Comment by onlyrealcuzzo
5 years ago
By your same logic, if it rose, they would have said so. They didn't.
Perhaps it was unchanged meaningfully / statistically significant enough to comment?
5 years ago
By your same logic, if it rose, they would have said so. They didn't.
Perhaps it was unchanged meaningfully / statistically significant enough to comment?
> By your same logic, if it rose, they would have said so. They didn't.
No, because they aren’t uninterested, unbiased observers just reporting the facts. The entire linked article is pushing very specific policy, and it is only expected that they will only raise arguments in favor of the policy they are proposing.
> Perhaps it was unchanged meaningfully / statistically significant enough to comment?
No. I looked at the data, and reported it accurately. Drug use went up overall, and if you disregard drop in heroin use (though only among young people, it also went up among those 35+), use increased significantly. Drop in heroin use among youth has offset the growth in use of other drugs.
> No. I looked at the data, and reported it accurately.
You were asked for sources. Instead, you pointed to the article someone else linked, and asserted that it’s biased reporting so the data that they didn’t show backs up what you say.
You still haven’t provided any sources for your ongoing assertions.
They don't provide solid sources because they don't exist. Their claims are untrue in the spirit in which they were posted: That the results of the policy were uniformly harmful.
2 replies →