第一天以記者的身份參加溫市市長的新聞發報會，興奮！
一來發報會議題具爭議性，二來第一次嘛，逼逼下，周圍望望下，呵，原來是這樣的...
繼安全注射屋，市長Larry Campbell家陣力撐大麻合法化，佢話大麻合法化之後，老師同學校輔導員先可以更有效教導學生毒品禍害。大佬，咩邏輯呀？如果所有野要合法化先可以正確教導仲得了？！甘不如順便將海洛英冰毒搖頭丸一次過合法化埋啦，咪等D學生哥淨係可以正確學習大麻，甘對其他毒品好唔公平窩！
阿市長仲話大麻合法可以更有效監管，杜絕非法種植場，可以減少政府"衿檔"開支，並且由政府以liquor store形式合法售賣大麻，可以增加庫房收入，再用於預防工作上。其實換句說話講，佢想壟斷市場，尤其美國吸食同擁有大麻都係犯法，呢個市場大成甘，邊個唔想分一杯羹？！
首先，政府將會令人上癮既毒品合法化已經講唔通，然後所謂既控制市場只不過係唔想俾人分左舊肥肉。再者，將大麻合法化只會發出錯誤信息，話俾D人聽，吸大麻無罪架，no big deal，立下甘既根基，就算你花再多錢做教育既工作都係徙氣！
等同要教一個小朋友唔好食飯前食零食，但係你擺到成屋都係，然後又同佢講食左阿媽都唔會罰你，唔會鬧你又唔會打你，一D阻嚇作用都冇，究竟想點？
阿市長話，等同酒精，青年人試過大麻，發覺no big deal, i m out of it，就唔會造成問題。
但問題就係，點解下下都要等D年青人以身犯險之後先自己學識what is not a big deal？
很多人開始接觸毒品也是因為他們生命中有一塊半塊（甚至更多）的空缺，誤以為毒品可以為他們提供答案。在這樣一個大前題下，如果到處有售會令人上癮的大麻，要叫這群有點煩惱又有點迷失的年青人如何有能力判斷大麻到底係big deal or not？！
家陣食下零食唔會死人，但係吸大麻會上癮，會損害腦神經，唔係講笑。到有一日佢地發現Marijuana is a big deal, but i can't get myself out of it的時候，要做補救的行動，又談何容易。
預防濫用藥物，重點不是毒品合法不合法，而是教育和輔導，讓他們知道大麻，酒精，毒品，逃避，通通不「合法」。栽培年青人正視困難，愛惜生命才最值得社會長遠投資。
澳門的新衣
-
寫得很好！
雖然有幾處地方我看不明白（怪自己見識少），但讀了一篇寫得漂亮的文章，感覺就像喝了山水豆漿一樣。
---
澳門的新衣
【明報專訊】前陣子，張炳良在一篇文章中說，香港人自八十年代以來，一直抱覑「不變」來應對變化。如果張炳良是對的，這可能是澳門與香港最大的分別。在回到祖國的旅途上，澳門人有什麼「不變...
11 comments:
i 100% agree with your point!
but today(or maybe yesterday?) i heard on the radio some liberal party person is promoting for some sort of election... and i noticed (it's not the first time actually) that the liberals continuously emphasize on how much the economy improved over their period of governing... but of course, they never talk about how they actually managed to do it! we learn in economics (actually i think it's common sense), in order to maximize profit, one has to 1) maximize revenue and 2) minimize cost. the liberals definitely did a good job of both: legalization of "illegal" drugs, cutting fundings in all public sectors, privatization of public service, etc. etc. etc. i was very frustrated... not only at the liberals, but also at those who repeatedly vote for them simply because they "improve" our budget!!! (that includes my mom by the way) why do we need a government? if a government always look at profit first, then it's just another monopolist!!! think about it, you can always only have 1 government in 1 country. isn't that monopolist? so why do we praise them when they manage to make a profit? a political party that emphasize on money should be brought down and beat to death!!! that's not the main job of a government! a government is supposed to serve its people, regardless of cost!!! as we always learn in economics classes, profit and social surplus never occur together!!! this topic makes me so mad mad mad!!! >_<
淨係識講錢既政府唔得，但係一個識洗唔識搵既政府一樣會搞到民不聊生，NDP就係一個版：一個政府收支不得平衡，往往後果就報應在市民身上，加稅，cut benefit, cut呢cut路，一句話冇錢你奈佢咩何？！
我都仲係唔明：如果學Larry Campbell話齌，以合法售賣大麻得返黎既稅收用於教育同防止工作上就真係死得人多；甘係咪即係話，賣得越多，就越多錢做預防工作呢？甘越多錢做，就應該越少人吸啦，但係越少人吸，就會越少人買，稅收減少，又會唔夠錢做教育，甘咪自自然然多返人吸大麻囉？！？！
呀！！！！陰謀論呀！！！
Larry Campbell always BS ga la
actually most politicians BS
any organized political parties are evil
all politicians should be independent!!! then there's no safety net they can rely on except for their own hard work!!!
