What makes you think it would be cheaper? It would be HEAVILY government regulated and taxed. I’ve never bought coke, and have no idea of the prices, but I would be highly surprised if legalized drugs were any cheaper. The price would be more stable, and the product more controlled, but I doubt cheaper.
I’d also think it likely that drugs would be less powerful. I know I have seen information that marijuana has been made more potent by the War on Drugs, and that government supplied stuff tends to blow.
Logically this is quite implausible - the current cost of illegal drugs implicitly includes a lot of costs (smuggling, bribing, bringing in profit sufficient to kill and risk dying for) that would simply not be present in a legal operation. The only possible way that drugs would cost the same would be if there were an extraordinary punitive tax on them - one that would be extremely stupid, too, since it would defeat the whole point of legalizing by making bootlegging competitively profitable and thus incentivizing the very criminals that legalization would be meant to put out of business.
Sure there will always be a black market for weed, but just the white market alone would generate billions. The handful of people who drive to different jurisdictions to save 60 bucks are not that significant to those who will pay the convenience price. Sure I could buy a tanker truck full of Pepsi at Costco for like 5 but I still buy my Pepsi in single serving sizes at the deli across the street for $ 1.50 most of the time. The same will work for Pot. Most people will just buy it at the local stores. Besides you can enforce taxation primarily upon the growers, and then you can just get them through traditional old tax law. You could grow your own plant and have the cheapest and best pot in the world conceivably too, but how many people do you see doing that just because it’s legalized?
There would also be the benefit of collecting taxes instead of pissing money down the black hole of enforcement, adjudication and imprisoning “criminal” offenders, our war on drugs.
OTH, what about the economic effects of loss of jobs in the industry plus turning millions of decriminalized jobless loose on a soft job market?
You could be right on ‘hard’ drugs. I don’t know, because I don’t know anything about the prices. But I have no doubt there would be an extremely punitive tax.
As for weed, for example, I know the price seems to be pretty low. Its also a price which people have made clear they don’t mind paying, by buying the stuff, even given its non-addictive nature. Retailers know people will pay the current price. I’m not a weed smoker, but from talking to friends who are I don’t see the price has a long way to fall, even without a government that would be pretty much committed (for revenue and morality reasons) to maintaining a price at least as high as street prices now.
It could still be quite high because right now costs are inflated to react to losses to law enforcement. We’re talking about a business that leverages against shipments worth $ 100m.
Of course not, the government could significantly tax it and it stay at roughly the same prices. It would also be a highly competitive market which would be pretty good.
Growing, harvesting, packaging and distributing weed will also create jobs. Collecting revenue for weed instead of wasting money chasing ,it will also be a net gain. We waste billions jailing weed smokers and distributors. To what end? Send your teenager out with a few bucks and he can come back with a bag of weed. Enforcement is not only wasteful, but it does not work. It corrupts the police and prosecutors too.
So, you don’t believe in advertising or in the impact of better distribution? Because if what you say is true those who pay for advertisers to increase sales are wasting their money, and those who fight to get more space on supermarket shelves are wasting their time. This has nothing to do with drugs, it is marketing 101.
I agree. There is a big risk cost now, and illegal growers tend to do their farming in remote areas and have to hire goons. I’m sure they are not using scientific growing techniques. Pot farms along I5 could produce for a lot less cost.
I think open pricing and competition would decrease prices, but since a base street price has been established, I agree that the government can set taxes using that as the final price.
How about legalizing on the same basis that drugs are approved now - no efficacy test required, though. Plenty of drugs with side effects are perfectly legal. We’d just have to be sure that the anti-drug crowd doesn’t try to use scare tactics.
Reefer Madness 2010!
Not necessarily. Pepsi advertising might not increase the overall consumption of cola, but is still worthwhile through increasing market share of that fixed pie.
It depends how you view the market. I don’t think advertizing a particular ‘brand’ of weed will boost overall weed smoking, after an initial boost where the market considered is ‘all intoxicants’ for want of a better word. Initially weed would increase its share of the market of recreational drugs away from alcohol, though I doubt that effect would be predominately caused by advertising but more by legalization. After that settles down, advertizing Charlie’s Chronic will simply reduce demand for Bert’s Best Bud.
No, it’s not. It is possible to use alcohol, cocaine, or heroin without endangering anyone else through the mere act of taking it.
PCP, if what I’ve read is true, may be an exception. From what I understand, it can cause violent, uncontrollable flashbacks long after use ends. This suggests to me that the mere act of taking PCP may endanger the public, and that would be justification for making it illegal.
Personally, I’d legalize almost all of it. Antibiotics are an exception, because of the possibility of it losing effectiveness for the entire population faster, and therefore there are externalities.
I’d make the FDA an advisory body only, legalize all drugs, and let doctors and patients make their own decisions. The FDA can mandate warnings, demand that all drug advertising list the FDA approval status of the drug, and insurance companies can mandate prescription of only FDA-approved drugs as a condition of liability insurance coverage for doctors if they like, but I wouldn’t stop anyone from buying and taking any drug, subject to the conditions I already listed.
