[ExI] Deficit spending and never admitting you were wrong

William Flynn Wallace foozler83 at gmail.com
Fri May 29 00:53:58 UTC 2020

We shouldn't *let* the government do everything that needs doing  Dave

How can we stop it?  I have noticed for a long time, and I am sure all of
you have too, that people seem to want to pass problems along to whoever
will take charge of it, and that has inflated our government tremendously.
Let George do it.  Back in 1973 the feds sued Alabama and their mental
institutions (not enough doctors, not enough nurses, not enough
psychologists, not enough of anything).  Patients were housed and many had
been there for decades *without a treatment plan!!*.  Some could have gone
home decades ago but the law said that someone had to pick them up and
families did not want to take care of them (let George do it) , so they
stayed in the mental hospital (including hospitals for the retarded)  I
took students there on field trips (no more - privacy laws, which is a
shame because people need to know the conditions in those place, which in
some cases are as bad as our prisons, which are right now being close to
being sued too - you simply would not believe what goes on in Mississippi
prisons).  I worked in the state mental hospital just a few miles from here
- aide.  To qualify for getting hired as an aide you had to have a second
grade education.  Just think about that.  After psychiatrists, the group
from which the largest percentage of admittances per capita were former

Don't you wish you had worked there, Henry?  I was paid $190 a month plus
room (dormitory) and board (cooked by patients, harvested from the
on-grounds farm).    1963 this was.

The feds wanted, and still want large institutions to shut down and mental
health clinics, mostly outpatient, put in the large town in a county.
Where this occurs, the outpatients come to get their pills and therapy.
Far, far less costly than the big institutions.  Feds actually having a
good idea here and trying to drag MIssissippi and I am sure other states,
usually Southern, into the 20th century.  Yes, I meant 20th.

Ever heard of any politician having as one of his issues and promises
mental health?  It is still a shameful subject.

I wonder how many prisoners would be released if every state released those
who were convicted of having an ounce or less of pot.  Quite a few here.
Many prisoners have been released lately because the state could not pay to
have them all in the prison.  Something like $30K a year per person.

OK, I'll stop, but it's not so much the feds that are causing the problems,
as it is the general population who do not want to be taxed any more to pay
for better mental health services, even though statistics show that 1
family in (3, 2, something like that) has a person who has mental problems.

bill w

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:19 PM Dave Sill <sparge at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 1:13 PM William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> I got some of my libertarianism from Heinlein. In one of his novels he
>> says "We'll feed and take care of your family but if you won't work you can
>> starve."  It's not just the drug addict that needs help - it's the family
>> too.  You want to be tough on the addict - fine - will you let his family
>> starve?  I would not and I think that most libertarians would not.  Status
>> restored.
> I don't want to be tough on the addict and I don't want anyone to starve.
> We shouldn't expect the government to do everything that needs doing. We
> shouldn't *let* the government do everything that needs doing.
> I have no idea what the addiction recovery rate is.  Depends on the drug,
>> I am sure.  I am also pretty sure that tens of thousands of homeless people
>> are addicted and have been in and out of therapy for years and are still
>> shooting up.  I have no idea what to do with them like the street people in
>> SF that Spike and I have been discussing.  I do not know what not treating
>> them like helpless people would be like.  How would you get tough on street
>> people?  Many of them are cross-addicted as well, and a large percentage
>> are mentally ill.  Getting tough is no solution to that, whatever that
>> would mean.
> I'd start by not making addicts criminals, so they can have hope of
> getting their life back if they beat the addiction. I don't understand
> "getting tough" on street people: do you think that's a lifestyle they
> choose? Better mental health care is something we definitely need.
> Totally agree about drug prohibition:  good money after bad, or even good
>> money after good. Has there ever been a bigger federal government failure?
> I'd have to think about that, but it's certainly up there.
> -Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20200528/534213ba/attachment.htm>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list