in response to what Viv said, do you really think our tax is being used properly?
do you think the Liberals, after "making our economy better", really put those money into use for the good of the community?
or do they just save it for election time and then use it to buy votes?
everybody can see it... but i'm surprise (and sad) that most ppl would rather have a government who only cares about money, then throw it in their face every few (is it 3 or 5?) years.
personally, i think that as long as the money is actually being used for public good, then i don't mind paying taxes. i'm part of this city too. what's wrong w/ paying to live here? my only problem w/ the NDP is that they don't use the money properly.
talking about cutting benefits, isn't that what Larry Campbell did as well? they always BS about reliefing budgets for hospitals, schools, and other public services. but how many of those "promises" did they seriously attempt at?
a budget is, in the simplest form, income minus expense. if you want a positive budget, then there're 2 things you can do: increase income and decrease expense. if government decrease expense, nobody is happy. so they can only go about trying to increase income. the traditional main income of the government is tax. if nobody wants to pay tax, then where can government get its income from? why of course, legalized drug, prostitution, etc. etc.
the situation is similar to "how does government lower crime rate?"
legalization of course!!!
when everything is legal, then crime rate will be 0
E-X-C-E-L-L-E-N-T!!!
not...
what i want to say is, everything that the government does is a tradeoff. in "modern" terminology, it's "choosing the lesser evil". i belief that if my tax money is being used to both provide public service AND prevent rediculous things like commercialized drugs, then by all means, take my money!
haha... sorry to take up so much space... but this city(/province/country) is moving real fast down the slope of morality... and i really don't wanna be forced to leave...
也不是所有政客也那麼髒的，最近不是有一個聯邦議員O'Brien，為了不想跟黨投票支持同性婚姻合法化，情願犧牲自己的政治前途，脫離聯邦自由黨，成為獨立議員嗎？！
雖然有人會話佢自己一票點影響到大局呀？但係我覺得佢既勇氣好值得我地尊重呀，起碼係黨既壓力下，唔係人人夠膽根據選民意願投良心票啦~
我很同意你所說的其中一點，鬧Liberals的何止我們兩個？！點解D人仲係甘投票俾佢地（Provincial as well as Federal)，等佢地有機會一直搞搞陣呢？！呢樣野我真係唔明。雖然話投票都係選the lesser of the devil，如果真係俾BC NDP做左省府，我地可能一日到黑俾D工會玩死...然後Federal Conservative又未必有能力推動全國經濟，可能到時俾魁省恰到有死死下，結果魁獨成會事實，又唔係好事窩！唉，不如問我自己，我地可以做D乜呢？係我而家既工作岡位，我可以做既就係通過新聞，將政府的全貌（好&不好）show俾市民睇，我相信壓力團體有其在社會的重要性，如果我地有五十萬人上街抗議同性婚姻合法化，我肯定Paul Martin都會驚到有得震冇得訓，睇佢仲敢唔敢推得甘大力？！
"雖然有人會話佢自己一票點影響到大局呀？但係我覺得佢既勇氣好值得我地尊重"
i 100% agree!
the other day i also heard about some voting in the VSB about participating in the pride parade as a unit in the name of VSB, and only 1 person in the whole commitee dare to stand up against the majority (it's really the majority. only 1 person did not vote and 1 against, the rest all agree!) i think it is these people that can help us guard our traditional values!
and this case shows exactly why political parties jeopardize the voices of the public. that's exactly why i want all politicians to participate independently. then the ruling parties can no longer buy votes every few years. and during voting period, it won't be battle b/w parties, but instead battle b/w politicians. then we'll get to vote for people who actually wants to work for the public!
雖然我唔係讀咩政治科學（this name is indeed weird, how can "politic" be a science?!)，但係始終政黨既存在都有佢既價值，一個政府如果讓一大群政治理念完全唔同既人執政，淨係花係解釋同說服既時間已經花去唔少納稅人既金錢啦！如果缺乏黨既群體力量，對於投票既人黎講，亦都好難有信心相信佢地選出黎既個一個半個議員真係可以做到野窩~雖然我地唔贊成同性婚姻合法化，但係對於支持既一批，佢地定必覺得Liberals冇得頂啦，係佢地既立場，呢個黨好有用窩，好以代表到佢地既聲音，係咪先？
所以我並唔反對分黨派既政治選舉制度，但係我覺得當要D議員投票去通過議案既時候，黨唔應該以政客既政治前途做籌碼去逼D議員跟黨既意向投票，話晒D議員家陣唔應該係幫個黨打工，而係幫選佢地出黎既市民打工嘛~而政客選擇加入或退出邊一個黨亦都唔應該抱住拍個好碼頭既心態，政治意念相同，咪坐同一條船互相效力囉，理念唔相同，就算會冇局長做，都應該離開！
但係講返轉頭，又有幾多政客會甘有良知呢？！
Post a Comment