US drug war has met none of its goals

Cypress said:
the "government" is an inanimate institution that is used as a tool for either good, or ill. Same with corporations. They're not nefarious and self-aware entities, which have manifestly evil intent in and of themselves.

Personally, I wouldn't be where I am today without government grants and student loans. Thank you U.S. taxpayer. And I certainly couldn't have afforded college, without having access to excellent, taxpayer supported public universities.

The way to keep corporate entities in check is with oversight and regulation. The way to keep government institutions from abusing power is with the choices and votes of an informed democratic electorate.

It's a simple as that. There's nothing inherently evil or corrupt about inanimate entities like governments or corporations.
Click to expand...

You just gotta wonder if some people get it.

People get loans and grants to help pay for an education and become contributing members of society (in addition to paying back those loans), but some will whine about the loans being a government handout.

I suppose the naysayers would rather the tax dollars be spent supporting dropouts who are unemployed and living on food stamps and public assistance.

IMO using taxpayer money to help people get educated and contribute is much, much better than using that money for wars, propping up corrupt dictators, or endless foreign aid.
 
Yurt said:
the united states has the highest percentage of citizens in prison than any other nation on earth

a TRILLION dollars and not a thing to show from it and what is fucking sad is that BOTH parties continue to support this failed "war" on drugs
Click to expand...

They also have the highest amount of cops and lawyers per ratio...That's how much crime goes on in America. Considering all the people in jail, there should be alot more if it weren't for lawyers and loopholes. And many of those people in jail shouldn't be there. Not to mention it is a known fact that jail DOES NOT rehabilitate people.

Speaking from experience in both the way the legal system and drug dealers operate? I've come to the conclusion of a few things. One? There are many crooked cops. Two? The Drug enforcement agency is a giant bureaucracy that's sole purpose is to keep the drugs and thus tax payers money, flowing in their pockets.

Who was that famous guy that quoted that cops are not here to stop crime, they are here to regulate it?

The same elties that are making all the so called "legal money", are also involved in making all the dirty money. That is how they get so rich.

The best way to launch a war on drugs is to actually go to the countries of origin and wipe out the crops. Considering the amount of cocaine that is making it into the US? The crops must be massive.

After all the billions the US gives Colombia a year, they have not been able to find and eradicate these crops? Its because they don't want to. That money is going to arming cartels. To ensure the drug trade flourishes.

It is clear that their production has been sky rocketing. Not going down.

If only we could get our hands on Noriega and interrogate him. I'm sure he can tell us of the CIA involvement in drug trafficking.

Though they would make him mysteriously disappear. Expect him to mysteriously die in the next little while. That is how they operate. Unless they have already killed him and this guy is a fake, thanks to plastic surgery. These elites have the resources to do whatever they want to cover their tracks.

I say if the Colombian military is not capable of eradicating the crops?It is time to get NATO involved. Go to that country and wipe out the crops. Cocaine is a bigger threat to the world than the Taliban.

Take away the crops? You take away their cash flow, their power, their weapons, and then there will be a significance blow to the drug dealers.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
in the history of our nation, have you ever seen a re-election fix something thats broken or allowed a failed program to succeed? No, you haven't. You haven't because, again, there is no incentive for the government to succeed. It doesn't profit when it succeeds.
Click to expand...

That's because they are in on it! Remember when george bush was threatening Colombia with war if they didn't stop the cocaine production?

Later on cocaine production sky rocketed. Did GW go to war with Colombia? Of course not. Later I found that what was happening was that people from other countries were bi-passing the elites and going straight to the source.

Basically the elites were warning Colombia not to do business with anyone other than them or they would wage war.
 
RStringfield said:
The only time the government succeeds is when it fights another government or there is a battle between different branches/departments of one government.
Click to expand...

Nope. When there is a lot of public pressure. If the people really pressured the Government to do something? They would have no choice but to act or risk being ejected from office.
 
christiefan915 said:
You just gotta wonder if some people get it.

