drug use is higher in poor families than in affluent ones.

To wit Portugal.

Here is a great podcast that none of you will listen to:

http://tomwoods.com/podcast/ep-443-as-the-drug-war-recedes-what-are-the-results/

Just find a liberal. They are experts at blowing smoke up your ass.

Is it really hard to grown one's own tobacco? Just curious. You'd think given the prices, smokers would get back to basics.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3155559/How-smoking-raise-risk-psychosis-Nicotine-interfere-brain-responds-pleasure-reward-leading-mental-conditions.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-126056/How-cannabis-trigger-schizophrenia.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2953915/Scientists-cannabis-TRIPLES-psychosis-risk-Groundbreaking-research-blames-skunk-1-4-new-mental-disorders.html

Pick your poison.

indigenous says

Here is a great podcast that none of you will listen to:

A lot of people read at 250 WPM or above. Since podcasts usually run at around 160, and involve a lot of repetition, hemming and hawing, and "you know", they drive some people bonkers with their slow pace relative to prose.

turtledove says

Is it really hard to grown one's own tobacco? Just curious. You'd think given the prices, smokers would get back to basics.

Some of us have become VAPERS. No money to the tobacco companies or the govt. Win win.

HydroCabron says

A lot of people read at 250 WPM or above. Since podcasts usually run at around 160, and involve a lot of repetition, hemming and hawing, and "you know", they drive some people bonkers with their slow pace relative to prose.

Another reason for your willful ignorance...

Robber Baron Elite Scum says

Even this ASSHOLE who drives a BMW follows my advice...

What good is havig the Force if you can't use it?

HydroCabron says

indigenous says

Here is a great podcast that none of you will listen to:

A lot of people read at 250 WPM or above. Since podcasts usually run at around 160, and involve a lot of repetition, hemming and hawing, and "you know", they drive some people bonkers with their slow pace relative to prose.

You forgot endless self promotion and product selling without ever getting to the point also.

bob2356 says

You forgot endless self promotion and product selling without ever getting to the point also.

And this boys and girls is what the psychs call projection...

komputodo says

Some of us have become VAPERS. No money to the tobacco companies or the govt. Win win.

Not necessarily true. Addicted is addicted, and somewhere, somehow vapers will pick up anything with the drug in it including cigarettes. The concept that addictions can be controlled and hygienic is just a way of talking more people into becoming addicted. Addicts will, in fact, crawl in the gutter to get their drug if they are in withdrawal and nothing else is available.

komputodo says

Some of us have become VAPERS. No money to the tobacco companies or the govt. Win win.

not sure where they get the nicotine from, but it's probably from tobacco leaf, so the tobacco companies still make money then.

a bigger win is that vaping seems much less likely to cause cancer than smoke does. that's huge. could save millions of lives a year. it's not certain that vaping is safe, but smoking definitely is not safe.

When I read the thread title, I assumed that Obama was now giving out cigarettes, at the taxpayers expense.

indigenous says

And this boys and girls is what the psychs call projection...

What about the Fed? What role do they play in this unwarranted aversion to podcasts?

HydroCabron says

What about the Fed? What role do they play in this unwarranted aversion to podcasts?

They subsidize the ones you libby mutts don't have an aversion to.

not sure where they get the nicotine from, but it's probably from tobacco leaf, so the tobacco companies still make money then.

I was a 1/2 pack a day smoker and now that I vape, a $15 bottle of juice lasts a month..So if phillip morris is still making money from me, it's a hell of a lot less.

Ceffer says

Not necessarily true. Addicted is addicted, and somewhere, somehow vapers will pick up anything with the drug in it including cigarettes. The concept that addictions can be controlled and hygienic is just a way of talking more people into becoming addicted. Addicts will, in fact, crawl in the gutter to get their drug if they are in withdrawal and nothing else is available.

Did this thread just morph into a thread about addictions? If so I have several. I like to vape, drink beer, eat bbq ribs and steak, post crap on patrick.net, etc. I've never crawled through the gutter for any of it.

Hi I smoke marbles how could I get free cigarettes free coupons

FortWayne says

Liberals like to legalize all the drugs in the world. Consequences of that would be astronomically tragic, but doesn't stop them from wanting it.

Damn conservatives want alcohol, the mother of all drugs, the real gateway drug, and the drug that kills more non-users than all others combined, to be legal and even celebrated. So, hypocrisy much?

The liberal philosophy is that you should be allowed to freely pursue happiness doing what you will as long as you are not infringing upon the rights of others. It's about personal responsibility and the free market of ideas. Why do you hate personal responsibility and free markets?

In any case, drug abuse is a medical problem. Locking people in jail only exuberant the problem. You lack philosophical consistency, empathy, moral integrity, or practicality. But hey, keep repeating the same failed policies. What was the mark of insanity again?

www.youtube.com/embed/rKMMCPeiQoc

Dan8267 says

The liberal philosophy is that you should be allowed to freely pursue happiness doing what you will as long as you are not infringing upon the rights of others.

So would you call yourself a Libertarian?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism

rando says

So would you call yourself a Libertarian?

No. Libertarians claim to be about both economic and social freedom, but in practice they are not. They don't care about most social issues, so they don't have any problem with gays or transsexuals or most other social things. However, they are very pro-class in practice. They strongly believe in the concentration of wealth and power, even though they will not admit it.

