Tunnel found under the US/Mexico border

[pocketfullofshells]

Well this thread is not really about legal immigration, but I will say I can agree we can make it easier for people to come here legally, but that does not mean everyone who wants to come right now can come.



The better question is did the mob dissolve after alcohol prohibition ended? I think we can all agree that they did not.



Competition with who? Drug cartels could arguably easily undercut the prices of the legitimate competitors, and continue to make money selling drugs. Additionally, they do not have to run legitimate businesses persay, they can run front businesses and sell the drugs illegally (free of government red tape, taxes, licenses etc, which presumably means cheaper).

if getting pot her when Illegal, is still much cheaper then dealing with "red" tape, then does not not suggest how bad we have lost? after all would not being Illegal and having to smuggle it in..be the ultimate in red tape?

 

[Apathy]

could have been Beck you know never assume its Rush, when sometimes beck told them first ( though Tweedledee will always soon Follow Tweedledum and vice versa

That is why I asked I wasnt quite sure.

 

[PLC1]

How exactly does decriminalization reduce demand, other than in name only? If that is the case, why not decriminalize murder... since that would "reduce demand".

Did the legalization of alcohol reduce demand for alcohol?

It certainly reduced the demand for illegal alcohol.

No they won't. If they are taken out of the drug business at all, which I view as unlikely, they will just move to the next "easy profit." Did the mob vanish when alcohol made legal?

The drug cartels will have to find another way to make money? Sure, they might do that, but we can at least eliminate their main source of income. Legalization of alcohol dealt a big blow to the mob.

So if a druggie wants to go get his fix and is turned away, where will he turn? He is going to want to get his drugs. Maybe people want to continue to enjoy drugs "off the radar" of the government. I bet they would pay a premium to do so.

Why should they care whether or not they are "off the radar of the government?" No, they will get their fix the easiest way they can.

In fact there are people in the US who go buy their prescriptions from Mexico, but that is not the main point.

yes, a few do so as a last resort when they can't afford necessary medications, but that's another issue.

You just told me that the neighborhood pharmacy would only be selling pot, which is not the main money maker for cartels. I imagine people who are addicts or want to get high off the radar would happily find an alternative method than going to a medical clinic.

Why wold they do that? It makes no sense.

The real outcome for legalization would result in two markets. The government controlled market, and the black market... the government would still spend billions of dollars trying to eliminate the black market, and all we will have accomplished is now making me pay for the recreational drug habits of those who are tied to the welfare state.

That is not what happened when alcohol was legalized. How many go to a moonshiner for booze?

 

[GenSeneca]

How exactly does decriminalization reduce demand, other than in name only? If that is the case, why not decriminalize murder... since that would "reduce demand".

We need an "applause" smilie...

Did the legalization of alcohol reduce demand for alcohol?

Since PLC evaded answering your question I'll answer it... No, legalization of alcohol did not reduce demand, demand skyrocketed.

Did the mob vanish when alcohol made legal?

You and I both know the people claiming that legalization would deal a blow to cartels are not actually offering solutions to the cartel problem, only kicking the the can down the road. As you astutely point out, eliminating one source will only result in them finding another. Since they are even making money off counterfeiting legal products, the solution to the cartel problem clearly doesn't lie in legalization of their products.

I imagine people who are addicts or want to get high off the radar would happily find an alternative method than going to a medical clinic.

Like continuing to grow their own?

The real outcome for legalization would result in two markets. The government controlled market, and the black market... the government would still spend billions of dollars trying to eliminate the black market, and all we will have accomplished is now making me pay for the recreational drug habits of those who are tied to the welfare state.

 

[Gipper]

We need an "applause" smilie...

Since PLC evaded answering your question I'll answer it... No, legalization of alcohol did not reduce demand, demand skyrocketed.


You and I both know the people claiming that legalization would deal a blow to cartels are not actually offering solutions to the cartel problem, only kicking the the can down the road. As you astutely point out, eliminating one source will only result in them finding another. Since they are even making money off counterfeiting legal products, the solution to the cartel problem clearly doesn't lie in legalization of their products.


Like continuing to grow their own?

Great job Big Rob and GenSeneca.

Man did you guys kick ass.

I just love it !!!

 

[Apathy]

Great job Big Rob and GenSeneca.

Man did you guys kick ass.

I just love it !!!

Logic doesnt need a cheerleader.

 

[Gipper]

Logic doesnt need a cheerleader.

True, but logic needs to commended whenever it presents itself.

Particularly, in this Age of Ignorance (aka liberalism)

 

[Apathy]

True, but logic needs to commended whenever it presents itself.

Particularly, in this Age of Ignorance (aka liberalism)

Define liberalism.

 

[Gipper]

Define liberalism.

Oh Lord, you are not kidding.

I have posted here for months. Take a look at a few of my threads and you will understand...well maybe you will understand.

 

[Apathy]

This should be an easy task you throw the term around a lot so you must know what it is.

 

[Gipper]

This should be an easy task you throw the term around a lot so you must know what it is.

If you do not know what liberalism is, there is nothing I can do to help you.

 

[Apathy]

If you do not know what liberalism is, there is nothing I can do to help you.

You are avoiding the question. Just answer it, it is not a trick question. How do you define it?

 

[Gipper]

You are avoiding the question. Just answer it, it is not a trick question. How do you define it?

Okay. Heres a quicky, but you read my posts with an "open mind" and you will understand.

Liberalism - take from the productive and give to the unproductive.

 

[Apathy]

Okay. Heres a quicky, but you read my posts with an "open mind" and you will understand.

Liberalism - take from the productive and give to the unproductive.

Seems like an incomplete definition to me what you are describing is socialism/communism or something of the sort. Certainly liberalism extends beyond that. Are they social authoritarians?

Would you agree with this definition of conservatives?

Conservative- The ideal of limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets

 

[PLC1]

True, but logic needs to commended whenever it presents itself.

And yet, when I present it, you don't seem to recognize it.