• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the U.S. legalize drugs for Mexico's benefit?

Should the U.S. legalize drugs for Mexico's benefit?

  • Yes

    Votes: 15 28.3%
  • No

    Votes: 24 45.3%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 1 1.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 13 24.5%

  • Total voters
    53
No, it would make it a legal market. But still I am saying that just because it is legal does not mean that there won't be black market stuff on sale.
Remember that it costs to make and bring an kilo of cocaine roughly .12Cents. If the stores were selling it for .80 an ounce without the taxes, that still is a huge profit for that kilo trafficked into the US. What I am saying is that the market cannot be as tightly regulated as you believe it can be.
So if it is legal, the legal and regulated stuff might cost for an ounce of cocaine 4bucks(there are 35 ounces in a kilogram so 4 x 35= 140bucks and expenses equal .12 x 35= 4.2bucks. 140 - 4.2= 135.8bucks and half that for the 2bucks you get 67.9 bucks. That is a pretty big profit) but the cartels can still bring that stuff in and sell it for 2bucks with a big profit margin. Its not that expensive to produce and export cocaine or herion. And remember that there are plenty of public officials willing to take a bribe even here in the US.

That is a pretty bold assertion. As you have stated, it is relatively cheap to produce. Why is it you believe back water industries will be more efficient in production given US productivity per hour is at the top of the mountain? Your story and theory have far to many "what if's" to be considered an accurate representation.

The reality in California regarding cannabis already negates your theory.
 
Poppy seeds and placeebos get me high and (oh yeah) west virginia.:wink:
 
Do drugs of course. The day drugs are legalized, it will not instantaniously drop prices to the point where it is unprofitable for suppliers to embark on their journey for profits.

Regardless, you seem ignorant as to the labor/capital ratio for drug manufacturing. The narcotic manufacturers already exist: we refer to them as Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Johnson and Johnson, Glaxco-Smith, etc....

But from the perspectives you have been arguing from; i suspect you are have a financial stake in drugs being illegal. Are you a cop/dea/probation officer/warden/etc...???

No, You seem to be ignorant on the realistic side of illegal narcotics. I still haven't seen anyone post the answer to my original question: 'What are the addicts going to do during the transitional period of illegal to legal?' And no Goldenboy, "Do drugs of course" isn't gonna get it for a logical answer.

So lemme tell ya what will happen on day one of "legal drugs".

1) Prices on the remainder of narcotics still sitting in the US will skyrocket. coke, heroin, weed, ecstasy, meth, will be in an alarming demand. The street level dealers will be even more aggressive which will then lead to a rise in violent crimes, and turf wars.

2) When the street level dealers supply runs out (which wont take long), The coke addicts will be hit the hardest during this "narcotics transition". The coke addicts will then have to resort to crystal meth, and once the meth addiction takes hold amongst the former coke heads then you can pretty much write them off.(RIP) With the sudden demand in meth we will then see a rise in meth labs which will then add a 50% markup on meth itself. So the coke dealers are now in the meth game and we all know what meth labs do to communities around the nation.

3) Ecstasy "addicts" (which are few and far between) Will just have to do without their party favors for awhile. Or at least til Phizer starts pumping out Ecstacy for all the rave kids.:roll: Worst case they will resort to pharmaceuticals which will also put a rise in crime. (Anytime addicts and it's dealers are forced to shift to new drugs and new sellers there's always a spike in crime.)

4) Pot heads will now depend on the US growers for their supply which will inevitably raise the price on marijuana. Being that pot growers have always been harvesting a large portion of the countries marijuana this wont be to harsh of a transition. I'm still baffled that the Mexican cartels found a market for a drug that we can grow and grow much better. (Whether or not the law clamps down on "legal illegal" pot growers during this time is a good question)

5) Heroin addicts will experience the easiest of these transitions. Luckily for them they will have access to the methadone clinics which will fill the void in their fix. The fact that most heroin comes from Europe we will then see a major spike in east coast crime and competition for turf. Street level dealers in Baltimore and Philadelphia will be hit the hardest. Most of these dealers major income come from the heroin trade. Their minor income comes from cocaine. Once these two drugs are no longer available they will more that likely enter the meth trade. This transition will be particularly dicey because of the outlaw biker gangs notorious grip on east coast meth. No these dealers aren't going to look at other business ventures. Selling drugs is what they do and will always do.

So with all this there will be a major shift and skyrocket of crime from the Atlantic to the Pacific.


