By deaths of despair I mean suicides, including mass shootings, and drug overdoses . . . . . it’s fairly obvious to me based on common sense and the evidence: it’s the guns. — Mikie

Guns cause drug overdoses?

But generally speaking you're correct. Unfortunately, there's no way to round up close to 400,000,000 guns. And they are made so well they last so long.

By deaths of despair I mean suicides, including mass shootings, and drug overdoses . . . . . it’s fairly obvious to me based on common sense and the evidence: it’s the guns.
— Mikie

Guns cause drug overdoses? — jgill

School shootings, for example. Unlike any other country and unlike any other time in American life. — Mikie

Sure, we can claim there’s no answers to why this is the case, but it’s fairly obvious to me based on common sense and the evidence: it’s the guns, — Mikie

Not sure why you’d want to deliberately misquote me like that.

Is JSTOR access some kind of flex? You guys are cute. — Baden

I don't know what went on there, but I think we've established that not only do I have JSTOR access, but that my access is bigger than Frank's, and (and I don't mean to be rude), but Frank's using a girls access. It's for girls.

:lol:

This thread is specifically about deaths of despair and their roots in the aforementioned (neoliberal) policies. — Mikie

Which is why I referenced anomie again (and again).

In the running for one of the stupidest statements made on this forum.

So stupid is it that false analogies are your only recourse. How does a government impact your life without a policy?

This thread is specifically about deaths of despair and their roots in the aforementioned (neoliberal) policies.
— Mikie

Which is why I referenced anomie again (and again). — Pantagruel

And which is why I’ll reference, again and again, why that’s completely irrelevant. I’ll do so as long as it takes. I’m not interested in hand-waving, I’m interested in REAL POLICIES.

Sure, maybe spiritual decline, nihilism, degradation of norms and values, “anomie,” etc., are interesting. We can make up a story about why neoliberalism exists and how the “real” reason is attributable to anomie or anything else. That’s not the topic.

How does a government impact your life without a policy? — NOS4A2

Ask the families whose kids died in one of the many school shootings we have.

Deregulation is a policy and a choice. It’s the choice to let industry do whatever they like, with obvious outcomes.

And which is why I’ll reference, again and again, why that’s completely irrelevant. I’ll do so as long as it takes. I’m not interested in hand-waving, I’m interested in REAL POLICIES — Mikie

The ills of any society will be seen to have something to do with government policies or the lack of whatever is needed to make the world perfect, so it's not a particularly meaty topic.

And which is why I’ll reference, again and again, why that’s completely irrelevant. I’ll do so as long as it takes. I’m not interested in hand-waving, I’m interested in REAL POLICIES. — Mikie

To be clear, you are interested in laying the blame for something that pre-dates these policies on these policies. Got it.

The ills of any society will be seen to have something to do with government policies or the lack of whatever is needed to make the world perfect, so it's not a particularly meaty topic. — frank

Yes, you can easily argue that everything, whether because of regulation or because of lack or regulation, can be blamed on the government. Since this is true, the government might as well be tasked with fixing social ills.

Ask the families whose kids died in one of the many school shootings we have.

Deregulation is a policy and a choice. It’s the choice to let industry do whatever they like, with obvious outcomes.

No neoliberal policy or lack thereof put a gun in anyone’s hand, I’m afraid. The Swiss government, on the other hand, does offer guns to every conscript and subsidizes ammo at shooting ranges, with no “obvious outcomes”.

Yes, you can easily argue that everything, whether because of regulation or because of lack or regulation, can be blamed on the government. Since this is true, the government might as well be tasked with fixing social ills. — Pantagruel

Now that would be a meaty topic with potato salad for the vegetarians. That's not the topic of this thread, though.

To be clear, you are interested in laying the blame for something that pre-dates these policies on these policies. Got it. — Pantagruel

:rofl:

Bye.

No neoliberal policy or lack thereof put a gun in anyone’s hand, I’m afraid. — NOS4A2

Yeah, it’s a complete mystery that we have more school shootings than any country on earth. Nothing to do with policies. Maybe it’s ectoplasm.

Go back to sleep.

Yeah, it’s a complete mystery that we have more school shootings than any country on earth. Nothing to do with policies. Maybe it’s ectoplasm.

Go back to sleep.

It should be easy to name one neoliberal policy that contributed to just one school schooling.

It appears your main gripe is with my OP framing, and that’s fair enough. It’s arguable whether being provocative is the best way to open a serious discussion. I find it piques interest and does more to get people to pay attention than a disquisition on economics. But that’s me. — Mikie

In my experience as well you need something a little more out there to get responses. Its not the claim I have any issue with. Its the fact it didn't try to argue its point enough to feel like a topic that could be philosophically discussed. I rarely have any opinions in regards to politics, but I do like to read what others think.

Politics however can become a dangerous poison if it is not handled correctly. It is not that I believe any one political viewpoint is toxic or saintly, it is that I find politics often descend into bias, emotional appeals, and tribal warfare. The rest of the internet is flooded with such posts, and I do not want to see it infecting these boards here as well. Please, continue to be provocative! But, also try to make the post philosophical and not a general political statement.

