| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5 |
fulano
Banned
Posts: 496
Registered: 3-31-2008
Location: Ramona, CA
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
The whole concept of using drugs (all drugs) "recreationally" i.e. "for fun" is what upsets me. |
Drugs are for people who can't handle reality.
|
|
|
rts551
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6700
Registered: 9-5-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
Ful
You continue to bash ... but have not put forth any answers. Lets here what you would change that would fix the problem.
|
|
|
fulano
Banned
Posts: 496
Registered: 3-31-2008
Location: Ramona, CA
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by rts551
Ful
You continue to bash ... but have not put forth any answers. Lets here what you would change that would fix the problem. |
Which problem? (1)The problem that Mexico may be a failed state because it lacks sovereignty over large chunks of its real estate; or (2)the problem
with drug gangs murdering about 4,000 people per year as they jostle for control of drug routes; or (3)the problem with illegal drugs coming through
Mexico to the US; or(4)the problem with the illegal drug trade in the US?
|
|
|
Eugenio
Nomad
Posts: 206
Registered: 4-23-2008
Location: Navojoa, Son.
Member Is Offline
|
|
We're forgetting here that most of Mexico's problems stem from bad press in the US - and a xenophobic attitude by americans in general. In fact the
only places in Mexico where crime is out of control are the areas where large numbers of mexicans live.
Viva Baja.
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Barry A
You are right about my "politicizing” my proposition with references to Conservatives and the “War on Drugs”. I have a lot of resentment for what the
“Neo Cons” have done to our country and to the countries of others.
I respect the real Conservatives like Barry Goldwater who was for decriminalization of drugs and who fundamentally believed that the government had no
place in interfering with the private choices of people.
The “Neo Cons” took over the Republican Party and perverted many of its values and goals. I carry a lot of resentment for the harm done by these
people. I own that and am afraid that these feelings will not go away until War Crime Tribunals deal with these people and that justice again prevails
and this country again is seen as a beacon of hope and as a nation that supports the rule of law. I have very strong feelings about this and no doubt
these feelings color my writing.
I appreciate your respectful confrontation of my resentment and how it undermines my credibility and provides a distraction from the point I am
making.
Fulano
I think that FlyfishingPam addressed the issue of decriminalization vs. legalization in her post. Legalization would allow for government control of
the resource, its quality, price and tax revenues to be generated from its sale.
I do not argue with the likelihood of increased use, or report of use, after legalization. However one must realize that these drugs are already in
wide enough use to fund the Cartels. Those are billions of dollars amigo that are in an underground economy.
Problems of individual abuse, addiction etc. can be addressed on an individual basis. There are ways to address addiction on an INDIVIDUAL basis.
Dealing with the problem in this way diffuses the issue. The individual addict is not threatening the legitimacy of the state. The individual junkie
is not threatening to destabilize the entire government! The drugs Cartels are indeed doing this. I would rather treat a million addicts than fight
out a house to house war in cities across Mexico in a “War”. Look at what has happened in Iraq with an occupation in the “War on Terrorism”. One must
at some point ask the question whether a “War” like that in Iraq, that has displaced over two million people, disrupted or destroyed infrastructure
like electricity, sewage, garbage, water etc. is better or worse than the stability of the place before the “War”.
What will Mexico look like as this “War” increases, as the firepower increases, as the battles wage on in the cities? What happens in cities where
“war lords” rule? Or what happens to the private citizen living in a war zone? These are the stakes, these are some of the fundamental issues.
Give me an individual addict to cure rather than an armed, organized gang to deal with.
Iflyfish
|
|
|
oldlady
Banned
Posts: 1714
Registered: 10-31-2005
Location: BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
Amen.
|
|
|
fulano
Banned
Posts: 496
Registered: 3-31-2008
Location: Ramona, CA
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by IflyfishGive me an individual addict to cure rather than an armed, organized gang to deal with.
Iflyfish |
Do I need to give you a lecture in logic? You have reduced the entire problem down to an "either/or" scenario. Your entire position is that if drugs
are legalized, organized crime will disappear. You have no proof of that. You just assume the conclusion. There are other possible scenarios.
1) Individual drig use AND organized crime could increase.
