Post by BlackFox on Aug 29, 2012 9:45:40 GMT -5
Justin probably won't think so, but I believe this is a well written article in defense of the WOD. I believe it becomes quite flimsy when it comes to marijuana though. It relies more on "It won't solve as many problems as people think", and doesn't take into account at all the lives that are ruined by simply being arrested, regardless of whether jailtime is involved( job losses, stigmatization).
The main reason for posting it is because it argues in my favor two points of contention I've had with Limited Recourse and JC, and hell, there ain't much else going on in here.
www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-drug-policy-roulette
For LR:
Fifty years ago, scare-mongering propaganda claimed that marijuana intoxication made people violent, but such claims have long since been discredited.
For JC (StrickJ): you need to read it all though
What makes illegal drugs so expensive is precisely the fact that their production is prohibited, and that this prohibition is often strictly enforced. One factor is what economists call "compensating wage differentials," or compensation for taking risks. Suppliers of illegal drugs court real dangers, including arrest, imprisonment, physical injury, even death. Thus, in addition to seeking wages that compensate for their time and allow for normal profits, people employed in drug distribution also seek compensation for assuming these risks — much as coal miners and deep-sea divers typically earn higher wages than people performing similar jobs under less hazardous circumstances.
As for marijuana, the 2010 RAND Corporation study Altered State? — which examined California's Proposition 19, an initiative to legalize recreational marijuana use and cultivation — included the authors' calculations of marijuana's likely legal price. Even with ongoing federal prohibition of outright farming, the study estimated that grow-house based production, distribution, and retailing that avoided federal law enforcement's traditional targeting levels could profitably produce at a price of $38 per ounce of sinsemilla (high-potency) marijuana — a decline of more than 80% from today's prices, which range from $300 to $450 per ounce.
Moreover, were nationwide legalization to allow for the large-scale farming (instead of mere gardening) of marijuana, yields would be on the order of 500 to 2,000 pounds per acre, suggesting production costs ranging from a few dollars to a few tens of dollars per pound (not per ounce). And it would take fewer than 10,000 acres — or 0.0025% of the 400 million acres of cropland in the United States — to supply the entire current U.S. market for marijuana. It is difficult to imagine such mass cultivation exerting anything but dramatic downward pressure on marijuana prices. And it is impossible to imagine that such steep price declines for marijuana — as well as for cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines — would not significantly increase the rates of drug use.
The main reason for posting it is because it argues in my favor two points of contention I've had with Limited Recourse and JC, and hell, there ain't much else going on in here.
www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-drug-policy-roulette
For LR:
Fifty years ago, scare-mongering propaganda claimed that marijuana intoxication made people violent, but such claims have long since been discredited.
For JC (StrickJ): you need to read it all though
What makes illegal drugs so expensive is precisely the fact that their production is prohibited, and that this prohibition is often strictly enforced. One factor is what economists call "compensating wage differentials," or compensation for taking risks. Suppliers of illegal drugs court real dangers, including arrest, imprisonment, physical injury, even death. Thus, in addition to seeking wages that compensate for their time and allow for normal profits, people employed in drug distribution also seek compensation for assuming these risks — much as coal miners and deep-sea divers typically earn higher wages than people performing similar jobs under less hazardous circumstances.
As for marijuana, the 2010 RAND Corporation study Altered State? — which examined California's Proposition 19, an initiative to legalize recreational marijuana use and cultivation — included the authors' calculations of marijuana's likely legal price. Even with ongoing federal prohibition of outright farming, the study estimated that grow-house based production, distribution, and retailing that avoided federal law enforcement's traditional targeting levels could profitably produce at a price of $38 per ounce of sinsemilla (high-potency) marijuana — a decline of more than 80% from today's prices, which range from $300 to $450 per ounce.
Moreover, were nationwide legalization to allow for the large-scale farming (instead of mere gardening) of marijuana, yields would be on the order of 500 to 2,000 pounds per acre, suggesting production costs ranging from a few dollars to a few tens of dollars per pound (not per ounce). And it would take fewer than 10,000 acres — or 0.0025% of the 400 million acres of cropland in the United States — to supply the entire current U.S. market for marijuana. It is difficult to imagine such mass cultivation exerting anything but dramatic downward pressure on marijuana prices. And it is impossible to imagine that such steep price declines for marijuana — as well as for cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines — would not significantly increase the rates of drug use.
tq8oBMsj(qiGRg~~_3.JPG)