TE> How about it Janada, the Megalopolis of Texas?  Good idea or
JO> Ack! Ack! Ptewey! We're already in deep guano, even though
JO> illegal immigration is supposed to be just that...ILLEGAL! What
JO> with Owlgore pushing through the papers of thousands (without
JO> checking their records!) just before the election, and
JO> NAFTA...it's just awful. The influx of drugs is higher than
JO> ever. I can only imagine the money that we are paying out
JO> directly or indirectly. Even if they aren't getting an actual
JO> check from the fed, it still costs the taxpayer a fortune in
JO> loss from criminal activity, then to process and house them if
JO> they are caught. It's bound to cost over time (maybe a *long*
JO> time) when the illegals or almost legals vote in liberal
JO> politicians. Our roads are a NAFTA-induced nightmare too.
MA> An interesting point came to my attention last week during a
MA> Cato Institute discussion about the "Drug War".  It was pointed
MA> out that about 3.4% of the population used drugs before they
MA> began being classified as illegal in the late 1800's.  Oddly
MA> enough, by the mid-60's, with several decades of prohibition,
MA> about 3.4% of the population used illegal drugs.  In the late
MA> 1970's it was decided that we must "declare war" on drugs and
MA> the Drug War began in earnest with about 3.4% of the population
MA> using drugs.  Now, two decades, countless billions of dollars,
MA> and millions of prisoners later, how about that, about 3.4% of
MA> the population uses illegal drugs.
I've read that too. I also saw the statistics for the DARE programs.
More kids in schools with the DARE programs use drugs than at the
schools without it. Well, it figures...afterall, sex education has
worked so "well" in schools...both subjects should be up to the
parents, if you ask me.
MA> I would suggest, sooner or later, we are going to have to admit
MA> that no matter what we do, no matter how much money we waste,
MA> no matter how many of our civil liberties we give up, and no
MA> matter how many otherwise innocent people we put in prison, a
MA> certian percentaged of the population is going to use drugs.
MA> Nothing we have done will alter this.  The people that are
MA> opposed to using drugs will remain opposed, and never use them,
MA> and the people who want to use them will continue to do so.
MA> For all the good intentions, all the honest efforts, all the
MA> reasoned arguments, the whole thing is a total waste.
As hard as it is to believe, I agree with you. Some people WILL do
whatever it takes (that 3.4%) to get drugs. And I don't have a
problem with learning from that history...as long as we don't call
it a "disease" but a choice, and we don't ever let it be an excuse
for any form of bad behavior. Personally, I don't really care if a
guy (adult, anyway) gets high in his living room...I do feel bad for
his ultimate fate, but it's not for me to break down his door and
decide for him. But if he decides to drive that way or commit crimes
to support his habit, then it should be open season on him. The
Heinlein rule should apply: "Your right to punch me ends just short
of my nose." And none of this namby pamby "War" on this and "War" on
that, the Clintons love so much. It's a joke...and a bad one.
An example of what's happened with the huge flow of drugs is all the
kids od'ing on heroin here in Plano. I don't know what the answer
is. The school system is better than most here, so education didn't
stop them. It's a well-to-do town (both parents usually work at very
good jobs), so ultimately the kids probably have too much money, too
much time to kill, and not enough parental guidance. 
MA> Relative to immigration, unless we have a desire to preserve
MA> the integrity of the welfare state and it's social programs,
MA> not claiming myself these have any integrity to begin with,
MA> what is the advantage to restricting immigration?  If those
MA> coming are coming to work, as Adam Smith said, "expanding
MA> markets", all they do is make life better for all of us as
MA> Smith pointed out, "expand wealth exponentially".  One of the
MA> greatest scams of the twentith century is how social liberals
MA> have duped conservatives into defending the welfare state for
MA> them by convincing them to abandon our traditional stance of
MA> having an open immigration policy.
[snip]
I would never agree to an open border policy. We've already let too
many people in that weren't checked out, and we do not need someone
else's problems. I think our policy used to be if the person had
something to offer, a trade, a skill, something...and I don't mean
new ways to scam welfare or commit theft. Maybe it isn't fair, but
life isn't fair, and if we let everyone live here, then what happens
to us? We ALL suffer. It's just more socialism--misery for ALL.
MA> As far as NAFTA goes it is a horrible deal, but not because it
MA> opens up trade.  Free trade is not an enemy of the consumer or
MA> the businessman, but because of all the trappings of government
MA> attached and expenses incurred.  To initiate a free trade
MA> agreement we should simply open the borders to trade and knock
MA> down all the barriers.
[snip]
I'm not against free trade, and I think we could manage it without
opening the borders and becoming Texico. I've *been* to Mexico, it's
not that nice to visit and I sure don't want to live there. NAFTA is
just a bad agreement altogether. 
And as I was saying about the roads. I know a lot of truck drivers,
they have to jump through all kinds of hoop$ and pay even more fee$,
part of which is supposed to help pay for roads. So it sickens me
when I see these rattletrap trucks come from over the border that
aren't paying license$ and fee$ like the people here, but it's all in
the interest of "free trade", right? Dallas is always being
threatened by sanctions because our air "isn't pure enough"...if they
would quit lowering the acceptable standards, it would help, and it
certainly doesn't help if anyone can come here from Mexico with a
truck that wouldn't have passed emmissions 20 years ago! I pay a lot
of taxe$ and fees every year to have a fairly new car te$ted...okay,
I use the roads...but what about the ones that really tear up the
roads and dirty the air? Heck, those are Owlgore's BUDDIES! They
helped him become VP, so I guess it's "worth" it. Hogwash!
JO> Yep, we get sheered enough as it is. Although I always figured
JO> our state animal was the longhorn steer...even if sometimes it
JO> seems a bit light on the longhorn and heavy on the steer part
JO> ...kinda leaves us short on defense and/or testosterone. (sigh)
MA> I always tended to prefer the armadillo meself...
Too dany hard to peel!
... Can't you hate purple and not be a racist? - Bill Maher, Pol.Inc.
___ Blue W---
* LAKOTA v1.5
--- Alexi/Mail 2.02b (#10000)
---------------