2) A concerted effort could reduce organized crime AND individual drug use.
Your argument is a variation of the "false dilemma" fallacy.
|
|
|
rts551
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6700
Registered: 9-5-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
I haven't heard your solution yet, Ful.
|
|
|
Skeet/Loreto
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4709
Registered: 9-2-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
Ole Skeet has a solution
Boose and Tobacco are drugs which do not have the immediate effect of lilling you-
Hard Drugs are faster to Death with more violant Deaths, also Faster.
Legalize Drugs
Put all users of Drugs who committ Crimes in Consentration Camps in the Arizona Desert/ Supply them with Drugs so that they die Faster.
Anon The Preacher
|
|
|
TMW
Select Nomad
Posts: 10659
Registered: 9-1-2003
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Member Is Offline
|
|
I think you could legalize Marijuana and treat it like alcohol, but the hard core drugs I believe would swamp our national medical capabilities. We
spend enormous amounts on alcohol and tobacco related medical problems now. I guess one way for national healthcare is to legalize them all, but be
prepared to pay the price out of pocket. Social security and Medicare taxes will seem small fry in comparison. I think Mexico needs to get tougher
with the drugs gangs. Find out where their money is and take it away. Probably start with cleaning house first and get an elite drug fighting force
with well paid members. Raise the kill rate to 10,000 a year or more. I also think the military at the checkpoints could be better used elsewhere.
|
|
|
Cypress
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7641
Registered: 3-12-2006
Location: on the bayou
Member Is Offline
Mood: undecided
|
|
I'm with Skeet on this! Attributing the problem to Conservatives, AKA
Republicans? Last time I checked the Democrats, AKA Liberals, held a majority of
the Senate and House seats. They can pass legalization laws today.  Naw, they're too busy holding hearings on Steriod use among sports stars and grilling
oil company execs.  The drug issue and the fuel issue are based on "Supply and
Demand".
|
|
|
oldlady
Banned
Posts: 1714
Registered: 10-31-2005
Location: BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
Fulano,
In what post did any of the supporters of legalization say that if drugs are legalized organized crime would disappear? If you want to "give lectures
in logic" that's fine, but why don't we start with challenging what has been stated instead of leaping to extreme conclusions by inference.
Mexico is obviously having a very difficult time with the situation. Why wouldn't they? The US has thrown vast amount of resources at the
problem..no real measure of progress that I know of. Ergo...what either country is doing is not yielding an improved result. The "either/or"
situation seems to be...either continue what you are doing or change what you are doing. Either change your strategy, which in my opinion is worth
trying, and legalize sale and use of drugs. I'm strong on individual freedoms and don't like the idea of a government telling its citizens what they
can and cannot do with their bodies. A lot of people are going to be irresponsible, abuse drugs, overdose and die in the process. Some innocent
people will be killed by their cars. But many will not be mugged, beaten and killed for a few hundred dollars if the drug only costs a few bucks.
Or, you commit resources to the problem and wipe out the dealers, importers, etc. Expect a lot of people are going die in the process. A lot of the
best we have, as in any other war. Don't expect a perfect solution, don't even look for one. My expectation is that the situation would improve
significantly enough that Mexico will not become a failed state.
Skeet's comment has a Darwinian logic to it.
|
|
|
Cypress
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7641
Registered: 3-12-2006
Location: on the bayou
Member Is Offline
Mood: undecided
|
|
oldlady, Darwinian logic? Guess the "best we have" are dealing drugs and
will be caught up in the killing fields. You equate the narco thugs and our troops
in Iraq? What sort of rationalization process is oozing thru your mind?
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Cypress
oldlady, Darwinian logic? Guess the "best we have" are dealing drugs and
will be caught up in the killing fields.You equate the narco thugs and our troops
in Iraq? What sort of rationalization process is oozing thru your mind? |
Huh????????????? 
|
|
|
bacquito
Super Nomad
Posts: 1615
Registered: 3-6-2007
Member Is Offline
Mood: jubilado
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by fulano
| Quote: | Originally posted by flyfishinPam
Well, I hate to tell you this, but Mexico legalized possession of small quantities of marijuana, ecstasy, cocaine and heroin for personal use 2 years
ago.
