Freedom, Confidence and the "special" Market.

Discussion in 'Economics' started by SNBthetrue, Jan 29, 2010.

  1. Confidence, is the word of the time, from Trichet to Schwarzman...

    I think that confidence was always at the essence of any system. In the Roman Empire days roads were the gate to prosperity. Everyone had to have confidence in the signs to find his way...
    It leads to my remark about how to quickly and efficently restore the confidence between the people and their respective system. I think it has to come from the bottom. I personnally think that Drugs, is one of the major roots causes of mistrust between the system and his people. Let me explain why I think that Milton Friedman vision on the drug industry is right and necessary for restoring a full confidence in the game.

    "The reign of tears is over. The slums will soon be only a memory. We will turn our prisons into factories and our jails into storehouses and comcribs. Men will walk upright now, women will smile, and the children will laugh. Hell will be forever for rent."
    from "Billy Sunday, the noted evangelist and leading crusader against Demon Rum, greeted the onset of Prohibition in early 1920"

    And why write myself what as already be well explained by master Friedman
    ( )

    Prohibition and Drugs
    by Milton Friedman
    From Newsweek, May 1, 1972


    On ethical grounds, do we have the right to use the machinery of government to prevent an individual from becoming an alcoholic or a drug addict? For children, almost everyone would answer at least a qualified yes. But for responsible adults, I, for one, Would answer no. Reason with the potential addict, yes. Tell him the consequences, yes. Pray for and with him, yes. But I believe that we have no right to use force, directly or indirectly, to prevent a fellow man from committing suicide, let alone from drinking alcohol or taking drugs.
    I readily grant that the ethical issue is difficult and that men of goodwill may well disagree. Fortunately, we need not resolve the ethical issue to agree on policy. Prohibition is an attempted cure that makes matters worse-for both the addict and the rest of us . Hence, even if you regard present policy toward drugs as ethically justified, considerations of expediency make that policy most unwise.
    Consider first the addict. Legalizing drugs might increase the number of addicts, but it is not clear that it would. Forbidden fruit is attractive, particularly to the young. More important, many drug addicts are deliberately made by pushers, who give likely prospects their first few doses free. It pays the pusher to do so because, once hooked, the addict is a captive customer. If drugs were legaily available, any possible profit from such inhumane activity would disappear, since the addict could buy from the cheapest source.
    Whatever happens to the number of addicts, the individual addict would clearly be far better off if drugs were legal. Today, drugs are box incredibly expensive and highly uncertain in quality. Addicts are driven to associate with criminals to get the drugs, become criminals themselves to finance the habit, and risk constant danger of death and disease .
    Consider next the test of us. Here the situation is crystal clear. The harm to us from the addiction of others arises almost wholly from the fact that drugs are illegal . A recent cominittee of the American Bar Association estimated that addicts commit one-third to one-half of all street crime in the U.S. Legalize drugs, and street crime would drop dramatically. Moreover, addicts and pushers are not the only ones corrupted. Immense sums are at stake. It is inevitable that some relatively low-paid police and other government officials-and some high-paid ones as well-will succumb to the temptation to pick up easy money.


    Legalizing drugs would simultaneously reduce the amount of crime and raise the quality of law enforcement. Can you conceive of any other measure that would accomplish so much to promote law and order?
    But, you may say, must we accept defeat? Why not simply end the drug traffic? That is where experience under Prohibition is most relevant. We cannot end the drug traffic. We may be able to cut off opium from Turkey but there are innumerable other places where the opium poppy grows. With French cooperation, we may be able to make Marseilles an unhealthy place to manufacture heroin but there are innumerable other places where the simple manufacturing operations involved can be carried out. So long as large sums of money are involved-and they are bound to be if drugs are illegal-it is literally hopeless to expect to end the traffic or even to reduce seriously its scope. In drugs, as in other areas, persuasion and example are likely to be far more effective than the use of force to shape others in our image. "

    That's in my own little opinion the first step to restore the link of confidence between the people and their system. Advantage of legalizing drugs compared to illegal

    1. First time drug use is free in the illegal setup...
    2. Health information + help numbers can be printed on the package directly
    3. Ultra cheap, no more a financial impact on the addicted
    4. Health risks can be managed, and the link of trust with the medics can be real
    5. Confidence is restored between the cops and the streets eyes
    6. Law and Order cost can be drastically reduced

    Anyway it's not only an economic issue, there is a lot of "morale" behind it... But I don't see any negative economic impact of what Milton says... Do you ?
  2. what has this got to do with Economics?

    A case can be made, but we're more concerned as a whole on other economic issues.

    switch this to the politcs thread.
  3. I personnally thing that this issue of distincting Illegal drugs from their counterparts approved by the FDA is one of the most important issue for Freedom in general.

    1. Subjects like this needs constant discussion, argumentation and exchange of ideas, they are apex issue of the Market.

    For exemple: If a drug has a 50% kill ratio but save half the other from X. should it be illegal ? Or approved by the FDA ? Answer :confused: , BUT should a freeman be able to judge that he want to take the risk to get a 1/2 chance to be saved ? It's his health, it's his own personnal responsability.

    2. Drugs are the main causes why all the Empire that went to the Golden Crescent ( Afghanistan and co ) have all collapsed. The reason why local population will always follow the money ( aka drug lords ) and never support foreign troops.

    3. Drugs are the reason why a new war front is slowly but surely opening in South America ( Columbia ).

    4. The Illegal Drugs Markets are the most advanced form of organization never reached, the real base :

    a. No written communication
    b. No legal support
    c. Totally based on confidence
    d. Global

    And thusfar represent in the long term a real risk for demokratik process and transparence... But on the other hand are the Gate Keeper of the Market, in a sense that every system that will oppose them will always generate insecurity, that they will always be able to exploit, and make the real rules of the Market always true, aka RoaaR which is translated in :


    5. Discussion on the subject of Illegal drugs is the Ultimate Indicator on stability and sanity of a country. Does Policitical correctness rules or not ?

    One thing I am deeply assured is the instant political correctness takes control, it's the most perfect setup for real MMS... ( or feed their minds to eat their wallets :D ).