drug king-pins are folks who operate according to the laws of economics as surely as you or I do
I doubt that I care to be compared to drug king-pins in any meaningful way, Bob. BY your reasoning, then drug lords are simply heads of corporations, like the thousands in America, trying to make a living. So was Capone.
"I doubt that I care to be compared to drug king-pins in any meaningful way, Bob."
Your objection is moral, perhaps? Since you don't specify, I can't tell, and you are clear I shouldn't go beyond your actual statements.
The fact that an enterprise is criminal doesn't mean that it doesn't operate by economic principles. If Capone lost money, he would have gone out of business, same as you. He sought to maximize profit and minimize risk, same as you. The fact that his enterprise was illegal didn't mean that it was free from the laws of Capitalism, Mike. Adam Smith didn't say that he was only formulating laws that legally sanctioned businesses would follow. Nor did Karl Marx. Nor did Samuelson; nor any of the current crop of Laissez-faire capitalists.
Capitalism is about the rules that seem to regulate the movement of capital and how it's used from the point of view of the entrepreneur. Marxism and socialism try to look at the same economic movements from the point of view of labor and how it affects the movements of money and skills. It's all economics. The issue of legality is a different set of priorities. When I.G.Farben was producing various manufacturing products in Germany during the thirties and forties, including many chemical products, their eye was primarily on the bottom line. They concerned themselves with the economics. The fact that they were using slave labor for their production was an economic issue to them, and it seemed a useful was to go though many would find it abhorrent in afterthought. Being a permitted thing to do, they did it and profited from doing so.
Pelikan, one of my favorite pen manufacturers, got the contract for the production of ink for the third reich, and made a good chunk of change from that contract. It was used to tattoo prisoners in many of the concentration camps, according to my friend Norman, who after many years — on finding out this piece of information — refused to use a pen I'd given him, a lovely Pelikan fountain pen.
Morality and Economics do not always eat from the same trough. Should they? I'd say yes, but then I'd have to stop buying oil, when I examine the way some oil companies treat indigenous peoples in both Africa and South America,. for example. The drug Lords are simply the heads of proto-corporations.
Labeling drug king-pins evil doesn't mean anything except that it makes the nature of the competition for the money more savage because the potential rewards are greater.
So it is unfair to them to label drug king-pins as evil?
You've also heard me speak about the heads of some other corporations as evil from time to time.
There is trafficking even in legal drugs, and it tends to be highly profitable too.
No doubt. How many dead bodies does this trafficking in legal drugs leave laying around, Bob? How many murders are committed in this legal drug trafficking? How many kidnappings?
Do you blame these murders on the drugs themselves or the laws that make dealing in these drugs so profitable?
I would say that it is the laws themselves that make the murders likely, and that one should fault the lawmakers for creating the conditions where the competition is so extreme that people are willing to kill for the profits for the deaths and the kidnappings.
Do you see a lot of murders and kidnappings among the farmers who raise the poppies where the raw materials are easily available for those who need them for relief of pain? You'd have to demonstrate to me a similar rate of murder there to suggest that the cause of the murders was the drug itself and not the unreasonability of the law.
Some nations have tried with some success to undermine a portion of these practices and keep the availability of at least some drugs low and affordable.
Which means what, exactly? If we were to legalize pot, heroin, cocaine, and all of the other drugs listed as illegal and make them affordable to all the illegal drug trafficking would die out? Well, you are probably right there. Is that how you want to life here to be?
Perhaps you know the way I should live my life better than I do, is that what you're suggesting? What if I know the way you should live your life better than the way you think you do? Is that Okay with you?
Give me a break.
Shall E-Bay have a HEROIN day? Should Krogers advertise “buy one, get one free” on bales of pot? Should “Things go better with Coke” take on a new meaning?
I admire the rhetoric, but don't see anybody proposing your suggestions but you.
Given the advertising culture, I don't see it as impossible. Perhaps you would limit people's freedom to do so? Seems like you are very much in favor of having people live the kind of life you prescribe at the expense of their own rights to determine their own notions of the sort of life they should lead. That should not be the American way, I suspect, everybody free to live their life the way Mike wants it to be; and I don't think that you'd really want that for everybody. I don't think you fought for that. I think you'd be insulted at the very suggestion, though I may be wrong.
Bob, I began by talking about the illegal drug-running, with all attached to it, like the cartels and the tens of thousands of murders and felonies attached to it and you turn it into a talk about aspirin, the high cost of legal drugs and the drug lords, responsible for thousands of deaths, being entrepreneurs of a capitalistic system out making a few bucks like we all do. MY question to you would be the same question on thousands of bumper stickers these days……WHAT PART OF ILLEGAL DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND??.
I don't understand the part about illegal where it turns out to be in somebody's economic interest that a specific thing be illegal. Like the part where it turned out that Marijuana is basically a benign drug with some basic medical uses that was put on the controlled drug list for bogus reasons almost a hundred years ago despite some decent research by Harvard researchers going back almost fifty years.
Yeah, I've seen it abused — by people who could abuse air and water, myself included on occasion, but its reputation as a gateway drug — and the whole concept of a gateway drug itself — is bogus. Almost everybody who ended up as a heroin abuser, for example, ate bread or drank milk, and everybody breathed. The concept would suggest that milk, bread and air were all gateway experiences for heroin addiction. Need I mention vitamin pills or sugar?
Clothes are an almost certain predictor of heroin use and a 100% predictor of cancer and heart disease. So is food.