The War on Drugs is Less than Useless, It’s Counterproductive

Meet Vivek Ramaswamy

Anyone who wants to shut down useless government agencies and dismantle the climate cult is worth at least a cursory look. But what about the rest of his policies? And how does Vivek differ from Trump?

It’s easy to tout independence from China but as a practical standpoint, nearly impossible to achieve. 

The entire rest of the world would have to go along, otherwise bilateral trade just shifts. And China has many rare earth elements that the rest of the world needs. 

Besides, what is Vivek proposing on trade policy that Trump did not attempt with sanctions and tariffs (and fail miserably at)?

But let’s get to the focus of this post.

Annihilate the Drug Cartels

A pledge to escalate the war on drugs is entirely the wrong approach and a proven decades-long failure. 

JoeInGeneral asks “What actual war on drugs has been waged?”


War on Drugs

It’s amazing that someone does not know about the endless War on Drugs.

The war on drugs is a global campaign, led by the United States federal government, of drug prohibition, military aid, and military intervention, with the aim of reducing the illegal drug trade in the United States. The initiative includes a set of drug policies that are intended to discourage the production, distribution, and consumption of psychoactive drugs that the participating governments and the United Nations have made illegal. The term was popularized by the media shortly after a press conference given on June 18, 1971, by President Richard Nixon—the day after publication of a special message from President Nixon to the Congress on Drug Abuse Prevention and Control—during which he declared drug abuse “public enemy number one”.

Two years prior to this, Nixon had formally declared a “war on drugs” that would be directed toward eradication, interdiction, and incarceration. In 2015, the Drug Policy Alliance, which advocates for an end to the War on Drugs, estimated that the United States spends $51 billion annually on these initiatives, and in 2021, after 50 years of the drug war, others have estimated that the US has spent a cumulative $1 trillion on it.

In June 2011, the Global Commission on Drug Policy released a critical report on the War on Drugs, declaring: “The global war on drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world. Fifty years after the initiation of the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, and years after President Nixon launched the US government’s war on drugs, fundamental reforms in national and global drug control policies are urgently needed.” The report was criticized by organizations that oppose a general legalization of drugs.

In 1982, Vice President George H. W. Bush and his aides began pushing for the involvement of the CIA and U.S. military in drug interdiction efforts.

The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) was originally established by the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988, which mandated a national anti-drug media campaign for youth, which would later become the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. The director of ONDCP is commonly known as the drug czar, and it was first implemented in 1989 under President George H. W. Bush,[60] and raised to cabinet-level status by Bill Clinton in 1993. These activities were subsequently funded by the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1998.The Drug-Free Media Campaign Act of 1998 codified the campaign.

During his time in office, Barack Obama implemented a “tough but smart” approach to the war on drugs. While he claimed that his methodology differed from those of previous presidents, in reality, his practices were very similar. He promoted a universal drug issue, but his binary “tough but smart” solution maintained the mentality of criminalizing drug offenders.

The present state of incarceration in the U.S. as a result of the war on drugs arrived in several stages. By 1971, different steps on drugs had been implemented for more than 50 years (since 1914, 1937, etc.) with only a very small increase of inmates per 100,000 citizens. 

After 1980, the situation began to change. In the 1980s, while the number of arrests for all crimes had risen by 28%, the number of arrests for drug offenses rose 126%. The result of increased demand was the development of privatization and the for-profit prison industry. The US Department of Justice, reporting on the effects of state initiatives, has stated that, from 1990 through 2000, “the increasing number of drug offenses accounted for 27% of the total growth among black inmates, 7% of the total growth among Hispanic inmates, and 15% of the growth among white inmates.” In addition to prison or jail, the United States provides for the deportation of many non-citizens convicted of drug offenses.

In 1994, the New England Journal of Medicine reported that the “War on Drugs” resulted in the incarceration of one million Americans each year. In 2008, The Washington Post reported that of 1.5 million Americans arrested each year for drug offenses, half a million would be incarcerated.[87] In addition, one in five black Americans would spend time behind bars due to drug laws.

