politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Anyone with a pulse finds this sinister as fuck because it's obvious that no one would voluntarily participate in something like this.
I could see someone who is addicted to hard drugs finding success with a program like this, and the phrase "if they want to" implies that going to one of these is voluntary and not compulsory, but the real question is once they are there, can they check themselves out at any time if they feel like the program isn't working for them? Or did the government just trap them in a taxpayer funded insane asylum for the rest of their lives because they now won't give them any psychiatric medication to help treat the antisocial symptoms?
Of all the RFK stuff I've heard about, this one seems like it would be his best idea and one that most liberals could get behind if it weren't for his regressive views on psychiatric care. Getting people off drugs and back onto their feet should be a worthwhile societal goal. Getting people off of SSRIs and Adderall and other psych meds seems like it would be counterproductive.
Sorry mate this is just bonkers.
Do you really believe RFK has just solved drug abuse?
Why not ask people who have been working in rehab centres for decades what is needed to mitigate this complex problem.
Where exactly in my post did I say this solves the problem?
I didn't say that's what you said, I asked you whether it's what you really believe?
Suggesting that this is RFK's "best idea" implies that this set up addresses the problem of drug abuse better than existing established rehab programs.
If that's what you think my post is saying, then I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. His best idea is still a bad one, but it's at least built on a foundation that has been proven to work, which is rehab. When I said it was his best idea, that wasn't me praising him or implying that it would actually do anything more for drug addiction than current state sponsored or private rehab programs do. It's just closer to hitting the mark than his other schemes would be to making Americans healthier.
Fair enough, my bad.
People voluntarily go to rehab centers all the time. Court-ordered rehab is often offered as an alternative or complement to jail time.
Voluntary rehab centers don't rent you out to factory farms as manual laborers during harvest season.
True. If you are being rented out then you are not volunteering. If there are daily quotas and ~~guards~~ supervisors then you are not volunteering.
But people do volunteer for rehab. It really depends where on the wellness retreat <---> concentration camp line these things fall.