Comments on: A revenue and legalization lesson from FDR http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/02/25/a-revenue-and-legalization-lesson-from-fdr/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: ewangelia http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/02/25/a-revenue-and-legalization-lesson-from-fdr/#comment-626611 Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:08:29 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2208#comment-626611 I do believe all the ideas you have introduced on your post. They are very convincing and will certainly work. Still, the posts are very quick for beginners. Could you please lengthen them a bit from next time? Thank you for the post.

]]>
By: Brian Choi http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/02/25/a-revenue-and-legalization-lesson-from-fdr/#comment-9185 Wed, 04 Mar 2009 16:59:46 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2208#comment-9185 In my original post, the point I was trying to make was that all these proposals are trying to patch up a broken economic system by consuming new markets instead of trying to fix the system… whether it be marijuana or gambling, we’re continuing in search for endless consumption.

Everyone thinks this will be a solution. It is not. And that’s what I was trying to say. I actually am not against legalizing marijuana if it was for medical reasons or for war against drugs. But I don’t speak for everyone and while the morality of this issue is up for debate and I certainly don’t think it’ll be resolved on this board but the reasons for proposing to legalize it… this economy… I believe is not the fix.

]]>
By: B.Free http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/02/25/a-revenue-and-legalization-lesson-from-fdr/#comment-9179 Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:33:32 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2208#comment-9179 Mr. Choi,

I think we both are missing each other’s point. You wish such things never existed. Interesting wish, and I can sympathize with your situation but, I cannot agree with you. Tobacco though abused does have uses. Granted few are medicinal (e.g. elimination of respiratory and intestinal parasites) but, it is a great organic pesticide for your garden and used in moderation enjoyable. I also agree that Nicotine is very, very addictive. Nicotine is more addictive than most illegal drugs. However for addiction to occur you need more than an addictive substance. You need a person who is both physically and psychologically prone to addiction. My comments below, though grated vague, referenced alcohol because there is a lot of research on the illness of alcoholism. An alcoholic produces a certain body chemistry that is conducive to alcohol consumption and a personality that has been termed an addictive personality. Given the reality that there are numerous substances that a person can abuse, taking marijuana, tobacco, cocaine and opium out of the market will not stop addiction. The Addict will find something else. Please note that research has shown that during the highest point in the War on some Drugs the addicts of this nation turned to substances like paint and glue even aerosols that were pressurized with nitrous oxide. My point is this nation needs to stop this stupidity called the War on Drugs and look at the situation rationally. The substance does not make the addict. The addict has an illness that is both genetic and psychological and needs treatment. Like with alcohol consumption, the addict (alcoholic) makes up an insignificant portion of the population consuming the substance. It would be more rational and less expensive to use the resources now applied to drug interdiction on treatment of addicts. I do not think addicts should be jailed simply because they are using a substance. If they violate someone’s rights or endanger someone then treat them as if they were not an addict and prosecute them for the crimes they commit.

If these substances were legal the prices would crash, the production would be brought into this country, draining the funding to the criminals south of the boarder and in the Middle East. New jobs would be created here. New taxes would be realized and there would be additional cost savings in prison and law enforcement. The idea that the number of addicts per capital would increase has never been shown in those societies that have legalized. In fact by substance category (like heroin) addicts actually decreased due to the exposure to the medical community who were administering the substance.

Currently there is no control stopping kids from gaining easy access to these substances. At least in the White markets you have stores who will not sell to minors. Minors are resourceful and you will see theft and fraud gain the bold access but at least it will be more difficult that today where any kid with money can get any illegal substance they desire.

Given the experience with Alaska the local city governments will be upset since a large part of their revenues come from fining people for possession and that source will no longer be available. There will be a shift from interdiction to law enforcement actually expending their resources on real crime. Our laws over the last 60 years have been used to ensure these black markets are profitable to not only the criminals but also government entities. This needs to change. I think this shift is necessary not just in this country but globally. If the US moves in this direction the rest of the world will follow.