In 1986, the US Defense Department funded a two-year study by the RAND Corporation, which found that the use of the armed forces to interdict drugs coming into the United States would have little or no effect on cocaine traffic and might, in fact, raise the profits of cocaine cartels and manufacturers. 

Obvious Problems With War On Drugs

  • If you decrease the supply of drugs without curing the demand, the price rises. 
  • Crime related to addiction increases and the desire to smuggle drugs goes up because the profit rises. 
  • Throw people in prison for drug use and you need more prisons. 

Troops to Mexico?

Instead of understanding the obvious problems with the war on drugs, we have proposals to send US troops to Mexico.  

https://twitter.com/WallStRenegade/status/1639401934208610305

Excuse me for pointing out the absurdity of an anti-war Libertarian proposing we send US troops to Mexico. 

Republican Says U.S. Troops Should Enter Mexico—’Have a Military Presence’

Please consider this official nutcase proposal Republican Says U.S. Troops Should Enter Mexico—’Have a Military Presence’

Republican Representative James Comer has suggested the U.S. should set up troops in Mexico following a kidnapping that resulted in the deaths of two Americans. 

The Kentucky representative and House Oversight Committee Chairman was on Fox and Friends on Tuesday and discussed how the U.S. should deal with what he saw as Mexico’s failure to deal with the cartels.

Not only is the idea idiotic, Mexico would not want us there. I received a reply saying I have no evidence for my claim. 

Here it is.

Despite the mounting pressure on the Biden administration, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has warned the U.S. not to overstep the mark with any response.

Graham Proposes Bill for US to Use Military Force in Mexico

The idiocy escalates with Senator Lindsey Graham who Proposes Bill for US to Use Military Force in Mexico

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Monday said he was prepared to introduce legislation to “set the stage” for U.S. military force in Mexico, saying it was time to “get tough” on the neighboring country after four Americans were kidnapped by armed men this week.

“I would put Mexico on notice,” Graham said. “If you continue to give safe haven to drug dealers, then you are an enemy of the United States.”

Graham added he would “introduce legislation to make certain Mexican drug cartels foreign terrorist organizations under U.S. law and set the stage to use military force if necessary.”

“I would tell the Mexican government if you don’t clean up your act, we’re going to clean it up for you,” the senator said.

What the US Can Learn From Portugal’s Drug Decriminalization

For a sensible approach, please consider What the US Can Learn From Portugal’s Drug Decriminalization

Compared to Portugal, drug overdose deaths per million in neighboring Spain are 2.5X as high, 3.5X as high in the EU, 10X as high in the UK and 31X as high in the USA.

Portugal decriminalized the use of all drugs in 2001. Weed, cocaine, heroin, you name it – Portugal decided to treat possession and use of small quantities of these drugs as a public health issue, not a criminal one.

The drugs were still illegal, of course. But now getting caught with them meant a small fine and maybe a referral to a treatment program – not jail time and a criminal record.

Joseph Califano, founder of the Center for Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, once warned that decriminalization would “increase illegal drug availability and use among our children.”

But in Portugal, the numbers paint a different story. The prevalence of past-year and past-month drug use among young adults has fallen since 2001, according to statistics compiled by the Transform Drug Policy Foundation, which advocates on behalf of ending the war on drugs. Overall adult use is down slightly too. And new HIV cases among drug users are way down.

The above article was from 2017.  Here is another article.

Next, please consider Drug Decriminalization in Portugal from May of 2021.

  • Drug-related deaths have remained below the EU average since 2001
  • The proportion of prisoners sentenced for drugs has fallen from 40% to 15%
  • Rates of drug use have remained consistently below the EU average

A 2015 study found that the social costs of drug use in Portugal fell 12% between 2000 and 2004, and 18% by 2010. While the former figure was largely driven by the reduction in drug-related deaths, the latter was linked to a ‘significant reduction’ in costs associated with criminal proceedings for drug offences and lost income of individuals imprisoned for these offences.

Portugal has set a positive example for what can be done when drug policies prioritize health rather than criminalization. At the turn of the century, Portugal was facing a crisis, including high levels of HIV infection among people who use drugs. Many impacts of reform were felt immediately: new HIV infections, drug deaths and the prison population all fell sharply within the first decade. 

