Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Sold under strictly licensed terms, hard drugs taxed to fund public awareness and treatment programs, no public resources (airwaves, etc.) allows to be used for advertising, any advertising that cannot be disallowed taxed at 100% of advertising spend for the same fund, no sales to minors, etc.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sun Jan 6th, 2008 at 07:31:52 PM EST
Thats why I've been stress testing the progressive decriminalisation argument.  Hard Drugs could be hugely more profitable than Alcohol or cigarettes for both private industry and the state (in terms of tax revenue) because producing heroin or cocaine is a lot cheaper than champagne.  

The billions that are now spent on illicit drugs, law enforcement, and the costs of crime could well fund any increased health care costs that might arise and still create a huge net surplus.  If it keeps the dudes happy, why knock it?  It will be the true opium of the people and distract people from serious political issues. If I was a Machiavellian member of the political elite I would be promoting it as a win win situation.

Sometimes you have to be careful of what you wish for.  

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Jan 6th, 2008 at 08:04:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... drugs as "hard" and "soft" is a category mistake. The critical trait for that question is the classification of drugs as physically addicting.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to make a pot of coffee.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sun Jan 6th, 2008 at 08:30:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
BruceMcF:
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to make a pot of coffee.

Adict... ;-)

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Sun Jan 6th, 2008 at 08:40:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But it was Fair Trade coffee!


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sun Jan 6th, 2008 at 08:44:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
So cocaine addicts would be ok if their drug of choice was fair trade?

or if it came from the apropriate Leftist freedom fighters?

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Sun Jan 6th, 2008 at 08:48:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... in that way, you extinguish any humour it may have contained.

So excuse me for a moment while I grieve its passing. sigh

OK, that's over. Now, if we must get all dKos-ish, once we have done the main classification, of physically addictive substances, then it becomes necessary to assess (1) the harm done if someone is addicted and (2) the difficulty of breaking the physical addiction.

I have been short enough of cash at various times over the past five years to know quite well what is involved in kicking coffee ... and further, to know that I will, indeed, kick coffee rather than spend money required for necessities in order to buy more coffee.

I have also kicked the tobacco habit ... twice ... and that was a wrenching experience, to overcome a physical addiction with long-established and well-know possibilities of truly horrific consequences.

So I have no trouble with Folgers being allowed to be a caffeine addiction pusher for fun and profit. But the greater the harm, third party harm, and difficulty in kicking the habit, the greater the justification for strict regulation.

And, especially, I do not want to see tax revenues from any addictive substance like tobacco or heroin being used for purposes other than public education campaigns regarding the perils of their use and public health services for those who wish to escape addiction.

On whether it should be illegal if it was in fact possible to thereby prevent its use, that's a counter-factual that I am not terribly interested in. Making it illegal does not prevent its use, but does substantially interfere with efforts to help people cope with and, in the best case, free themselves of the addiction.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sun Jan 6th, 2008 at 09:13:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I am not at all sure there is any profit in cancerettes - even with the high taxes. Canada has found out that if you try to tax them too much you form a black market.

If we are going to turn drugs into a government cash cow we had better have some idea how much drugs are going to increase our medical costs.

Live fast. Die young and leave a beautiful corpse.

aspiring to genteel poverty

by edwin (eeeeeeee222222rrrrreeeeeaaaaadddddd@@@@yyyyaaaaaaa) on Sun Jan 6th, 2008 at 08:49:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I only know the numbers for Germany: the estimated cost of smoking to the health care system is about 50% higher than tobacco tax revenue. But what the state is saving on pensions because smokers die sooner is almost double the tax revenue again.

"If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles." Sun Tzu
by Turambar (sersguenda at hotmail com) on Mon Jan 7th, 2008 at 09:33:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series