Btw: I'm a Metro Corrections Officer/ 3rd shift. Why would i have a financial stake in illegal drugs?
 
No, You seem to be ignorant on the realistic side of illegal narcotics. I still haven't seen anyone post the answer to my original question: 'What are the addicts going to do during the transitional period of illegal to legal?' And no Goldenboy, "Do drugs of course" isn't gonna get it for a logical answer.

I think you have hit on the final solution to drug addiction. Just make the transition from illegal to legal drugs, but do it in a way that takes a few months to accomplish. Since, as you affirm, drugs will be unavailable in the interim, the addicts will have to do without for that time. During a few months of unavailability, addicts will be forced to kick the habit. Perfect solution to the epidemic of drug abuse.

Does anyone see even a tiny little problem with that idea?
 
I think you have hit on the final solution to drug addiction. Just make the transition from illegal to legal drugs, but do it in a way that takes a few months to accomplish. Since, as you affirm, drugs will be unavailable in the interim, the addicts will have to do without for that time. During a few months of unavailability, addicts will be forced to kick the habit. Perfect solution to the epidemic of drug abuse.

Does anyone see even a tiny little problem with that idea?

The problem I see ain't tiny. How did the supply dry up overnight? This guy doesn't know his ____ from his right hand holding it.
 
During a few months of unavailability, addicts will be forced to kick the habit. Perfect solution to the epidemic of drug abuse.

They'll find other narcotics to feed their addiction but as soon as they find their drug of choice they'll be back in it. Addictions takes years, sometimes a lifetime to kick.
 
The problem I see ain't tiny. How did the supply dry up overnight? This guy doesn't know his ____ from his right hand holding it.

HOW did it dry up over night!!??? It's called an urgency in supply and demand! And just how much narcotics do you think dealers have "stashed" away for a rainy day?! Wake up dude!:thumbs:
 
No, You seem to be ignorant on the realistic side of illegal narcotics. I still haven't seen anyone post the answer to my original question: 'What are the addicts going to do during the transitional period of illegal to legal?' And no Goldenboy, "Do drugs of course" isn't gonna get it for a logical answer.

Here is a more realistic way this would work:

drugs become legal, part 1:

Coca: purchase of raw materials/manufacturing starts, legit companies, corporations buy raw coca leaves directly from farmers unions in Bolivia, and Peru (and pay more than the pittance the farmers currenty receive), Mexican cartel cannot interfere here since they are not in these countries, nor will they know which cargo containers going through Mexico (if in fact they even go through Mexico, and not via boat)) are loaded with coca leaves, or processed cocaine. No Mexican Cartel boogeyman able to interfere anywhere yet,

-Mexicans still smuggle in and sell their processed cocaine since there is no US supply yet- addicts still have their fix.

Opium: Drug companies use existing legitimate supplies of opium from India and elsewhere,and expand into other regions (you do know there is already supplies of opium completely independent of the black market already right? - all the stuff our morphine, and oxycodone, ect.), and begin purchasing from other locations, including Afghanistan. again, no Mexican Cartel boogeyman here. there is a Taliban presence in Afghanistan, but who knows what the future will hold there, too bad this is not already in place, what better way to starve them of revenue and influence over the Afghan people, especially since we have our Army there to deal with them.

regardless.. Opium, again no mexican Cartels where our supply would come from, and since there is no way legal way to get the drugs yet, the black market supply is still there for the addict.

drugs become legal part 2: The legitimate companies process and manufacture the raw materials into drugs, no cartels needed nor welcome here. They then transport the manufactured drugs to prepare for distribution, again even if for some reason this involved shipping through Mexico, the Mexican cartels have no way of knowing which cargo containers have drugs, so again no Mexican boogeyman here.

Of course the addicts still cannot get their fix from a legal source yet, and naturally those in the drug trade will still peddle their goods so long as the opportunity is there, so they still have supply to their fix.

phase 3: distribution of legal supply begins, and now the addicts have a choice, buy drugs of a known purity legal from a legit source, or continue to buy from the black market source. (taking this a step further, an addict should have an option for a free fix at a clinic where there are trained counselors that would see them regularly).

there will be no disruption in the supply, the black market will be there until it is starved out by competition. Also there is no conceivable way for the Mexican cartels to influence the legal trade, they are not where the raw materials are grown, and they won't be involved in purchasing/manufacture, transport, or distribution either.
 