Biggest Impact of Portuguese Policy

The biggest effect has been to allow the stigma of drug addiction to fall, to let people speak clearly and to pursue professional help without fear.”

Four Beneficiaries of the War on Drugs 

  1. The drug cartels and dealers because prices rise
  2. Bureaucrats who demand still more money to fight a hopeless cause
  3. Administrators and builders of for profit prisons 
  4. Public unions, especially prison guards

The loser is of course the taxpayer who funds the above beneficiaries.

The Correct Solution

  • Regarding Mexico: The state department needs to issue a warning advising against travel in Mexico stating that anyone who travels to high crime countries does so at risk of being kidnapped, killed, or incarcerated. 
  • Regarding Drug Use: Policy needs to reduce the desire for drugs, the associated stigma with drugs, and the profit in drugs.

Escalation of the war on drugs is a proven failure. Both major political parties have been involved. 

It’s time for a new approach. 

This post originated on MishTalk.Com.

Thanks for Tuning In!

Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

70 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ultracrepidarian
Ultracrepidarian
1 year ago
If you look back at history to the 1920’s, the real reasons for the war on drugs becomes much more obvious. first of all, the USA learned its lesson well from Prohibition….that is to say that the authorities know what happens when you make a popular substance to be illegal and you get aggressive about enforcement…..it makes the mob to become much more powerful and rich, the police to be much more busy, and the substance itself to become much more popular and do much more damage to health and welfare.
Then, when you move forward to the 1960’s you realize that this was the era of the real civil rights movement, the real effort to integrate blacks with whites and forget about racism, break down the color barriers. However, most of the people who were in favor of integration happened also to prefer marijuana to alcohol. It is much nicer, while alcoholics are often raging, stone heads are dreamers and lovers.
So the conservative politicians from both sides of the aisles initiated the tough treatment of drug use and sales, in order to brand a whole lot of a certain category of people with criminal records, to introduce a whole lot of young men they considered undesirable in the first place to get permanent blots on their record, while the authorities break up and destroy young families, and permanently weaken the ability of many undesirables from economic success.
and its been very, very successful……despite the breaking down of voter laws and red lining property and separate schools, they have largely sufcceeded in still keeping the majority of blacks separated socially and economically from whites, they have kept racism and segregation alive while eliminating the official language about it, by the use of the war on drugs and by unequal enforcement practices..
worleyeoe
worleyeoe
1 year ago
The solution is to build more jails and make life in jail a very hard life. We’ve arrived at the point where hardcore criminals should not be looked at as having opportunities to be rehabilitated. You commit the crime & our got to jail and serve your time in a very austere environment. No TV. No Internet. No cell phones. Work details & libraries sound about right.
Also, build a wall and start deporting illegals rather than allowing them to stay in the US for amnesty hearings.
Marijuana needs to be decriminalized but not necessarily made legal.
Anything above that needs tiered enforcement up to 3 strikes & your out. First offense drops from your record after 1 year. 2nd offense drops after say 3 years. 3rd offense becomes a permanent felony on your record with minimum mandatory of jail time, say 1 year plus probation.
Minor drug sales should have one mulligan that drops off your record say after 3 years, you loose your driver’s license for 12 months and then you get 2 years’ probation.
Once you get to a certain level of drug sales, you do mandatory time with no plea deals, say 5 years minimum.
Once you’re convicted of being a major supplier, you go to jail minimum 20 years, no plea deals.
Once you have a wall built & enough of the bad guys rounded up and sent back home, then you start bombing the narcos south of the border.
The ONLY type of immigration allowed should be LEGAL. And ANY company in the USA should have to pass an extremely rigorous process for getting labor imported via legal immigration. And, there should be taxes involved to name one of many options at making it really hard to justify / approve getting foreign labor involved.
On what planet does it make sense to let 10M illegals into the US when we’re on the cusp of having AI & robotics start wiping out jobs in the next 5-10 years?
None, absolute, NONE!!!
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
1 year ago
“Declaring….” is a children’s game played solely and entirely by the rankest of all possible retards.
KidHorn
KidHorn
1 year ago
The only way to stop illegal drugs is to build the modern day equivalent of the berlin wall along our southern border. We would also need to inspect all boats entering our waters. Since we have the opposite of the berlin wall, the war on drugs will never work.
I’m fine with gradually legalizing certain drugs. Do it slowly so we can adjust as needed. Like we’re doing with cannabis.
Jackula
Jackula
1 year ago
I am 100% on board…the drug war has been an expensive failure from many perspectives. The Portugal solution is one to emulate…
Dr Funkenstein
Dr Funkenstein
1 year ago
The USA has a perfect right to send an army in Mexico. Its corrupt bandits posing as leaders say they use America as a safety valve to send millions of illegals to and in turn they will send back tens of billions of the welfare they collect. The question is can any military reform this corrupt cesspool.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  Dr Funkenstein
Best step for the USA is to copy Russia, invade Mexico and then divide it up into states. Voila! Immigration problem solved. As for drug dealers, they will likely move south into Central America countries.
hmk
hmk
1 year ago
A couple of questions come to mind. Why does the US have such a bad drug problem compared to the rest of the world? Also, the PR war on cigarettes seemed to drive down cigarette consumption so why wouldn’t a concerted effort like that help bring down drug abuse. Short of making it a capital offense and killing drug dealers and users ie China , legalizing it seems to be the only option left. I believe heroin is legalized in Switzerland and it hasn’t fallen apart yet except for Credit Suisse. Not overly taxing it and making it affordable seems to be the only option left. MJ legalization hasn’t been a catastrophe as I see it. They legalized gambling and in some places prostitution. I don’t see legalizing drugs much differently at this point. The war on drugs has been a big fail except to those who profit from it.
Webej
Webej
1 year ago
»Annihilate the drug cartels
At first I was confused, taking it literally, but I soon realized he actually meant strengthen their monopoly with more vigorous support.
I have a uniquely American solution: the magic of the market place.
–All drugs should be available prescription free with mandated labels indicating ingredients and dosages at outlets such as Walgreens.
–The drug cartels will be out of business, all drugs related crime will evaporate.
–Successful rehabilitation from addiction will be many times more likely, addicts not having first burned up all family and social resources.
» Send in troops
In Afghanistan the production of heroine increased 25× fold after the US invasion of 2001, within the year.
Was Vietnam drug-free after sending in the troops?

