tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20372724.post5824342243671642740..comments2023-09-01T09:38:54.262-04:00Comments on Dumb Looks Still Free: But making it legal was supposed to solve it!A Jacksonianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07607888697879327120noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20372724.post-36561112291889428862007-08-14T08:20:00.000-04:002007-08-14T08:20:00.000-04:00Simon - I do agree, to an extent, but Mr. Friedman...Simon - I do agree, to an extent, but Mr. Friedman did not factor in the cost of overhead to running such operations.<BR/><BR/>I am all for removing these laws on a personal liberty basis as that was the way the US was run before we turned onto the Nannystate path. I see positive benefits for our society, and a reduction in drug crime violence. What I do *not* see is ending the criminal-terrorist enterprises that have established business acumen and capital to now shift money to other operations once the overhead is removed and the cash flow sustained for limited cost to them.<BR/><BR/>As I have tried to get across, terrorist operations flourish due to low cost arms and ready means of distributed command and control. The high cost area is finding people to *guard* establishments and *train them* and *sustain them*. Friedman's 'price support' has been used to facilitate that aspect of terrorist organizations which now have a sunk capital investment that does not go away unless the 'human capital' is removed. Indeed there will be added liquidity on their part, as middlemen, to now expand operations if the US decides to go the route of removing the narcotics laws. If we ignore *that* problem with outlaw groups wishing to wage unaccountable war with the US and the West, in general, then we will also need to take responsibility for what we do to ensure our own freedoms.<BR/><BR/>Removing the narcotics laws helps some things, but not others. It is not a panacea to the ills facing us, although it removes some, it does not remove all. And as we have proven incapable of holding international trade accountable to National survival, we miss the aim of the Republic: to hold our economic side of the house accountable to human liberty and freedom so as to sustain it.<BR/><BR/>These organizations have benefitted from the 'sunk cost of expansion' due to the drug trade. That capital cost is non-recoverable to us even if we remove those laws *tomorrow*. That investment has happened. That is not because of the drug trade itself, but because we hold NO trade accountable when it empowers declared non-Nation State enemies wishing our demise.<BR/><BR/>Notice that Hezbollah *recognizes* the importance of 'retail sales markup' which is why they *bought into a shopping mall* so as to get a 'piece of that action' and improve their sales of black/gray market goods. Legalizing the drug laws does not *stop* that investment with profits then going to purchase arms so as to attack us. Legalization does not *stop* that. Actually helps them, at this point in time to a certain degree. Legalizing gambling in Nevada didn't get the Mafia out of *that* trade and helped them to *expand* by removing *cost overhead* there, until it is a *profit center*. Terrorists don't want profit to themselves, save to expand their ability to reach out and kill. They will utilize any means to do so. All of our lovely laws and law enforcement does not stop Mafia investment in legitimate businesses. They spend money on some overhead, but mostly on pesonal aggrandizement. Folks like Hezbollah and Hamas, however, don't care about that and wish to use our decadence against us.<BR/><BR/>Getting serious on the removing the narcotics laws does not address that in any way, shape or form. That is where I split hard and heavily with removing the drug laws, which I particularly do not like even as a non-user of said medications. There are damned good reasons to get rid of them.<BR/><BR/>Don't tell me legalizing will do one thing *now* to end the larger threat to the Republic because we are unwilling to enforce *any* law on holding trade accountable to our survival as a Nation. Trade is accountable to society, may be limited or opened as we wish as a society, and must be ensured not to be harming us, especially when it helps those wishing our downfall as a Nation. That is more basic than yea or nay on narcotics laws: that is the primary reason we *have* a Nation. No matter what path we choose on narcotics, the upholding of the accountability of trade to the Nation is paramount and primary.<BR/><BR/>And as Hezbollah has demonstrated, they have the wit and street smarts to exploit our own laws to profit in a literal sense, from the Nation. Strange to say, but they did something that we also have laws against in intra-State trade and were only caught after years of doing that. Legal purchase to illicit sales and keeping the middleman profit by not paying taxes. Excess funds go to Hezbollah. That is not unsophisticated, but extremely opportunistic across the white/gray/black markets. It is not *wheat* it will go to, but very cheap knock-offs, bootleg software, and anything that any Nation does not want in their Nation. That is the 'magic' of the Black Market Peso Exchange system: it uses 'white' transactions to deliver 'black' money via 'white' trade goods.<BR/><BR/>The drug laws are *not* the problem in that set-up.<BR/><BR/>Our lack of enforcing laws on trade in a meaningful way, even inside the US, is the problem.<BR/><BR/>These are not unsophisticated groups blind to how the system of economics works: they just wish to exploit that system to different ends. You and I want it for upholding personal liberty and freedom. They want it to remove same and place an Empire on this planet to rule, not govern. They are willing to use our economies and law systems against us. We have means to end that, but *that* puts a cost burden on *us* to ensure that trade is held accountable to the Nation and that we call those seeking to end us by their proper names and go after them.<BR/><BR/>That *also* costs money.<BR/><BR/>Lawyers and front companies are damned cheap in comparison: the cost of doing business.<BR/><BR/>National Sovereignty is beyond price, and our unwillingness to see past our own parochial and partisan views is putting us all, as a Nation, in great danger. These are not 'businessmen' like the old style mafia. These are exploiters of business by any means necessary so as to defeat the Nation from stopping them from their goals. I haven't even *touched* on the majority of black/gray market goods that these organizations can and do use, either. Somehow addressing just the drug portion doesn't end this threat nor even hinder it... actually helps it.<BR/><BR/>I am more than willing to pay the price for that, if we, as a society, will recognize the price must be paid to put these organizations on the permanent outlaw list.<BR/><BR/>That will cost *also*.<BR/><BR/>And yet that monetary price is one we are unwilling to pay... and I'm not hearing much from the drug legalization side on how to end this threat and address that cost, either. There is a *bite* here no matter what our choices are as a society. Freedom isn't free. That, to me, is the *right* side of the equation. And we are not willing to ante up that cost *anywhere*. Of that I have heard zero from the drug legalization side. We can stop doing wrong, but now comes telling of the cost to make things *right*.A Jacksonianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07607888697879327120noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20372724.post-86792920027349500832007-08-14T07:41:00.000-04:002007-08-14T07:41:00.000-04:00I see your point though. If they can't profit sell...I see your point though. If they can't profit selling illegal drugs they will make up the difference by selling wheat.<BR/><BR/>Really. It is not about stopping anything. It is about lowering the profit margin.M. Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09508934110558197375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20372724.post-60136420491051528952007-08-14T07:26:00.000-04:002007-08-14T07:26:00.000-04:00Milton Friedman said prohibition represents a pric...Milton Friedman said prohibition represents a price support to criminals and terrorists. Socialism pure and simple.<BR/><BR/>And if the big money is going to be made in retail what better way to cut that profit line than legalization.<BR/><BR/>Agreed every nation will not do the right thing. No reason we should be on the wrong side of the equation.M. Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09508934110558197375noreply@blogger.com