Well I was listening to a speech last night on The Federal War on Drugs in the class. The speaker actually presented a very good point, and he knew what he was talking about unlike most people on the subject.
He advocated ending The Federal War on Drugs, but he raised a really good point. If Marijuana were legal for recreational use and then made a taxable income, it would be financially beneficial. However, once The Government raises the tax on Marijuana we will again be in a War on Drugs, because users will retreat to The Black Market once more to get it for cheaper. I'm not sure how to refute this. Here in Connecticut there was a tax on tobacco and cigarettes and it went to hell.
The state of Rhode Island is talking of its legalization for both Recreational and Medical use. The thing is, unless its legalized on a Federal scale people from this state will travel over to RI causing massive drug trafficking between the states where its legal and where its not.
Additionally, what is a non-statist way to control recreational drug use? I mean if we legalized all the drugs(Heroine, Crack, Cocaine, ect).
Democracy for Breakfast: However, once The Government raises the tax on Marijuana we will again be in a War on Drugs, because users will retreat to The Black Market once more to get it for cheaper.
How is this different to buying produce at a farmer's market as opposed to purchasing them in the store? A market may be cheaper (slightly) but is less convenient, not as clean, occasionally dubious quality. How high does he think the taxes will be raised, enough to make people seek out 'black market' dealers?
And I don't think it follows that "Product A is cheaper on black market" therefore "War on Product A".
teuch:How is this different to buying produce at a farmer's market as opposed to purchasing them in the store? A market may be cheaper (slightly) but is less convenient, not as clean, occasionally dubious quality. How high does he think the taxes will be raised, enough to make people seek out 'black market' dealers?
High enough to meet inflation, so that we would profit from the income of the taxation.
It doesn't matter which market is better, the black market is dangerous. Unless the Fed abolishes the DEA, which they won't, we will be in the war on drugs again.
Democracy for Breakfast: He advocated ending The Federal War on Drugs, but he raised a really good point. If Marijuana were legal for recreational use and then made a taxable income, it would be financially beneficial. However, once The Government raises the tax on Marijuana we will again be in a War on Drugs, because users will retreat to The Black Market once more to get it for cheaper. I'm not sure how to refute this. Here in Connecticut there was a tax on tobacco and cigarettes and it went to hell.
I'm not seeing what needs to be refuted. Legalizing it and taxing it causes problems - an easy solution is to legalize and not to tax it.
Democracy for Breakfast:Additionally, what is a non-statist way to control recreational drug use? I mean if we legalized all the drugs(Heroine, Crack, Cocaine, ect).
I used to be interested in this question. However, as time as gone by, I've become more and more convinced of the thick libertarian mindset, to wit, that social coercion is also a bad thing, just not quite as bad as physical coercion. I believe it is a positive good that people live their lives as they see fit, and I don't think sacrificing any, or any minor pleasure, to social welfare is acceptable.