People get loans and grants to help pay for an education and become contributing members of society (in addition to paying back those loans), but some will whine about the loans being a government handout.

I suppose the naysayers would rather the tax dollars be spent supporting dropouts who are unemployed and living on food stamps and public assistance.

IMO using taxpayer money to help people get educated and contribute is much, much better than using that money for wars, propping up corrupt dictators, or endless foreign aid.
Click to expand...

First of all? Education becomes more and more expensive so the elites can keep the good jobs open to their children. Two? yes the government programs are helpful but don't think that they do it for you. They skim alot of money from them and help out their "friends" with it.

As far as people complaining about tax payers funding education? If they graduate and get a good job, they will be paying back those loans and then some. Not to mention they will probably be in a higher tax bracket and will be giving back ten fold.
 
I personally think the War on Drugs has actually caused people to use newer drugs, like ecstasy and meth, because these are easier to make/conceal in your home or locally. They don't need to be smuggled in or transported, and if they are, can be hidden much easier than, say, marijuana bales. It is also responsible for the socially acceptable practice in our culture, of running to a doctor for a 'magic pill' to keep you happy, content... high! The drug companies are like... Oh yeah, we can mix you up some chemicals that will make you feel stoned as a rat, BETTER than pot! And by going to the doctor and asking him for it, you aren't doing anything wrong, no law is broken, you aren't a drug abuser, you aren't an addict, you're not involved in this War on Drugs! Look at you... attending your daughter's 'Just Say No' rally, high as a fucking kite!

See.... here is the problem with the War on Drugs... it's similar to what I have said about Liberal idealism, it doesn't take into account, the consequences... and there are ALWAYS consequences to something like this. The results can be catastrophic... Look back to Prohibition for examples. The error is, not addressing the fundamental problem, and attempting to apply an artificial 'fix' for the symptoms. It makes us feel like we are doing something, but in actuality, we are often causing more harm than good.

We need to be able to honestly discuss what makes individuals want to escape life, or enhance a euphoric feeling to function in life? Why do they seek this high? Solve that mystery, and you solve the drug problem.
 
Damocles said:
No, the implication is that we throw trillions at broken government programs rather than admit that they will never work. But heck, if it weren't for these laws we wouldn't have 1/3 of the population in prison! Yaaay us! And those judges wouldn't have had any fake charges to convict innocent children on!

What a shame that would be, eh?
Click to expand...
Because he's right. You're implying guilt by association. That because a particular program or, in this case, a policy doesn't work, none of government work.

Scratch a libertarian and you get an anarachist.
 
Yurt said:
the united states has the highest percentage of citizens in prison than any other nation on earth

a TRILLION dollars and not a thing to show from it and what is fucking sad is that BOTH parties continue to support this failed "war" on drugs
Click to expand...
It's not just government that is responsible here. This is a failure of understanding or at least of imagination of the American public of stupendous proportions. Let's keep in mind that whether we like it or not our politicians and the policies they promote are a reflection of our collective values. So we, as a people and a society, are more to blame then the government. These policies on drugs are a reflection of our own misguided values.

Unfortunately the views were expressing here on this topic are a minority views. Most Americans, particularly the older generation still believes drug offenders are criminals and that we should lock them up and throw away the key.

A politician can explain to them till the cows come home how their views are manifiestly wrong and inhumane and that their are superior methods to managing the problem of drugs other then through law enforcement.

The only thing that would result in is that politician losing re-election and that's regardless of their party affiliation. Politicians being what they are, are not going to cross that line.

The problem now is placing the cart before the horse. We need a paradigm shift in our public conscienceness away from the criminal law enforcement approach and towards the public health approach to managing drug abuse. The people must be educated that drug abusers are a public health problem and not a criminal one. Until we can convince our fellow citizens to adopt this view then no public policy shift towards the public health approach stands a snow ball chance in hell.

Education is the key!
 
