SphereofWreckening

Its because the company literally paid shills to stump for them in person, call Congress, etc.

The way it was presented was that they paid average users to call Congress which is disingenuous. I'll admit I was wrong when I came to the influencers being paid for in person events, but that's only a smaller group of people and events. The vast majority were not paid and did so of their own volition.

Edit: Didn't realize OP and the replier were different people. That's also on me.

literally paid shills

No *one outside of some influencers were paid lmao. People contacted Congress but they weren't paid, and a quick Google search brought up zero result of people being paid *outside of the influencers. So I'd love to see where you're sourcing this from.

Edit: Correction - about 30 influencers were paid to visit events for Tik Tok. I'll rescind saying that literally no one was paid: that's point is wrong. My main point was that average users weren't paid to call into Congress. And the vast majority that called in or have talked out against the ban did so of their own volition rather than being paid as implied by OP's comment

The replacement drugs only work with someone inside the system. There are a lot of people outside of or at odds with the system because of how it levies criminality against addicts. And again: criminality that is automatically assumed acts as a positive feedback loop leading to addicts committing legitimate crime.

I'm not familiar with Finnish prisons. I've been told that they're better than US prisons and I definitely believe that much. But still, someone with an issue of addiction shouldn't be going to prison at all in the first place. That was the main point I was trying to make there.

And I'm not advocating for anything like free drugs. What I'm advocating for is a more psychological approach to handing addiction. Addiction itself is a psychological disease, and it needs to be treated like that. Not like it's some sort of moral failure: like the system insists upon.

I do not think we will find consensus on this, so this is where I'll take my leave.

Except it literally is life or death in the case of withdrawal. Those who are addicted things like like heroin, or even have a severe enough addiction to alcohol can die once they're in a certain part of the withdrawal process.

And just because prison was the rock bottom that some addicts needed to reform doesn't mean it's the best option. Honestly prison is one of the worst possible options because it leads to a positive feedback loop of criminality. Addicts are automatically labeled as criminals on arrest and then have to fight against that stigma for the rest of their life. So of course they'd do things like turn back to crime, because their options are automatically limited on arrest.

I won't sit here and act like I have all of the solutions. I don't have all of the solutions and I'm just some guy. But so long as addiction is seen as a criminal offense we will fail addicts every single time. We need the large scale social programs Finland has currently along with a strong re-evaluation of how to handle drug related crimes.

Drugs in general are still illegal to possess and use under Finnish law. You need to decriminalize drug use before you can actually tackle it since it's a health/psychology issue when it comes to the individual.

It's hard to seek out proper help when you're worried that you'll be arrested/fined just for being an addict.

Grocery stores dump hundred of pound of still edible food into the garbage each and every day. And no one is eating less because of thefts from the grocery store. The main reason people are starving right now is because their grocery bill spiked and extra $100-200 for absolutely no reason other than pure greed that they were able to blame on "inflation".

Your problem isn't with the addicts, its with the system that is ever antagonistic towards its people. Addicts can be hard people to deal with, but they're still people. Now obviously if they're acting violently there's no excuse for action like that. But if they're just taking food why should I care?

If people are stealing for drugs then it means that the system in place isn't meeting their current needs. The problem for a lot of addicts is that they either steal and cheat for drugs or die. Withdrawals literally have the capability to kill addicts. I don't believe in any circumstance we should be holding money ahead of human lives.

It's a shame when people are stolen from, but it's a tragedy when people die. And a system that doesn't allow an avenue for actual recovery is a failed system.

junkies

What a disgusting dehumanizing term. Drug addiction is a much greater issue that needs more than reactionary remarks and actions to solve. A good number are literally that desperate for money because they'll literally die from withdrawals without whatever it is they're addicted to. And so long as they're being non-violent then I empathize with their struggle.

Again, I don't at all care about some large corporate store getting stolen from. Actions like banning bags and whatnot mean little in the face of human suffering.

Don't really care about some corporations losing out on their margins after nickel and diming everyone as high as they possibly can. Especially if the end result is someone or multiple people eating.

I think at this point we may be in general agreement with disagreements on specifics. I don't want to make a billion posts and be overly semantic; so I'll say I can generally agree with that.

Harry Potter is a big enough IP for her to ride that fame and money for the rest of her life. A lot of people will only ever know her through that and continue to hold reverence for her. That's more what I was referring to in terms of prolific.

And ultimately her drivel will go viral regardless of if we want it to or not. Some billionaires have a habit of soaking up as much attention as possible. In my opinion it's better to speak against it and hope she eventually disappears permanently. The alternative is say nothing and let her words fester and possibly infect more minds.

But that's exactly my point: She wasn't cancelled. She continues to make hand over fist in cash while maintaining her status as a billionaire and prolific writer. All while using her money and reputation to ruin trans people's lives while crying as the victim.

If you're tired of hearing about JK Rowling that's valid. If I never heard of her again I'd be more than happy. But the point is that she continues to gain coverage/attention in her fight against trans rights with startlingly effective results. So long as trans people are being persecuted then in my opinion we can't leave these things be. Because silence will only embolden those with these ways of thinking.

I apologize if I've been short with you. The last OP kept acting like they knew me or have any context for why I feel the way that I do. I'm very opinionated on the subject; but the people I love are affected by issues like this so I have to be.