Cite? Coke and heroin are addictive. Therefore an addict will do ANYTHING to get their substance of choice. …Oh and using alkyhol, heroin and coke harms a hell of a lot of personal relationships
Well you know…the illegal drugs are the ones that can and do cause lasting nereologal damage.
I think you’ve prolly never firsthandly witnessed the havoc drug abuse and addiction can wreak. It isn’t pretty. The government doesn’t go "tsk tsk tsk. Our wittle children are having fun. We need to protect them against these evil chemicals. Drugs have a VERY negative effect on society, and the users in general.
You don’t think so? My father was an alcoholic. Alcohol killed him by age 62, and wrecked his life a lot earlier than that. He didn’t do wonders for my life, either. I lost a friend to a drug overdose when I was in college. Another friend died a few months ago because a bad drug addiction destroyed his liver and he went into a coma and died. I’ve watched other friends struggle with alcohol and drug addictions. But I’ve also seen others use various recreational drugs or alcohol their entire adult lives while remaining solid, productive members of the community. And that’s the big difference. If the mere act of taking a drug doesn’t make you a threat to others, then the drug should be legal.
There is a fundamental difference between a drug that might destroy your own life, and one that by its very ingestion endangers the public. You are crossing a very bright line when you try to use ‘the emotional damage caused to an addict’s loved ones’ as being the same as a PCP flashback in which someone flies into a rage uncontrollably and kills another member of the public.
Once you cross that bright line, you’ve opened the door to the government being allowed to control all your behavior. There are people losing their jobs because of internet addictions. Do you know what that might do to their families? Maybe we should ban message boards. There are people who kill themselves doing extreme sports. Maybe that should be illegal. And of course, the most destructive drug known to society is alcohol, and it was back even when other drugs were legal. Yet prohibition was a dismal failure and no one wants that back.
Your attitude is frankly patronizing. Not just to me, but to every adult. It’s none of your business how well I manage to run my own life, so long as I don’t recklessly endanger others. Yes, people can ruin their lives with drugs. But that’s just one of many ways in which free people can and do screw up, and we have no business trying to stop them until they become a threat to the public.
Where did you get your information from, a 1930’s scare film? Not everyone that does coke and heroin gets addicted. The majority of people who try coke and heroin don’t get addicted. I know a lot of people who have tried coke and meth. I know no one who has been addicted to either. I don’t know anyone that has tried heroin, but as many opiates as I’ve tried myself and found bland, I doubt heroin would be an unforgettable experience for me. And if the drugs were legalized and considerably cheaper, addicts wouldn’t have to do anything to get their drugs. They could get a job.
And the personal relationships thing is totally against the fact that this is supposed to be a free country where people are free to do whatever they like, even if other people don’t like it, as long as it doesn’t directly harm anyone else. The only exception to this is children, and I’d argue that if you smoke crack in front of your 7-year-old kid, you deserve to have them taken away from you. But I, an adult, should have no legal obligation to play it safe so Mama doesn’t have to cry at my funeral. It’s not something I’d hope for, but it’s not going to keep me from living the life I want to either.
Well, THERE’S an upside for you! In his ongoing effort to stay shit-faced, our user who can’t afford the $20 a day to do so legally will have to snatch fewer purses. Or break into fewer houses. Or steal cheaper cars. Whatever. His workload will diminish, giving him more time to enjoy his habit. We normal folk will notice that fewer grandmothers get shoved to the ground as their pocketbooks are torn from their hands. It’s a win-win scenario for everyone!
Ok…so your thesis is that " prohibitation is a failure" so let’s legalize it.
Also not everyone becomes a fuck up on drugs and drink so let’s take a devil may care attitude towards any negative behavoirs.
Yeah…then that way our mental insistutions and streets will be filled with fuck ups.
The thing is…there’s no healthy reasons for those substances to be legalized.
They cause harm to people and thus society in general.
You know…back when meth was legal in Japan a significent percentage of meth users were suffering meth related psyosis ( I have to look up the exact stat in Beautiful Boy)
It would be awesome if drugs and alkyhol didn’t have any negative side effects…but they DO.
Presumably this is supposed to be sarcasm, but it actually reads pretty good straight.
If the current situation is “awful”, and there a way to make it “bad, but a lot less bad”, then that’s a good thing. Not as good as “perfect with stars and ponies for everyone”, but still worth considering if better (and viable) options are not presenting themselves.
I don’t want any of the current drugs. I’ve never found the idea of drugs attractive, and every single person who has tried to tell me a drug does something for them has been a class a poser.
Like the song says, none of the current ones. Each one is more wrong than right.
*I want a new drug
One that wont make me sick
One that wont make me crash my car
Or make me feel three feet thick
I want a new drug
One that wont hurt my head
One that wont make my mouth too dry
Or make my eyes too red
One that wont make me nervous
Wondering what to do…*