jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (09/30/86)
This article is not really expressing an opinion in either of the two camps (since i don't think either is wholy right), but to comment on the use of statistics (as in, "lies, damn lies, and ...). In article <1037@gilbbs.UUCP> mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP (Thomas J Keller) writes: >In article <385@fai.UUCP>, ronc@fai.UUCP (Ronald O. Christian) writes: >> I may be ignorant myself, but I can't reconcile two figures >> 1) Drugs claim about 500 lives a year. >> 2) The US government wants to spend (is spending?) 2 to 3 >> billion dollars a year to combat the problem. > Yup. $6,000,000 per death. Strange priorities. Strange priorities indeed. That 500 figure puzzles me. Perhaps that's the number that can be unequivocally attributed to OD's? I don't have any figures on drug- related mortality with me. But, It surely cannot be argued that the number of drug users is much, much more. This is not one of my areas of specific interest, so I don't have exact numbers. Of those, many are addicted to the substance which they are abusing. (Some may not admit it, just like smokers who insist they can quit.) The addicts I have seen have always had their general health and resistance debilitated by their abuse of drugs. I grant that I am only likely to see or become aware of an addict when that is the case. Still, the number of people who die of diseases that are aggravated by an addiction surely ought to swell that first number. And a good number of addicts, it seems, do not quit until their (early?) deaths. Also the straight division diverts one from the truth, which is that Reagan's primary concern seems not to be with the dying, but with the loss of productivity suffered by American industry. -- Joe Yao hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP} jsdy@hadron.COM (not yet domainised)
bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) (10/03/86)
>Also the straight division diverts one from the truth, which is >that Reagan's primary concern seems not to be with the dying, >but with the loss of productivity suffered by American industry. > Joe Yao hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP} Someone else on the net claimed that the loss of productivity was estimated at something like $4-5B, I don't know if that's accurate, but if it's even ball-park it seems spending $3B+ to fight that is a little strange, we could practically just buy the productivity back in cash. Of course, Reagan, for all his braggadaccio about his war on drugs has in fact cut spending on fighting the problem in recent years, his claimed increment only replaces part of what he cut a few years back. No, it seems to me that it's just those damn conservatives with all their fat-cat spending programs which are driving us to the worst deficits in history, can't wait till we get a few liberals in office and get back to some fiscal sanity...(oh heavens Barry, that's not what the audience has been brainwashed to accept, you'll be flamed now for sure! nope, no smileys, the facts speak for themselves.) -Barry Shein, Boston University