Jock's Place - drugs - 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!
:@)

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.

I think it is our spiralling

The Poet Laura-eate — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 14:27:44 +0000

I think it is our spiralling culture of excess/escapism that is probably the real root of the national drinking problem, so no point trying to lop a branch with the drink price increases!

I've never tried khat. But

Jock — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 11:56:53 +0000

I've never tried khat. But I have had both chocolate and sugar, even in a cocktail called Cake!

They're not at the

Jock — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 11:51:23 +0000

They're not at the forefornt of bansturbators on drugs policy. Lib Dems have quite a sound policy, unless it has been unilaterally updated by the powers that be (wouldn't put it past them!) - on decriminalizing where possible, renegotiating treaties or finding ways of working within them and crucially of moving to an evidence based classification system which would include all psychoactives so you could see whether your tipple was more or less lethal than what we currently call legal drugs.

I am a bit disappointed in the whole Libertarian manifesto to be honest. I know that I am more libertarian than those who seek to temper their libertarian instincts in the name of getting elected. The book we're writing will, I think, show that there's not a fag paper to put between proper liberal economic policies and proper libertarian ones. How could there be if one's favourite liberal author is Herbert Spencer!

Drugs

Mark Wadsworth — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 09:47:18 +0000

Yup. Totally agreed. The key words are legalisation, regulation, taxation and education*. How do you square this with the Lib Dems being at the forefront of the bansturbators?

Thanks a lot for your support on my 'Twats of the day' post, BTW! It is a bit bizarre that my (proto-UKIP) economic policies are closer to yours than to the so called Libertarians. Hmmm...

* Neil Harding added this to the list.

"They may as well make sugar

Alix — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 08:58:04 +0000

"They may as well make sugar and chocolate class Bs on a whim if you ask me"

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

I reckon they'll have another go at khat next:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khat

Really must nip over to Wood Green and get some. I was foolish enough not to stock up on Wispas when they had their recent limited re-release, and I've learnt my lesson.

comment

Mark Pawelek — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 07:57:38 +0100

I agree with you, except I don't have a suspicion I have certainty. They factored in social harm" but have ignored the harm caused by prohibition. How are we to measure the harm done to Columbia, Mexico and Afghanistan by keeping these drugs illegal?

Here is an outline of the framework they used to establish harm.

I've listed 4 such areas of harm, due to prohibition in my reply to another blog.

A proper scientific scale would have to be a dual scale. One scale for drugs under a legal scheme and one for drugs under prohibition."