Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.
All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..
As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.
Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!
*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."
Subject: Seems like liberals are going to say that drug abuse is a symptom of a depressed life, and the conservatives are going to say that drug abuse is a cause of a depressed life?
Czuch:It's both in my view. Clearly, some who are well off, but get involved in drugs, can find themselves in financial ruin (not to mention the physical toll drugs take on a person). Others, who are depressed for whatever reason, self medicate through the drug of their choice. I'm not sure of the stats on poverty and drugs.
While I believe there is a connection between drugs and poverty, I don't think there is necessarily a causal relationship. Except in some cases, one does not give birth to the other. They are more like cousins.
The single most common factor to poverty is single parenthood. A single mom has a 60 percent (it may be higher) greater chance to live in poverty than she would if she stayed motherless or was married.
I'd have to look it up but somewhere I read that in many of the poorer homes, nobody works outside the home. In many of these cases, the persons were capable of working, but chose not to work. Instead, they relied on the government to fix things and take care of them.
Poverty is a huge problem around the globe. All of us who are able should do what we can to alleviate the suffering of others. Businesses and community should do everything possible to help the needy in our neighborhoods. I'm not fully against some (read that limited) government assistance but I'm sure that it should NOT come from the Federal government as they waste money - it's better off out of their hands. Perhaps State and local governments can help but the bulk of caring for the needy ought to come from the people in the community voluntarily. (And people who can work, need to get a job, maybe two. When my kids were young and I needed to make ends meet, I worked THREE jobs. Suck it up, roll up your sleeves, get your fingers dirty and earn your bread! That's always been my attitude.
The last thing the government should do is to saddle its citizens with oppressive taxes to support the life style of others. I'm sure we all know or have known people on government assistance that clearly didn't need the help. They were milking the system. And we also know that our "representatives" will spend our money very easily - and they can't be trusted. Even if they could be trusted, "spreading the wealth around" amounts to theft.
Yes I recognize that there are people in our communities that need help and could fall through the cracks. But limited assistance seems better than the crazy entitlement system we currently have. It's out of control spending that we can't afford and money we don't have. But now I'm preaching to the choir.