» Prisons
The explosion of drug inmates followed the mandatory sentencing laws, to fight drugs. The number of female inmates increased tenfold in the ten years following mandatory sentencing laws, which are opposed by virtually all even conservative judges, which turn them into clerks.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
The problem is one of unknown consequences. We know the outcome of the current policy. We don’t know what would have happened without it. This is usually the case when dealing with uncertain outcomes. Most politicians tend to defendability. we saw its zenith with covid…
The solution is actually embedded in the Constitution. turn drug policies and laws over to the states. If California continues as a drugged cesspool while other states are a drug-free nirvana…
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
1 year ago
I wonder if the answer to the war on drugs will turn out to be self driving cars.
I suspect a HUGE reason for the war on drugs is because impaired people drive and kill others. There was no war on drugs prior to the war on drunk driving that started in the early 80s (I remember doing underage drinking in the early 80s and just being driven home by the cops or had your parents called to drive you home). The war on drunk driving was because too many people were being killed by drunk drivers and that also essentially created the war on drugs since testing for impaired driving due to drugs was very hard to do then (still is now compared to checking for alcohol).
Would the war on drugs end if there was self driving cars and far less risk of being killed by an impaired driver? After all how many people really care if someone gets high in their own house and doesn’t harm anyone? Even if they are an addict they are no worse than alcoholics and society tolerates those people if they aren’t harming anyone.
Zardoz
Zardoz
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
It wasn’t anything rational like that: link to en.wikipedia.org
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Tex, there’s a small but real percentage of the population that knows what’s moral and right and believes they should be able to force you to be moral and right too. Never attempt to discuss solutions for drunk driving with a Mad Mother.
KidHorn
KidHorn
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Self driving cars would help reduce the damage, but I’m not sure if it will happen in the next 25 years. Might be like cold fusion. We’re always on the cusp of making it a reality.
8dots
8dots
1 year ago
The Dow high on drugs. Bad news on top of bad news, a pyramid of bad news might take the Dow down.
Toutatis
Toutatis
1 year ago
Is it true that in the US the main drug suppliers are the doctors ?
MarkraD
MarkraD
1 year ago
Reply to  Toutatis
Pharmaceutical co’s created the opioid crisis, so yes, for opioids.
Dr’s were told opioids weren’t addictive, thus passing that message on to patients.
.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Thusly proving that a percentage of Dr’s are greedy or brain dead or both.
KidHorn
KidHorn
1 year ago
Reply to  Toutatis
I would guess it’s the pharmacies.
MarkraD
MarkraD
1 year ago
“The entire rest of the world would have to go along, otherwise bilateral trade just shifts. And China has many rare earth elements that the rest of the world needs.”
I suggest googling Iron Nitride and Niron Magnetics, the probable source of Musk’s recent announcement to switch off rare earth’s, American ingenuity is about to Trump China’s monopoly.
.
.
Siliconguy
Siliconguy
1 year ago
Reply to  MarkraD
The rest of the world has plenty of rare earths. China successfully cornered the market by intentionally ignoring the environmental damage of the cheap and dirty refining process they use. It will take a few years to get other countries mining operations going, but it will cost more to do it cleanly, so tariffs would be needed to offset the Chinese cost advantage.
MarkraD
MarkraD
1 year ago
Reply to  Siliconguy
Google my references, you’ll find it interesting either way.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Legislating common chemistry is difficult.
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
1 year ago
LEGALISATION from production to consumption , that s the sensible way forward ! Quality control and high taxes, a win win…and taking into account biblical wisdom regarding ‘the forbidden fruit’ , consumption would undoubtedly decrease …a win win win in other words ! Life can be so simple , pedantic moralizing idiots want to make it complex though….for some kind of ‘win’, most likely….
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  FromBrussels2
Why have limits for any human activity… driving a car, drinking alcohol; having sex…keeping in mind that the entire western legal/social system is founded on original sin and eternal guilt for doing what is essential for life?
Zardoz
Zardoz
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
There’s a sex limit?!?
Webej
Webej
1 year ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Absolutely, but the enforcement has been left to nature.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Unfortunately it is a depreciating asset.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