I disagree with a government that attempts to dictate under penalty of law what someone can or cannot put into their body. Personal freedom is a right in this country and our lawmakers have grossly abused their power in this area. It needs to stop.

Now if you like we can have a whole other conversation in a different forum on how the big tobacco companies took advantage of no government purity controls to produce a cheap and dangerous product that was proven to cause carcinoma at lower carcinogen concentration levels than the rest of the world’s processed tobacco cigarettes and caused more cardiovascular damage through their inane attempt to create more addicts by increasing the nicotine levels.

]]>
By: lois http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/02/25/a-revenue-and-legalization-lesson-from-fdr/#comment-9175 Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:18:02 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2208#comment-9175 a society based on ‘scarcity’ is what we currently have. a society based on ‘abundance’ is a better solution. abundance based on ‘sustainability’ is socially just and offers a ‘living’ paradym that can give meaningful context to peoples’ lives. what is the primary reason for substance use/abuse? most would say “lack of meaning”
which often leads to feelings of hopelessness, rage, mental illness. a society based primarily on financial gain will always be exploitive of ecology and society and therefore, unjust. there is only one issue at the top of the to do list nationally and internationally: GREEN SUSTAINABILITY. do we have the ‘time window’ to go in this direction? well, if we don’t, we will self destruct along with the world’s ecosystems which are the source of all life, wealth, and well being. think about it: what is the bedrock of all our advanced societal accomplishments,ideologies, material wellbeing, etc.: truly, it is the EARTH. rape the earth and soon you wiil only possess a handful of ashes, the resting place of all false nonsustainable ways of life. thaks for reading this and hopefull reflecting on how this might apply to your life.

]]>
By: d. a. taylor http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/02/25/a-revenue-and-legalization-lesson-from-fdr/#comment-9174 Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:16:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2208#comment-9174 I am a grandmother of two Mexican boys. Their dad is Mexican and the boys also hold Canadian citizenship.

Now with all this U.S. policy against drugs causing huge violence and civic turmoil for Mexico and U.S. with no end in sight I am very disturbed about my grandchildren’s futures.

They are still safe in Canadian schools but how do you give the kids some confidence to believe in an honest Christian life when Americans keep holding up Mexico as the poster child or the “guilty party” of the American drug war.

America’s complete foreign policy is attacking most of latin America and South America and Central America and Canada and Afghanistan and Europe and pretty much the whole planet using the drug pretext as a “control stick” to affect democratic reform.

Of course, the only winners are the hired security agents and enforcement agencies with their big budgets and the real loosers are the American people who pay for a policy which does not deliver good security but a more dangerous society compromised by bad economic and social policy.

]]>
By: ray barnum http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/02/25/a-revenue-and-legalization-lesson-from-fdr/#comment-9165 Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:17:28 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2208#comment-9165 This is an incredibly sane idea. What’s incredibly NOT sane is the status quo: there is a huge segment of government employees at all levels who are committed to stifling liberty by enforcing laws which appear very similar to Prohibition.

The results are:

1. The enforcers have a job
2. The banned products generate phenomenal profits for
those willing to risk peddling them
3. When “caught”, these people (or someone: taxpayers?)
pay an army of lawyers and others to prosecute
or defend them
4. The losers end up grist for the incarceration mill
5. After incarceration, the “losers” are often simply
better at their business, or better-trained in other
illegal activities. And probably more anti-social.

Overall, who benefits from the current set-up? Mostly the drug dealers and manufacturers who manage to remain uncaught while making incredible amounts of money, the government employees who pursue them, and still other government employees whose jobs are related to dealing with them when they are caught. And, to a small extent, the coffers of the venues that receive fines from those who are caught.

Now, who is harmed by the current mess? Virtually everyone not included in the above, which means a very large majority. This seems a good example of how our laws benefit a few while pretending to benefit the many.