:up: :up: :up:

↪Philosophim
:up: :up: :up: — frank

:100:

It should be easy to name one neoliberal policy that contributed to just one school schooling. — NOS4A2

:yawn:

Deregulation is a policy and a choice. — Mikie

it is that I find politics often descend into bias, emotional appeals, and tribal warfare. — Philosophim

Certainly.

The rest of the internet is flooded with such posts, and I do not want to see it infecting these boards here as well. Please, continue to be provocative! But, also try to make the post philosophical and not a general political statement. — Philosophim

Eh — Anyone who knows anything I’ve written over the last 4 years knows I’ll get into the topic more thoroughly, provided they’re serious. I don’t do provocative threads too often. But notice that it quickly flushes out the simpletons. That’s worthwhile to me so as not to put much effort into them in the future.

In any case, your point is taken.

Regarding mass shootings and guns, for those interested:

Perhaps, some speculate, it is because American society is unusually violent. Or its racial divisions have frayed the bonds of society. Or its citizens lack proper mental care under a health care system that draws frequent derision abroad.

These explanations share one thing in common: Though seemingly sensible, all have been debunked by research on shootings elsewhere in the world. Instead, an ever-growing body of research consistently reaches the same conclusion.

The only variable that can explain the high rate of mass shootings in America is its astronomical number of guns.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html

Notice the graph at the top. Really says it all.

But we mustn’t let that stop us from denying it, because admitting it’s guns could somehow undermine our religious beliefs in the magic of free markets and that government can do no good.

Also, regarding the stupid NRA talking point about the Swiss:

You want a gun in Switzerland even after you finished military service? Fine, but you have to apply for one and get a license unless you want a hand bolt-action rifle or a multi-barreled hunting rifle– in which case you do not need a license.

So, let’s say you are Swiss, you have military experience, and now you want a real, thoroughly lethal gun, not a multi-barreled hunting rifle that’s good for bringing home venison, and also, you’re 18 or older: Can you pack heat without a bureaucratic problem?

Here for the Swiss, unlike Americans, regulations are quite a bit more finicky. Not only are you supposed to be criminal record-free in order to get a gun, but you also must be deemed unlikely to cause harm to other Swiss. Local police who have doubts about a prospective gun owner’s well-being (or even those who are assured of the same but worry nonetheless) may and sometimes do ask local psychiatrists or friends about an applicant’s mental state or alcohol and drug use.

Also, that gun license, even when approved, is only valid for a maximum of nine months, and applicants are allowed only one weapon. Period.

That’s right. Twenty semi-automatics are unlikely to find their way into the basements of Swiss adolescents. So if the NRA wants to point to Switzerland, it needs to tell the whole story, please…

https://impakter.com/why-gun-ownership-switzerland-not-same-us/

Guess government regulation really does work. Hmm…or wait, if it does it means it’s not a policy— or something.

Note, the connection cannot be made. He fails his own test.

Note: imagine thinking deregulation has zero effects, and isn’t a policy. :lol:

Note, the connection cannot be made. He fails his own test. — NOS4A2

The connection could be made. He's just not interested in exploring that.

Let’s hear it.

Let’s hear it. — NOS4A2

Sure. Start a different thread on it and we can have an intelligent discussion.

Excellent idea! Why don’t you two geniuses go discuss it together? :ok:

I’ve just want to know of a single neoliberal policy that has led to a single death of despair, which for some odd reason includes mass shootings.

There is a perfectly good thread here. Our interlocutors have every right to share their own opinion, as well.

There is a perfectly good thread here. Our interlocutors have every right to share their own opinion, as well. — NOS4A2

You heard what I said.

There is a perfectly good thread here. Our interlocutors have every right to share their own opinion, as well. — NOS4A2

:up: + A thread on the same topic would likely be merged anyway. It's fair to ask that your question be directly addressed here by whoever can address it.

I’ve just want to know of a single neoliberal policy that has led to a single death of despair, which for some odd reason includes mass shootings. — NOS4A2

Despite my feeling that you’re being disingenuous, since it’s a legitimate question I’ll try again:

Neoliberal policies include tax cuts and deregulation. Deregulation is a policy. I don’t think that’s controversial.

If you’re with me so far, the connection becomes clear: the lack of regulation on guns has resulted in, predictably, a massive number of guns — more in number than any other country and more per person than any country except Yemen (I believe). That’s a real effect, a result of doing nothing — nothing about controlling guns. Less regulation of guns, more guns in circulation. We see this in various state policies as well.

More guns, as the article I cited mentioned, summing up the research, explains the prevalence of mass shootings.

So:

Neoliberalism = deregulation
Deregulation = more guns
More guns = more mass shootings

That’s one connection.

The other connection involves mental health during the neoliberal era. Which we can discuss too, if we’re serious.

Also: if we don’t like “death of despair,” fine. Call it what you will. I don’t see many happy, healthy people commit mass shootings, but so be it.