It’s rechargeable though.
ZZR600
ZZR600
1 year ago
In the UK we have just made Nitrous Oxide illegal! What a
farce! The government seems to forever want to legislate what people consume,
to no effect whatsoever. If a person is determined to get high, they will find an
alternative, even auto-asphyxiation….
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  ZZR600
Using fertilizer: NH4NO3 → 2 H2O + N2O
Using ammonia (needs a catalyst): 2 NH3 + 2 O2 → N2O + 3 H2O
Using a food preservative and fertilizer: 2 NaNO3 + (NH4)2SO4 → Na2SO4 + 2 N2O + 4 H2O
Perhaps this is why we do not require IQ tests for elected officials.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
How about meth?
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
Meth kills people.
N2O is laughable.
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
Have you tried to order NH4NO3 without police giving you a visit, or NH3 in a spray bottle?
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
No problem, it’s fertilizer.
Now ANFO would be a problem.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
Reply to  ZZR600
N2O is a quick cheap high for the young in a convenient form. It will be replaced by glue and paint thinner. Alcohol and cigarettes used to be the preferred cheap high but now seen as immoral and dangerous. Ecolos prefer the natural way with mushrooms but has a side effect of changing your hair color to bright blue and cause a profusion of metal rings to grow in your nose.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
There is a misconception of Portugal’s drug program. On the outside it looks like all drugs are legal and the emphasis is on getting people into programs that treat addiction. Drugs are NOT legal is Portugal and although there is an emphasis into getting people into programs that choice is not facultative for the user. The government makes it very uncomfortable for those who are caught not by putting them in jail but by in many case removing their means of making a living. A committee decides your fate. They can remove or suspend your professional license if they wish. This hits doctors, lawyers, stockbrokers and anybody else who needs a license to make a living. They can prevent you from leaving the country or visiting certain places or establishments. The committee can levy heavy fines if it wants to. It can make you check in with them periodically. It can confiscate your property as well. It cannot make you go into rehab but it will make your life very hard if you don’t so saying that they look at the problem as a health issue only gives the wrong impression. They look at it as a societal problem and the solution involves both health and law enforcement. There is nothing in it about freedom to consume drugs as you wish and get help when you want. There is a significant part of coercion involved that forces people to go into rehab. The two-pronged approach is the reason for its success. That would probably be not work in the US because the coercive part is not what is politically possible for now.
We should also look at new technology. It is now possible to detect if a person is using a variety of drugs from across the room by analysis his breath. As this technology becomes ubiquitous it should become easier to detect who is using and under what circumstances. The implications could be that hiding drug use will become impossible and if impossible then avoid getting treatment would be impossible as well. Food for thought.
Zardoz
Zardoz
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug78
Doesn’t track well with the “land of the free” slogan. Ultimate surveillance.
inonothing
inonothing
1 year ago
Reply to  Zardoz
“Land of the Free” refers to law enforcement.
Doug78
Doug78
1 year ago
In the 1990’s the emphasis turned from having individuals incarcerated for drug use and possession to individuals being free to consume drugs as they wish. Since the risks were now non-existent for the individual and many individuals loved getting wasted the market for drugs increased rapidly. Where once heavy drug use was marginal it now became mainstream as the onus of a drug conviction had been lifted. Consumer demand exploded as anyone with an eye could see it would. Now we have a large section of the population that has a vested interest in not only keeping it legal but expanding it. Attacking the supply chain only won’t work because the demand is just too high. Before drug use was low because both the consumer and the supplier suffered very high penalties if caught.
Nominalis
Nominalis
1 year ago
The War on Drugs is the largest coordinated government project ever with 182 nations working together to create the mythical Drug-Free World. That makes it the biggest thing ever, bigger than the auto industry which is more competitive than coordinated. And what have the trillions of dollars spent on prohibition bought us, what is the #1 success of the Drug War? Fentanyl, the bathtub gin of the modern era. And a criminal justice system so corrupt that cops can kick down anyone’s door with a no-knock warrant based on hearsay and shoot an unarmed resident then plead qualified immunity. What a hopeless charade, what a farce.