Last edited:
Here is a more realistic way this would work:

drugs become legal, part 1:

Coca: purchase of raw materials/manufacturing starts, legit companies, corporations buy raw coca leaves directly from farmers unions in Bolivia, and Peru (and pay more than the pittance the farmers currenty receive), Mexican cartel cannot interfere here since they are not in these countries, nor will they know which cargo containers going through Mexico (if in fact they even go through Mexico, and not via boat)) are loaded with coca leaves, or processed cocaine. No Mexican Cartel boogeyman able to interfere anywhere yet,

-Mexicans still smuggle in and sell their processed cocaine since there is no US supply yet- addicts still have their fix.

Opium: Drug companies use existing legitimate supplies of opium from India and elsewhere,and expand into other regions (you do know there is already supplies of opium completely independent of the black market already right? - all the stuff our morphine, and oxycodone, ect.), and begin purchasing from other locations, including Afghanistan. again, no Mexican Cartel boogeyman here. there is a Taliban presence in Afghanistan, but who knows what the future will hold there, too bad this is not already in place, what better way to starve them of revenue and influence over the Afghan people, especially since we have our Army there to deal with them.

regardless.. Opium, again no mexican Cartels where our supply would come from, and since there is no way legal way to get the drugs yet, the black market supply is still there for the addict.

drugs become legal part 2: The legitimate companies process and manufacture the raw materials into drugs, no cartels needed nor welcome here. They then transport the manufactured drugs to prepare for distribution, again even if[/] for some reason this involved shipping through Mexico, the Mexican cartels have no way of knowing which cargo containers have drugs, so again no Mexican boogeyman here.

Of course the addicts still cannot get their fix from a legal source yet, and naturally those in the drug trade will still peddle their goods so long as the opportunity is there, so they still have supply to their fix.

phase 3: distribution of legal supply begins, and now the addicts have a choice, buy drugs of a known purity legal from a legit source, or continue to buy from the black market source. (taking this a step further, an addict should have an option for a free fix at a clinic where there are trained counselors that would see them regularly).

there will be no disruption in the supply, the black market will be there until it is starved out by competition. Also there is no conceivable way for the Mexican cartels to influence the legal trade, they are not where the raw materials are grown, and they won't be involved in purchasing/manufacture, transport, or distribution either.


Everything fits on the blueprints...

Like i mentioned earlier in this thread: The tentacles of the cartels runs far and wide....And sometimes it's hard to distinguish from the good guys and the bad.
 
If it weren't so profitable then why do stores buy counterfeit goods instead of the real thing? There will always be a cartel and it will have members. IF drugs are legalized who is to say that the stores that sell drugs won't be selling stuff made by the cartels instead of the government made drugs? I cannot see Pfizer or Merck all of sudden taking a large interest in the selling and distribution of cocaine, herion, crystal meth, etc. So really just because you make it legal does not mean that the cartels are not going to be the ones still controlling the market.
Alcohol Prohibition was a totally different thing to the illegal drug trade that gives the cartels their money.

Do stores buy counterfeit alcohol? Of course not, because the business is regulated and monitored along every step of the way, and some random guy running a liquor or convenience store is not going to run the risk of losing his business for something so foolish.
 
Everything fits on the blueprints...

Like i mentioned earlier in this thread: The tentacles of the cartels runs far and wide....And sometimes it's hard to distinguish from the good guys and the bad.

alright Mr. doomsday. Your boogeyman is going to be locked in the closet, if any tentacles peek under the door they are much easier to lop off at that point.
 
alright Mr. doomsday. Your boogeyman is going to be locked in the closet, if any tentacles peek under the door they are much easier to lop off at that point.

:) I always think the worse when it comes to the heavy narcotics business.
 
The problem I see ain't tiny. How did the supply dry up overnight? This guy doesn't know his ____ from his right hand holding it.

Oh, you have found the problem, whether it, or the item being held in the hand,:mrgreen: is tiny or not is up for dispute.

But, the bottom line is, there is no way that the supply of drugs is going to dry up, even temporarily.

We can't even keep them out of prisons.
 
HOW did it dry up over night!!??? It's called an urgency in supply and demand! And just how much narcotics do you think dealers have "stashed" away for a rainy day?! Wake up dude!:thumbs:

What caused the supply to dry up again? I thought you have been telling us that the illegal supply will continue to dominate the market. Which is it? Is your ass talking?
 