I’m not a drug-interested person. I’m perfectly satisfied with the variety of alcoholic beverages available, so my support of legalization of marijuana is not motivated by the desire to lower the risk of using it! My motivation is: cut the lifeline of cash that supports this cancer of illegal drug traffic! Provide products that meet basic standards of purity and potency. License them, sell them with huge tax premiums (think– tobacco!!) and use the expanded tax base help reduce our deficit.

Oh, and some of the taxes could be used to fund some retraining for the newly out-of-work government employees and for psychological intervention and re-education for those drug dealers who might be interested.

Not that all of those people will be out of jobs, though: there are plenty of other drugs out there that can keep the anti-drug circus going. But the big part of the “show” seems to be marijuana. Let’s pull the plug on that NOW, and rake in some tax dollars!

]]>
By: Mark http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/02/25/a-revenue-and-legalization-lesson-from-fdr/#comment-9153 Tue, 03 Mar 2009 22:55:56 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2208#comment-9153 BUY AMERICAN!

I totally agree with the legalization approach.

Let’s stop subsidizing the international drug lords by producing what America wants right here in America. No more will international terrorists and criminals profit from exporting drugs to America. Let’s see what happens to those drug lords in Mexico after their biggest market suddenly stops buying from them.

]]>
By: John Hawley http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/02/25/a-revenue-and-legalization-lesson-from-fdr/#comment-9147 Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:01:35 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2208#comment-9147 About thirty five years ago the editors of Consumer Reports published a remarkable study done by Edward Brecher called Licit and Illicit Drugs. This was an excellent survey and in depth study of the history of the use of a wide range of drugs and the rising attempts to regulate them. He observed that if one were a drug lord and were seeking to design a system that enriched himself to the maximum level possible, he could not do better than the system we now have in place. This observation is as true now as it was in the early 70’s. Demand for drugs is, to a large extent, driven by its forbidden nature. If drugs could be secured at a minimum cost from a dispensary, stocked by legal and regulated channels, the illegal drug cartels would wither. I assure you that the strongest opposition to legalization of any drugs will be from the current pushers and the gang bosses. Their unwitting front men in the debate will be, ironically, the most self-righteous among us, certain that they know best what is good for us and determined to throw us in jail if we disagree.

]]>
By: Brian Choi http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/02/25/a-revenue-and-legalization-lesson-from-fdr/#comment-9144 Tue, 03 Mar 2009 19:45:24 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2208#comment-9144 B.Free. You missed the point. I said the kids are temped into smoking. Kids are less responsible for decisions they make. I’m sure you think pure pressure is just a myth and conspiracy as well but majority of us parents do not. And by the way, I think you’re perfect rehab. Just walk up to any addict and tell them to “stop” I think it’s working miracles.

I have quit smoking for three years and started again just a few months ago partially thanks to this economy but for three years, I was constantly tempted. I asked someone who quit for 30 years if the temptation goes away. He told me it never goes away. I have a choice to start smoking as an adult but I wish I was never exposed to it when I was in school. And I certainly wish the same for my kids. Cigarette or marijuana.

And you’re also implying that if there are people who enjoy it, it should be available. Do you believe cocaine and heroin also should be legalized because there are people who enjoy it? You agree to child pornography if the child consent to it and actually enjoys it?

]]>
By: nexien http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/02/25/a-revenue-and-legalization-lesson-from-fdr/#comment-9141 Tue, 03 Mar 2009 19:13:48 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2208#comment-9141 1) Legalize & tax recreational drugs (Marijuana, cocaine, heroin)

2) Add at least marijuana and heroin to the medical armamentarium

3) Release/parole all imprisoned individuals who were convicted of non violent drug related crimes.

4) Eliminate the IRS, and all the attorneys and accountants associated with it, and all the enforcement crap, and move to a straighforward transaction tax at the level of financial intermediary organizations – which becomes a software modification of current programs, and frees up over 50 billion dollars a year while providing the money congress claims it requires.

]]>