abombthecoder
abombthecoder
1 year ago
great post on mish. legalize all drugs and watch fentanyl deaths end by 99% over night. legalization will also end drug cartels.
desire for drug can be worked by a better political and economic system. happy people use drugs less. unhappy people use drugs more.
the war on drugs has many externalities not addressed. legalizing would have many positive externalities.
i know it’s weird for americans to try and solve problems without a war, but it’s possible and necessary.
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
1 year ago
Reply to  abombthecoder
Haven’t seen you before on Mishtalk(I think)….People talking common have increasingly become endangered species in recent years ….so….welcome!
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
1 year ago
Reply to  abombthecoder
Another thing you forgot to mention about desire for drugs. Busy people tend to do less drugs. A lot of drug use is done by those who are bored / have too much time on their hands.
As society has evolved to give everyone more free time (or less work to do) drug use has increased. That’s why there was far less drug use in older generations.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
The more/less work theory misses the point of what causes drug abuse. I am not a fan of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs… but there is insight into why people do things.
MPO45v2
MPO45v2
1 year ago
Good post, like the Portugal approach and for all the political hyperbole about drugs, illegal immigrants and the like there is the reality of the leading causes of death in the US:
  • Heart disease: 695,547
  • Cancer: 605,213
  • COVID-19: 416,893
  • Accidents (unintentional injuries): 224,935
  • Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 162,890
  • Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 142,342
  • Alzheimer’s disease: 119,399
  • Diabetes: 103,294
  • Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis : 56,585
  • Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 54,358
Don’t hear anyone talking about banning fast food burger and pizza joints across america or cigarettes/alcohol either. Given the demographics of America, I expect these numbers to double over the next 10 years.
And right now there is a fungus, candida auris, making itself at home around the world that is starting to kill a lot more than usual. Look out for that one to make it up to the list as climate change accelerates and preys on the old and weak. Be on the lookout for big pharma profits on that one, I’d tell you which company but that wouldn’t be any fun especially with Easter so close.
Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
1 year ago
Reply to  MPO45v2
Well, we must keep in mind that deaths happen to each age group X times more than to the next younger age group.
So old people die, not young.
Old people die of heart disease and cancer. Younger adults who die, die of oops (50 to 60 per 100,000), suicide (20 per 100k), and crime (10 per 100k). Let’s face it, those three may be proxies for intoxicants.
Old, old folks die of oops, BTW. It jumps up to 300+ per 100k for 85+ers! Not a huge killer for that age, but stays on the list of top 10-15. So, if you get old, you get both drunk and brittle. Dang.
Kids don’t die. Their total deaths per 100,000 are rounding error noise for old folks.
Climate change, AKA Global Warming, will almost certainly help life spans get longer. Yeah, old folks can be killed by heat waves (apparently easily in Paris), but where do old folks go when they retire? Hudson’s Bay or Florida? Nome or Phoenix? 🙂
The WarOnDrugs will end when someone decides that taxing drugs is more lucrative than, um, let’s say, fighting that war. Worked for alcohol.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  Felix_Mish
They are heavily taxing marijuana here in CA making the product much more expensive, which in turn is causing the black market to continue to remain lucrative.
Remember Newton’s third law: “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction”.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Felix_Mish
If you are a very old codger there may come a time when oops is preferable to a slow death in an “assisted living” facility or hospital with many tubes and pumps, and infrequent visitors.
Directed Energy
Directed Energy
1 year ago
Nobody wants the “war on drugs” to end. Too many jobs are dependent on it.
Bhakta
Bhakta
1 year ago
You got it. The War on Drugs is immensely profitable for millions of people who are gaining their wealth from it. Police, lawyers, judges, bail industry, court clerks, jailers, and all who supply the jails, probation and parole officers, medical labs who test for drugs, and more. People use intoxication because their lives are meaningless and hopeless. Getting wasted is an escape, albeit temporary and miserable, but an escape. Were people educated on the real purpose and treasure of the human form of life, they would not waste it getting stoned.
Greenmountain