Oh, you have found the problem, whether it, or the item being held in the hand,:mrgreen: is tiny or not is up for dispute.

But, the bottom line is, there is no way that the supply of drugs is going to dry up, even temporarily.

We can't even keep them out of prisons.

There is NO way the supply is going to dry up. They will continue to supply, and drop the prices, but it will come a day that the addicts go to the legal distribution point and not buy overpriced drugs off the street. This guy has no idea what he is talking about.
 
:) I always think the worse when it comes to the heavy narcotics business.

And this has led to you presenting completely irrational scenarios in this thread.

I always think about harm reduction, and how folly it is to relinquish control of something as destructive and dangerous as heavy narcotics to an anarchist black market environment, especially when the damage this has done is so plain to see.. The worse case scenario is what we have now.
 
Last edited:
What caused the supply to dry up again? I thought you have been telling us that the illegal supply will continue to dominate the market. Which is it? Is your ass talking?

1) I've been telling you that the cartels will still be competing over the corridors with the same narcotics.(after the narcs are legal).

2) If the US decides to make narcotics legal then the remainder in the country will soon dry up. Or is the US government gonna start pumping out all these drugs for the addicts so we don't have to purchase from the cartel anymore? So which is it? Sounds like the US government and the cartels are going to have a dual partnership in drug distribution, huh? But nooooo those cartels will disappear once the US government makes narcotics legal. :thumbs:Dumb ass!
 
And this has led to you presenting completely irrational scenarios in this thread.

I always think about harm reduction, and how folly it is to relinquish control of something as destructive and dangerous as heavy narcotics to an anarchist black market environment, especially when the damage this has done is so plain to see.. The worse case scenario is what we have now.

Well those graphs and charts really added some insight to the OP. Thanks! *yawn*
 
1) I've been telling you that the cartels will still be competing over the corridors with the same narcotics.(after the narcs are legal).

2) If the US decides to make narcotics legal then the remainder in the country will soon dry up. Or is the US government gonna start pumping out all these drugs for the addicts so we don't have to purchase from the cartel anymore? So which is it? Sounds like the US government and the cartels are going to have a dual partnership in drug distribution, huh? But nooooo those cartels will disappear once the US government makes narcotics legal. :thumbs:Dumb ass!

You don't think private enterprise is going to jump at the chance to produce narcotics? You don't have a clue.
 
Yes, for the benift of the US and Mexico.
 
You don't think private enterprise is going to jump at the chance to produce narcotics? You don't have a clue.

Of course they're gonna jump at the chance. Are these PE's going to have these drugs manufactured and ready to go before the legal narc law goes in place. Or are they going to pass the law first and then worry about manufacturing? Are they going to leave the addicts hanging????


There's no chance in hell this would ever become legal if the government couldn't tax it. That's why marijuana is taking so long in legalization is because they cant figure out a way to tax it.(which i support legal marijuana)

So the government cant even figure out how to legalize a weed that grows out of the damn ground!?
 
No, You seem to be ignorant on the realistic side of illegal narcotics. I still haven't seen anyone post the answer to my original question: 'What are the addicts going to do during the transitional period of illegal to legal?' And no Goldenboy, "Do drugs of course" isn't gonna get it for a logical answer.

I have explained it ad nauseam. If you are unaware of how the underground economy behaves in regards to illicit drugs, then by all means go back and read my previous posts in this thread, and get back to me with any comments.

1) Prices on the remainder of narcotics still sitting in the US will skyrocket. coke, heroin, weed, ecstasy, meth, will be in an alarming demand. The street level dealers will be even more aggressive which will then lead to a rise in violent crimes, and turf wars.

Bull****! We are going to assume (and for a very good reason), that the demand for drugs will not increase in a substantial enough manner to influence price. Why? Because i do not buy cocaine, and it being legal will not increase my desire to do so. The deterrence from cocaine (even to the rational addict ;) ) is the negative physical effects from -should we say- overindulgence.... Unless of course you can come up with a compelling argument that demand will shift greatly in the presence of legalization; if not..... That eliminates demand.

Supply on the other hand.... Well you already implied an inventory concept; so we have extremely short term supply covered. Now.... in order for the price to actually increase we would need a supply determinant both in the form of distributed knowledge (knowing that your producer has for some reason decided not to produce) and less and less producers forgoing assured profits (because the drug addicts still want to do drugs :lol: ) by shutting down production.

