drug legalization, in full/100%, results in a net financial, and social for that matter, benefit to society
******************************
But does it benefit the capitalist ruling class?
A business generating trillions.
We live under the dictatorship of the rate of profit.
Health, etc does not take precedence.
I never said health took precedence over profit. Not saying it *shouldn't*, however, I never said it did.
"Dictatorship of the rate of profit"?? WTF does that even mean? Feel free to elaborate as much as you need, I spent many years studying econ at uni, so go as far as you need. Please do the same for "capitalist ruling class". Oh, and if it's some ramble about wealthy people in general, don't bother, most everyone here is familiar with the obvious financial-gaps in US society.
I think you guys are being extremely naive about Clinton's comments. Do you seriously think she doesn't understand that her comments don't make much sense?
Those comments were probably made as PR stunt or just as way of avoiding a real answer a rather difficult (for a politicians) question. Don't you guys know that drug legalization is still largely a taboo issue when it comes to serious politics (I don't consider a Ron Paul to be a serious or responsible politician)?
Politics isn't always about approaching issues rationally, it's about what get votes.
It makes me lol a bit inside whenever someone hears a politician (especially here) say "drugs are teh bad!" and people just think they're naive politicians, who don't get it. Trust me, they do get it. If you think they do not, then it's YOU who does not understand the drug industry/politics relationships.
Like I said, there is money to be made in legalization.. but how do you plan on removing all the people in the prison/alcohol/pharma/policing industries? Prisons arent making profits for the government.. but it's a hell of a large industry and a huge portion of it is fed by illegal drugs.. same with policing.. How much does the police force stand to lose if there's no more war on drugs?
YES there will be new employment opportunities.. but have you ever tried to get someone to leave their job by saying "Hey its OK, there are new jobs coming in other industries in stead" ... There's still a % of the population unemployed (and dont forget all the people who would be in prison for drugs are now out looking for work too!)..
The point is there are a lot of people/businesses/industries established in their current position, and they won't want to give way (except perhaps pharmaceutical since they're in a position to grab new opportunities... tobacco/alcohol industry *might* get marijuana but really any of the big agricultural industries could go for it unless it's a sly deal that's already been sealed by friends in high places)
I'm not going to answer the specific questions, as I wholly agree with your statement here.
In my examples, I was merely showing that there is a net benefit to society FINANCIALLY once drugs are moved from an improper (illegal, cartel-based) market to a proper one (alcohol, cigs). We all agree that there's freedom, health, etc benefits. And I 100% agree with you on why there will be no decrim/legalization, at least without HUGE, drastic changes. People who want decrim/legalization typically have their hearts in the right place, but have zero clue what is involved and how much of a change to society would be experienced. They have no idea how many people would, at least temporarily, be 'displaced' by these changes, and how it's that fact, almost entirely, that keeps drugs illegal. They think it's because "politicians are stoopit, they believe drugs'r bad, and tehy inforce that on us". That's not the case. Unfortunately, the more you learn on the subject, the more you realize that, while that's not the case, the reality is far scarier/harder to overcome. I doubt I'll ever see it in my years. However, it still should be worked towards, as further action against drugs in a criminal-paradigm is pointless, maintaining this bloated, inefficient(and inhumane) system is pointless, so it's a question of how long before drugs are decrim across the world - may take hundreds of years, who knows, but virtually HAS to happen eventually.
/EDIT- oh, just to clarify, no- the cigarette/alcohol industries will fight pot tooth and nail. They're the sponsors of "partnership for a drug free america", and marijuana decrim would tear into their profits. No doubt that they, and the pharmaceutical industry, have plans for if/when pot is decrim'd/legalized, but they hate it as much/more than most groups. In the end, pot is unique amongst drugs in that one can make quite a decent amount of quality product with practically zero money/knowledge. Sure, more $/knowledge means more plants/higher potency, but even amateurs can grow their own product, and while that's better for pot-smokers (and this is coming from someone who doesn't smoke/like pot), it's a major source of competition for tobacco/alcohol. Marijuana is different than both in that it's quite easy - even appealing* - to grow one's own "medicine/recreational drug". (*Even though I dislike marijuana, as it's given me obscene anxiety any time I tried it since turning like 20-21, I WOULD grow it if it were legal. Not even to sell - as it'd have no real value then anyways - but even as an ornamental, that yeah, I'd definitely harvest for fun. But if non-smokers are inclined to grow, were it legal, imagine the backyards of your average stoner!! This would be hugley detrimental to many existing industries - however, medical-marijuana is making major ground, and while cannabinoids aren't a drug I personally care for, I do realize that the medical-marijuana fight is, by far, the best "foot hold" for any real change in the draconian state we live in with regards to drugs/institutionalizing our citizens.)