Greenmountain
1 year ago
If you can’t win a war in 50 years, it is not happening. For all the money we spend on CIA raids, drug enforcement, and prisons, let’s spend it on recovery. Not sure recovery is the answer, but in this case we know war is a loser. In the meantime, far too many under 40 year olds are dying or lost to the never ending battle of drup addiction and that is the real tragedy. But so much easier to blame Mexico, then to look in the mirrow of what we can do.
shamrock
shamrock
1 year ago
If we just do the same thing, but harder, it will work this time. I was just looking at this today, here is the history of the drug war:
1972: 3.2 overdose deaths per 100,000.
1980: 1.1 = SUCCESS, yeah!
1990: 1.8
2000: 6.2
2010: 12.4
2020: 27.9
2022: 32.
Make it harder to get marijuana, you get crack. Harder to get crack you get meth. Harder to get meth you get painkillers and heroin. Now it’s fentanyl and “tranq”.
Bhakta
Bhakta
1 year ago
Reply to  shamrock
Back in the 1960’s to get “high” we would try absolutely anything and any combination of anything. I was only 16 or 17 and I was crazy.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Bhakta
I think you may be right.
But I don’t remember some days of the late 60’s and early 70’s that clearly.
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
1 year ago
Reply to  shamrock
Look at these numbers increasing… must be social/financial, stress related issues ….
Avery
Avery
1 year ago
Yes.
Follow the money:
Cops / feds
Property confiscation
Cash confiscation
Lawyers
Bigger government
Surveillance and gestapo state
Testing labs
Prison industrial complex
Dr Feelgood prescription drugs
Bhakta
Bhakta
1 year ago
Reply to  Avery
Man, you nailed it here. No one who is making an easy living from the drug industry, want it to end.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
So what does this demonstrate?
Folks in Portugal can manage their drugs.
Folks in the US cannot manage their drugs.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
So let’s make an agreement to ship our drug users to Portugal? Portugal could surely use an extra few $billion per year, yes?
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
1 year ago
Let’s start with an obvious question: As Mexico is obviously awash with drugs, how come it doesn’t have the drug problem that plagues the US?
The stupidity of sending US military or marshals to Mexico is stunning. They would be a turkey shoot for cartels, and aligned Mexican military who would see it as violation of sovereignty no matter what the ruse. Was Iraq not enough? Never mind that this time it would certainly spill over the border.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Lately I’ve been wondering just how many US Javelins and Stingers have found their way into the cartels’ arsenals.
There’s a new supply in Ukraine which is not noted for its tight monitoring and control of anything.
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker
Probably not too many, since the Mexican government would try to stop it for obvious reasons, but give them one and it will be everything that Ukraine is receiving.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Wrong as usual. And I think you’d have to be a fool to not believe that the people packaging and transporting these drugs aren’t users as well.
———-
Mexicans are increasingly consuming illegal drugs
The rise of synthetic drugs is wreaking havoc on both sides of the border
July 23, 2022
In reto a la juventud, a live-in treatment centre in Ciudad Juárez, in northern Mexico, Jenny Chávez describes how her addiction to drugs led to her losing her job as a maid, her house and her family. The 39-year-old mother of five started taking cocaine ten years ago, but it was after she moved onto methamphetamine, or meth, a potent stimulant, that things began to unravel. “It’s hard because everyone takes it around here,” she explains.
Listen to this story. Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.
Mexico is home to hundreds of gangs shipping illegal drugs north. Domestic use of such substances, however, has historically been low. That is changing. Mexico’s most recent national survey, from 2016, shows that 10% of people reported having tried an illegal substance in their lives, up from 7% in 2011. Synthetic drugs in particular have become more common over the past five years. In 2021 36% of users at a government network of treatment centres sought help for addiction to meth, compared with 15% in 2016.
Consumption of meth is doing “terrible damage” to the country, says Javier González, who heads the addiction agency for the state of Chihuahua, home to Ciudad Juárez. That city is particularly badly affected because of its location on the border. But the problem is national. According to data from the network of treatment centres, meth overtook marijuana in 2020 as the drug that most people sought help with.
The demography of drug users is changing, too. More women are taking drugs, while youngsters are having their first experience at an earlier age. During the pandemic consumption of illegal drugs rose among 15-24 year olds.
Sunriver
Sunriver
1 year ago