Their philosophy is basically any kind of non-violent coercion, especially rigging the game either without using the government or using the government to allow everyone to pollute, while knowing the biggest players gain the most advantage from this bad behavior, is valid and good no matter how unjust or dire the consequences are for most people.

They believe in obviously wrong things like privatizing the ocean will prevent pollution and overfishing because a single owner wouldn't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. In reality, a single owner would have no problem destroying the ocean to immediate gain as much wealth as possible and then live luxuriously while the rest of the world is fucked. It's like burning down the factory for the insurance money.

Libertarians also completely ignore game theory in the application of their ideas. As an INTJ I'm both an idealist and a practicalist and these things don't come into conflict if you do it right. If the universe contradicts your theory, then it's your theory that is wrong, not the universe. Every idea must be tested against reality and rejected if found wanting. No exceptions. It's not that theory is wrong. It's that your theory is wrong. So fix it or abandon it and seek another.

I would call my political philosophy, rationalism. It's based on science, mathematics, reasoning, technology, and engineering. I look at government, and most other things, as machines. Machines that are either designed and implemented correctly or are not. If they are not, they should be fixed or replaced. Obsolete technologies, like capitalism, should be replaced with demonstrably superior ones. You should never be married to any ideology.

Our policies should be driven by
- rational thought and reasoning
- factually correct information and real science
- long-term optimization
- wise management of resources including the environment
- respect for individual rights and liberties
- an even economic playing field
- equality of opportunity, not equality of results
- the use of violence only when necessary, and never for financial gain for anyone

Every social, political, and economic policy I advocate is based upon the above principles. As for economics, like you, I'm basically a modern Georgist. I also believe in completely revamping our economic system so that it doesn't waste opportunity or cheat people with an owner class. I want to reward productivity, not control.

I want to replace inefficient and ineffective hierarchical structures in government and business with peer-to-peer systems. In IT we got rid of hierarchies for just about everything except namespaces, and namespaces carry no power. Our databases used to be hierarchical, and now are based on sets. The Internet is a graph. When was the last time you used a hierarchy for anything other than a namespace or a sort? We should do the same for government and business. The hierarchy is a technology invented by reptiles. We mammals should be able to do better.

On social issues, I'm a liberal. Everyone should be able to do whatever they want as long as they aren't infringing upon other people's rights. Of course, this includes property rights, and property rights include public property rights, which means you cannot degrade public property like the atmosphere, water, or land. Pollution violates your rights.

I believe in equality under law, so no one, not even kings, presidents, senators, judges, or cops have any privileges. Sure, they have massive resources that you or I don't have, and the time to enforce laws because they are paid to do that while you and I are doing other work. But the only reason a cop can arrest a person is because you and I can do the same. And the conditions for doing so are the same. Cops derive their power from the state, and the state derives its power from the people. If I do not have the right to murder you, then I can't give Johnny the Cop the right to murder you. I cannot give to another that which I do not myself possess. So no government agent has any rights that you or I don't have.

I'm strongly against religion because all religions, by the very nature of religions...
1. Are lies.
2. Require accepting lies and distorting reality.
3. Contradict the principles of transparency and accountability.
4. Cause massive irrationality and a plethora of dire consequences as a result.
5. Cause very bad behavior
6. Holds back the development and refinement of morality, which is best served by science and math. And this is important because as a species we do some pretty immoral things like hunt other sentient beings like whales and enslave them. It will only get worse if we find technologically primitive extra-terrestrial life or develop sentient A.I.
7. Undermine and corrupt our republic.
8. Infringe upon rights and liberties
9. Corrupt the courts
10. Brainwash children

I believe that technology is neither good nor evil, except how we use it. And since evil people will gladly use technology, it's imperative that good people do as well or it will only be used for evil. I also believe that science and technology can solve any problem we put the time, effort, and resources into solving. Even death. Well, depending on how you self-identify. A copy of me is just as good as the original to me. I have no problem with multiple instances of me.

I favor policies, ideals, and practices that promote knowledge, the stable environment, and the continuation of our species and abhor policies, ideas, and practices that place those things at risk or hinder advancement. Put simply, I have the same world view as Carl Sagan, what Neil deGrasse Tyson calls The Cosmological Perspective.

Understanding all the above, makes it clear why some people, the enlightened ones, like me, while others, conservatives (left and right), hate me. Those who dislike me are those who favor short-sighted policies that allow a few greedy people, who they think includes them, to profit in the short-term even though the way they do so causes great suffering for the rest of humanity. To me, this is just bad math. Maximizing the happiness of the few at the expense of the many is simply an optimally bad solution.

Dan8267-

Your comment should most definitely be a spoken video on YouTube.

Well said.

Dude. You are a HEARTLESS MOTHER FUCKER. GREEDY ASS LITTLE MAN. The Lord will have his way with you. Flat EVIL you are sir. To treat the people that gave your ass freedom like that is appalling. If it wasn't for veterans like myself ur ass would be Hitlers BITCH.

Patrick E Dougherty Sr.

Go sit in a smoking area. Bum a Cigarette from the most busy looking person they don't have time to argue. They will always give you a cigarette. People taking their time without a care in the world will say "NO I don't have an extra Cigarette, 20 came in the box"