So do tell how and why the drug supply suddenly stops from South America, through Mexico, and into the US. You see; i am ever so curious because i learned long ago that prohibition was a supply determinant (negative). Lifting this determinant has a positive shift for supply. Even in markets where goods are inelastic (changes in price do not have an "equal effect" on quantity demanded), shifting supply does in fact lower price (eventually).

So with your bogus statement debunked, we shall refer to any future instances to my statement above. Unless of course you have an adequate rebuttal.

2) When the street level dealers supply runs out (which wont take long), The coke addicts will be hit the hardest during this "narcotics transition". The coke addicts will then have to resort to crystal meth, and once the meth addiction takes hold amongst the former coke heads then you can pretty much write them off.(RIP) With the sudden demand in meth we will then see a rise in meth labs which will then add a 50% markup on meth itself. So the coke dealers are now in the meth game and we all know what meth labs do to communities around the nation.

You have yet to explain how supply is suddenly "choked off" by legalization.

3) Ecstasy "addicts" (which are few and far between) Will just have to do without their party favors for awhile. Or at least til Phizer starts pumping out Ecstacy for all the rave kids.:roll: Worst case they will resort to pharmaceuticals which will also put a rise in crime. (Anytime addicts and it's dealers are forced to shift to new drugs and new sellers there's always a spike in crime.)

See above.

4) Pot heads will now depend on the US growers for their supply which will inevitably raise the price on marijuana. Being that pot growers have always been harvesting a large portion of the countries marijuana this wont be to harsh of a transition. I'm still baffled that the Mexican cartels found a market for a drug that we can grow and grow much better. (Whether or not the law clamps down on "legal illegal" pot growers during this time is a good question)

As in all cases, supply will shift.

5) Heroin addicts will experience the easiest of these transitions. Luckily for them they will have access to the methadone clinics which will fill the void in their fix. The fact that most heroin comes from Europe we will then see a major spike in east coast crime and competition for turf. Street level dealers in Baltimore and Philadelphia will be hit the hardest. Most of these dealers major income come from the heroin trade. Their minor income comes from cocaine. Once these two drugs are no longer available they will more that likely enter the meth trade. This transition will be particularly dicey because of the outlaw biker gangs notorious grip on east coast meth. No these dealers aren't going to look at other business ventures. Selling drugs is what they do and will always do.

It is still based on the assumption of bogus supply.

So with all this there will be a major shift and skyrocket of crime from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

Based on your debunked theory.

Btw: I'm a Metro Corrections Officer/ 3rd shift. Why would i have a financial stake in illegal drugs?

What are the percentage of people imprisoned in the US due to drug related criminality?
 
I have explained it ad nauseam. If you are unaware of how the underground economy behaves in regards to illicit drugs, then by all means go back and read my previous posts in this thread, and get back to me with any comments.



Bull****! We are going to assume (and for a very good reason), that the demand for drugs will not increase in a substantial enough manner to influence price. Why? Because i do not buy cocaine, and it being legal will not increase my desire to do so. The deterrence from cocaine (even to the rational addict ;) ) is the negative physical effects from -should we say- overindulgence.... Unless of course you can come up with a compelling argument that demand will shift greatly in the presence of legalization; if not..... That eliminates demand.

Supply on the other hand.... Well you already implied an inventory concept; so we have extremely short term supply covered. Now.... in order for the price to actually increase we would need a supply determinant both in the form of distributed knowledge (knowing that your producer has for some reason decided not to produce) and less and less producers forgoing assured profits (because the drug addicts still want to do drugs :lol: ) by shutting down production.

So do tell how and why the drug supply suddenly stops from South America, through Mexico, and into the US. You see; i am ever so curious because i learned long ago that prohibition was a supply determinant (negative). Lifting this determinant has a positive shift for supply. Even in markets where goods are inelastic (changes in price do not have an "equal effect" on quantity demanded), shifting supply does in fact lower price (eventually).

So with your bogus statement debunked, we shall refer to any future instances to my statement above. Unless of course you have an adequate rebuttal.



You have yet to explain how supply is suddenly "choked off" by legalization.



See above.



As in all cases, supply will shift.



It is still based on the assumption of bogus supply.



Based on your debunked theory.



What are the percentage of people imprisoned in the US due to drug related criminality?


Your theories to the decriminalization of narcs is astounding!! Sounds like you've never been caught up in the drug game.(which is a good thing)

Bout a quarter of the inmates (little over half million) are serving for DRO. Why?
 
Back
Top Bottom