It is all about the fear of fentanyl. Takes away fentanyl, and the war on drugs is not necessary. Coccaine, Heroine, Crack, Methamphetamine, and most synthetics can be treated as a health issue. Fentanyl is a whole new ballgame in a brand new ballpark.

Zardoz
Zardoz
1 year ago
Reply to  Sunriver
It’s a self correcting issue.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Unless you give people drugs to use for free, there will still be drug related crime because the addicts have to get the money from somewhere to pay for the drugs they want/need.
And once you give people free drugs, so they can loll around wasted all day, you also then have to provide food, housing of some kind and medical care for them because they won’t be employable.
A simpler solution for society is to simply shoot any drug user caught carrying or using. Or cleaner, send them to the Soylent Green tanks and use their remains for animal feed.
Zardoz
Zardoz
1 year ago
Reply to  Jojo
You guys always think nobody’s gonna shoot back…
HippyDippy
HippyDippy
1 year ago
There’s never been a war on drugs. And the CIA isn’t called the Cocaine Import Agency for nothing! It started as a way to stop the antiwar movement, which the CIA sort of started with its promotion of LSD. It IS kept to help support the private prison industry, a fortune 500 sector in the land of the free, and the lawdawgs, the face of government. A great way to abuse the people. And, as our friend Machiavelli said in the only book on political science you need to read, The Prince, “the people only want to not be abused by the great, while the great only want to abuse the people”. Just a great way to get the idiot public on board with eradicating the idea of liberty and instilling a police state. Why would the state end it? It’s an obvious success!
8dots
8dots
1 year ago
If president Vivek hang 5/10 drug dealers per/y he will win. If the Mexican cartel buy Vivek he will lose.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.