https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
Wednesday, September 14, 2016
j reacts to the idea of politicians taking drug tests during and after elections
should public officials have to take periodic drug tests?
hear me out.
i should begin by stating that i would oppose this policy in the way it is usually presented, which is as a means to deny people access to help. but, this actually isn't on a libertarian basis, it's on a socialist basis. i would argue that drug addiction is a public health issue and that social services should exist to deal with it. not on the cheap, either. it's what government does.
to deny people welfare because they're on drugs is completely absurd. should they go rob a bank instead?
i have somewhat of a hazier view about whether employers should be allowed to test employees. it seems unnecessary to test a fast food worker - you'll be able to figure out fairly quickly whether it's impeding them or not. but it's probably a good idea to test a structural engineer from time to time. i'd reverse the normal logic: the more complex the job is, the more important it is that the person that's doing it is sober when they're working.
elected officials take the issue to the highest level. i think this falls into the category of public accountability.
pissing in a bottle a few times a year is hardly onerous. but, it would help us ensure that our government is being run by people that are clear-minded.
hear me out.
i should begin by stating that i would oppose this policy in the way it is usually presented, which is as a means to deny people access to help. but, this actually isn't on a libertarian basis, it's on a socialist basis. i would argue that drug addiction is a public health issue and that social services should exist to deal with it. not on the cheap, either. it's what government does.
to deny people welfare because they're on drugs is completely absurd. should they go rob a bank instead?
i have somewhat of a hazier view about whether employers should be allowed to test employees. it seems unnecessary to test a fast food worker - you'll be able to figure out fairly quickly whether it's impeding them or not. but it's probably a good idea to test a structural engineer from time to time. i'd reverse the normal logic: the more complex the job is, the more important it is that the person that's doing it is sober when they're working.
elected officials take the issue to the highest level. i think this falls into the category of public accountability.
pissing in a bottle a few times a year is hardly onerous. but, it would help us ensure that our government is being run by people that are clear-minded.
at
17:46
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
throughout history, the motive of philosophers and scientists has never been understood by merchants. we seek to understand for the sake of understanding. we seek knowledge for the sake of knowledge.
the merchant needs to put this in the context that he understands, and comes up with strange, if predictable conclusions. these conclusions always exist solely in the context of capital, of market exchange. how could they think otherwise? they is what they is.
but, the merchant can at least believe the philosopher when the philosopher explains: knowledge is a reward unto itself. the scientist would further clarify that the best way to attain knowledge is through observation.
you don't have to understand it to get it.
the merchant needs to put this in the context that he understands, and comes up with strange, if predictable conclusions. these conclusions always exist solely in the context of capital, of market exchange. how could they think otherwise? they is what they is.
but, the merchant can at least believe the philosopher when the philosopher explains: knowledge is a reward unto itself. the scientist would further clarify that the best way to attain knowledge is through observation.
you don't have to understand it to get it.
at
16:47
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
j reacts to the irrelevance, and actual obscurity, of watergate in 2016
the vast majority of eligible voters have never heard of watergate, and most of those who have heard of it barely understand what it was about.
let's say you were young in 1970. 20. you'd be 66 years old today.
the reality is that you'd have to be retired to remember nixon.
it's ancient history.
i just want a shift in discourse. these dinosaurs are so out of touch that it's just getting surreal.
i'd like to see a survey done of eligible voters to determine how many of them could pick what president it applied to.
easy question.
which president was involved in the watergate scandal?
a) clinton
b) reagan
c) kennedy
d) nixon
i bet you get as many people that say clinton (confusing it with whitewater) as you do that say nixon.
let's say you were young in 1970. 20. you'd be 66 years old today.
the reality is that you'd have to be retired to remember nixon.
it's ancient history.
i just want a shift in discourse. these dinosaurs are so out of touch that it's just getting surreal.
i'd like to see a survey done of eligible voters to determine how many of them could pick what president it applied to.
easy question.
which president was involved in the watergate scandal?
a) clinton
b) reagan
c) kennedy
d) nixon
i bet you get as many people that say clinton (confusing it with whitewater) as you do that say nixon.
at
10:00
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
yeah, i'm drunk in an upload. so, put an ad for alcohol on it. do you think this content is directed at kids when i'm not drunk?
the policy won't alter my content. it will just cost the platform money.
the policy won't alter my content. it will just cost the platform money.
at
02:28
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)