Jock's Place - drugs laws - Comments

Just moaning!

Jo — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 12:49:20 +0100

Yes sorry Jock - sometimes I don't pay attention at the back of the class...

I gained a grade E once for a module in the GCSE maths module I had to re-take twice. The first time I failed I gained a D!!! My IQ is, however, quite above average and I nearly gained a 1st for an element of my degree at university.

I also grew up against a backdrop of relative poverty and the associated issues. I therefore did exceedingly well at primary and 'middle' school (9-13) but my attainment sunk when I went to secondary school. There were just too many issues at school and at home. Nick shouldn't be looking into social mobility at all. It's looking at the issue top down when it should be looked at from bottom up. The help needed is at home. It's where the hinderance comes from and where things like sure start mobile libraries (just called mobile libraries in my day - a godsend where we lived without a car) do help but are like an anonymous hand appearing and stabbing helplessly at the problem...

Not getting at you at all, but I'm realising lately that feeling passionately about an issue usually comes about from experiencing a bit of the problem yourself.

Sorry to get so serious...:@)

Eh?

Jock — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 10:52:27 +0100

I wasn't having a go at mental illness or poverty at all. I was having a go at the research that opens up this can of worms. Even the article mentions several times disbelieving opponents of the findings saying that schizophrenia is markedly more prevalent in people with above average intelligence. Now, if the article were to have said "poor educational attainment owing to the pressures of living on the poverty line" raises the risk (and perhaps then especially amongst kids with a higher intelligence from such households who may be doubly frustrated by the inability to escape and have their talent nurtured properly), then it would be a different finding and would make some sense.

From my own experience, however, whilst not poor by any means (away at boarding school in fact) I can see how there could be a correlation between *unexpectedly* poor attainment amongst children of above average intelligence could be a sign that their brains are not being "fed" enough and are getting "bored".

I notice the primary data for this research comes from Sweden, because they can track people via their ID numbers and compare adult hospital admissions with exam results from their childhood (a bit scary in itself!); I would have thought that such cross referencing could also be made to say benefits recipientsand have produced something useful proving something more along the lines you are talking of.

E grades

Jo — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 08:28:13 +0100

Jock! How unbelievable - pupils who are more likely to gain E grades are those from a lower socio-economic background and are therefore more at risk of mental illness anyway. There is a chart in 'Britain after Blair' that illustrates that perfectly. After you begin to earn 15k your chances of becoming mentally ill slope dramatically. Therefore that is the reason for it.

It doesn't mean that mentally ill people are stupid at all. However, mental illness can make it hard to concentrate at school, of course.

Consider yourself well and truly told off!
:@)

It's worse than the double standards...

Neale — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:33:52 +0100

Hi Jock & Mark,

I think it's worse than just double standards. Take the music industry, for example. Organised crime doesn't get to put up billboard posters saying "How difficult can it be to clean a hospital" [... err... no.. just got that billboard flashback] ... I mean "Snort cocaine and you'll be a party animal".

Instead, they get all their marketing done for free, thanks to the music industry, and the collusion of the press.

If we're going to continue with the legal status of most drugs, then we should at least put in a law that is equal to all, but proportional to the message given out: if you're convicted for possession, then you get banned from appearing in the media for a year.

I somehow think that the music industry would make far more of an effort to look after their assets if this were the rule!

It's the double standards

Jock — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:34:06 +0100

It's the double standards that gets me. It's the very people, at the bottom of the shit heap, who would benefit most, themselves individually and their communities, from legalization who bear the heaviest burden of enforcement. But yes, good for them. The point remains though, you are more likely it seems to be treated this way at the other end of the pay scale by the very people who would probably hang and flog the lesser mortals for the same thing.

Good for them

Mark Wadsworth — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 22:36:29 +0100

What's the class war angle to this? Sure, drugs should be legalised for all, but the fact that they were let off is cause for cheer rather than otherwise.

I really couldn't agree

James Schneider — Sat, 03 May 2008 17:29:07 +0100

I really couldn't agree more. People often want to tar us "legalize, tax, and regulate" types as being unpragmatic ideological libertarian drug pushers. In fact, the legalize, tax, and regulate position is inherently pragmatic and non-threatening. The status quo, which keeps thousands of people living outside the law, at risk from abuse and sex slavery, is threatening. The status quo gives us a position where the IMF estimates that 15-20% of global GDP is orginised crime. A phenomenal level. If drugs were brought above board it would be taken out of the hands of the gangsters and out into the open. This is the pragmatic position.

Lane tax?

Jock — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 23:06:48 +0100

Did you mean a *land* tax? I dont *think* there is mention of it. Indeed ALTER, the Lib Dem land tax campaign group has more or less agreed that we wont argue too much with LIT on the basis that some form of land tax could be a national tax, replacing a number of other national level taxes.

But if you really did mean *lane* tax you will need, I am afraid, to elaborate what you mean!

LIT

Anonymous — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 22:06:57 +0100

Doesn't the latest LIB Dem document on LIT include a Lane Tax?

Oh yeah - now he's at the

Jock — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 20:29:09 +0000

Oh yeah - now he's at the Home Office maybe now's the time for dredging up that student paper article again! "Can't remember" writing it...yeah, whatever!

Wouldn't it be ironic...

Jock — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 20:27:56 +0000

...that whilst being bitterly disappointed that he lost the leadership, by putting him at the Home Office brief he might yet succeed in alienating me from the party more...:) He should have been left with a brief that involved economics somehow - he's fighting a Tory target seat. Of course he's going to be conventional at the Home Office portfolio!

I wish he would, but he

Jonny Wright — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 20:22:35 +0000

I wish he would, but he won't. Christ Huhne's attitude to drugs is depressingly conventional!

reply

Drug Treatment — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 20:27:53 +0100

Being of independent mind sounds more like being smart to me... but any kind of person you may be i believe that you should have some principles to guide your life period.

What would you expect from

center drug rehab treatment — Mon, 24 Sep 2007 15:51:25 +0100

What would you expect from them nowadays ? Money ! that's all they're interested in period.

Howard didn't keep quiet over Bulger

Mountjoy — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 14:56:18 +0100

The Rhys Jones murder has been compared by some in the press, media and blogosphere to the murder of James Bulger. I recall at the time that both Howard and Bliar were very vocal. But this time Brown and Jacqui Smith have both kept very quiet, while Cameron and Davis, for example, have made major statements. Today's Ipsos MORI opinion poll in the Sun shows that fear of crime has increased by 18 percentage points since last month. The Government needs to speak up and come up with some deliverable policy on this issue, rather than just keeping quiet.