Last edited:
RStringfield said:
The only time the government succeeds is when it fights another government or there is a battle between different branches/departments of one government.
Click to expand...
That's just so manifestly untrue. I can list all sorts of examples of government programs that have been extraordinarily succesfull that meet none of the criteria you ascribe too here.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
128660447633304831.jpg
Click to expand...
He's right! Governments and Corporations are tools of a civilized society. Just as a hammer is a tool nor is it inherently evil. It's the mother fucker weilding the hammer that wants to smack you upside the head that's evil. The same is true with Government and Corporations.
 
Yurt said:
actually, government loans and grants have caused the price of education to soar through the roof...schools know they can charge ridiculous amounts because students will just get loans
Click to expand...
That's a sepcious argument. Did you go to a public school or a private one?
 
christiefan915 said:
You just gotta wonder if some people get it.

People get loans and grants to help pay for an education and become contributing members of society (in addition to paying back those loans), but some will whine about the loans being a government handout.

I suppose the naysayers would rather the tax dollars be spent supporting dropouts who are unemployed and living on food stamps and public assistance.

IMO using taxpayer money to help people get educated and contribute is much, much better than using that money for wars, propping up corrupt dictators, or endless foreign aid.
Click to expand...
I read once in some study that the Return on Investment on Government Student loan is about 10 to 1 on direct returns and something like 100 to 1 in indirect returns based on the spin off economy it creates by producing so many more people with marketable skills. Wish I had a link.

If ever there was an example of Government programs that were a spectacular success the GI Bill and Federally Subsidized Student Loans would be great examples.

I believe in terms of todays money a person with a high school education and no advanced training or education can expect to make less then $1,000,000 is their life time.

A person with a BS degree in a liberal arts field can expect to make 2.5 to 3 times that in their life time and a person with a technical education can expect to make 3 to 5 times that much in their life time and even more if they have a professional level education.

Now if you were to assume a flat 25% tax rate for all (which obviously is not correct as taxation is progressive) a person with a high school education would pay around $250,000in tax revenues in their life time. A person with a nursing degree would pay around $750,000 in their life time. That's half a million dollars more in revenue and when one figures that in todays money a nursing degree at a State University would cost between $25,000 to $50,000....well that's nearly a 10 to 1 ROI. However the actual ROI is much greater when you consider the spin off affect of that person with the college education spending several million dollars more in their life time then the high school educated person then the ROI is, in reality substantially greater than 10 to 1.

This is what I call a good program!!!
 
wiseones2cents said:
First of all? Education becomes more and more expensive so the elites can keep the good jobs open to their children. Two? yes the government programs are helpful but don't think that they do it for you. They skim alot of money from them and help out their "friends" with it.

As far as people complaining about tax payers funding education? If they graduate and get a good job, they will be paying back those loans and then some. Not to mention they will probably be in a higher tax bracket and will be giving back ten fold.
Click to expand...
Well isn't that the point? Hell it's a win/win situation. The person receiving the education will produce more income in their life time and thus benefit from a higher quality of life and, as a result, the government will receive more tax revenues to utilize for public services.
 
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople said:
It's not just government that is responsible here. This is a failure of understanding or at least of imagination of the American public of stupendous proportions. Let's keep in mind that whether we like it or not our politicians and the policies they promote are a reflection of our collective values. So we, as a people and a society, are more to blame then the government. These policies on drugs are a reflection of our own misguided values.
Click to expand...

Uhh, so? The government gives "society" the means to force its values on others. You say...

Scratch a libertarian and you get an anarachist.

...untrue, but the libertarian view is that we should only criminalize those behaviors which violate the individual rights of another. "Society" should not be able to force it's values on others via government. This abuse of government is always bad.

BTW, it's not society that makes these choices, but whatever segment is able to gain power. Society can only express its choices through the free choices of individuals. The government is used to suppress those choices.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
That's just so manifestly untrue. I can list all sorts of examples of government programs that have been extraordinarily succesfull that meet none of the criteria you ascribe too here.
Click to expand...

Such as? Any success will pretend it could not have happened otherwise while ignoring how the government tends to crowd out other options.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top