Things have only gotten worse since. |
The problem is the market for the drugs (the big money) is up north. |
bacquito
|
|
|
bacquito
Super Nomad
Posts: 1615
Registered: 3-6-2007
Member Is Offline
Mood: jubilado
|
|
| Quote: | Or
Put all users of Drugs who committ Crimes in Consentration Camps in the Arizona Desert/ Supply them with Drugs so that they die Faster.
Anon The Preacher |
Not in Az. Better in Death Valley
bacquito
|
|
|
BMG
Super Nomad
Posts: 1776
Registered: 6-10-2007
Location: La Paz / Bahia Asunci�n / Away from home
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Cypress
oldlady, Darwinian logic? Guess the "best we have" are dealing drugs and
will be caught up in the killing fields.You equate the narco thugs and our troops
in Iraq? What sort of rationalization process is oozing thru your mind? |
Is there a post that was edited/deleted that I didn't see?
I think the world is run by C- students.
|
|
|
oldlady
Banned
Posts: 1714
Registered: 10-31-2005
Location: BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
I didn't equate anything with Iraq, Cypress, you did. I didn't mention Iraq in my post.
Nor did I say or imply the best are narco thugs.
Escalating the war on drugs means more law enforcement resources, does it not? I posit that some of those people will be killed in the process. You
may choose to believe that such will not be the case. Certainly there have been numerous posts with articles enumerating such deaths, in Mexico, in
the US. I consider law enforcement officials, among others, to also be among the best we have.
|
|
|
fulano
Banned
Posts: 496
Registered: 3-31-2008
Location: Ramona, CA
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by oldlady
Either change your strategy, which in my opinion is worth trying, and legalize sale and use of drugs. I'm strong on individual freedoms and don't like
the idea of a government telling its citizens what they can and cannot do with their bodies. A lot of people are going to be irresponsible, abuse
drugs, overdose and die in the process. |
Well, we just went through this on another thread and I don't like to repeat myself (too often, anyway). The problem with your strategy is that nobody
has yet figured out how to charge those people who use those drugs for the social costs to society of carrying them on our backs. Somebody has to foot
the bill to doctor them and feed them for the 6 or 7 decades they will live as useless, inept parasites on society. The hard-charging "neocons" are
tired of paying the bill.
If you tax the price of your newly legalized "recreational drugs" to fund a medical trust to pay for the costs, nobody will pay it. They will just get
their drugs cheaper and illegally because there is no social cost attached. Think about it. One $25 street priced balloon of heroin could totally amp
them out. It would then cost somebody $5,000 per month in medical, psychiatric, housing and food costs to carry the person for the next 60 years until
they die. That's $3.6 million of costs. How do you tack on to the $25 price for balloon of heroin the present value of another $3.6 million?
Even if you argue -- conservatively -- that only one "recreational drug" user in 100 will need this kind of lifetime support, that still puts the
cost of the tax on one hit at $36,000. Take it even one step further. Even if you argue that only one user in 100 will need this kind of lifetime
support, and that person will purchase 100 doses in his lifetime, that would still require a tax of $360 per dose.
There is no way you could ever fund the cost to society of drug users by taxing the drugs.
Now, lets take this little experiment to the logical absurdity. Let's say we decide to legalize drugs and not cover the costs in the taxes on the
drugs, because it makes them too expensive. Let's say we put legalization up to a vote of the citizens. Just like with a ballot proposition, we have
to tell the voters what the costs are. So we crunch the numbers and tell the voters that if they vote "yes" on the proposition to legalize drugs, the
cost to each taxpayer in the United States will be an additional $1,000 per year, which will be deducted from their paychecks or on their tax returns
as an additional tax to fund the "Recreational Drug Trust Fund".
Or, if we vote "no" on the proposition, there will be no additional tax, but 8,000 more Mexicans will die each year.
How do you think the vote will turn out?
|
|
|
Cypress
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7641
Registered: 3-12-2006
Location: on the bayou
Member Is Offline
Mood: undecided
|
|
oldlady, Oops! My apologies for attributed statements to you that you're not
guilty of.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
