General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEconomist: The right way to do drugs
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21692881-argument-legalisation-cannabis-has-been-won-now-difficult-bit-right?cid1=cust/ednew/n/bl/n/20160211n/owned/n/n/nwl/n/n/NA/nHence the libertarians must cede ground. States can tax users to deter consumptionthough not so much as to make consumers turn first to the untaxed black market. The right level of tax will depend on a countrys circumstances. In Latin America, where abuse is rare and the black market is bloody and powerful, governments should keep prices low. In the rich world, where problem use is more common and drug-dealers are a nuisance rather than a threat to national security, prices could be higher. One model is the United States after Prohibition: alcohol taxes were set low at first, to drive out the bootleggers; later, with the Mafia gone, they were ramped up.
A similar trade-off applies when determining what products to allow. Cannabis no longer means just joints. Legal entrepreneurs have cooked up pot-laced food and drink, reaching customers who might have avoided smoking the stuff. Ultra-strong concentrates are on offer to be inhaled or swallowed. Edibles and stronger strains help put the illegal dealers out of business, but they also risk encouraging more people to take the drug, and in stronger forms. The starting-point should be to legalise only what is already available on the black market. That would mean capping or taxing potency, much as spirits are taxed more steeply and are less available than beer. Again, the mix will vary. Europe may be able to ban concentrates. America already has a taste for them. If the product were outlawed there the mob would gladly step in.
In one respect, governments should be decidedly illiberal. Advertising is largely absent in the underworld, but in the legal world it could stimulate vast new demand. It should be banned.
Likewise, alluring packaging and products, such as cannabis sweets that would appeal to children, should be outlawed, just as many countries outlaw flavoured cigarettes and alcohol-spiked sweets. The state should use the tax system and public education to promote the least harmful ways of getting high. The legal market has already created pots answer to the e-cigarette, which reduces the damage done by smoke to lungs.
EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)Like an old book of etiquette.
"How to treat women in the 1900s"
Its just all so obvious and old fashioned (in that millions have been saying this for decades).
eridani
(51,907 posts)Good to see sense about the War on Some Drugs there.
EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)it's one of their things
This is calling for legalisation in 2009:
http://www.economist.com/node/13237193?zid=317&ah=8a47fc455a44945580198768fad0fa41
This is from 2016:
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21692881-argument-legalisation-cannabis-has-been-won-now-difficult-bit-right?spc=scode&spv=xm&ah=9d7f7ab945510a56fa6d37c30b6f1709
LOADS more here:
http://www.economist.com/topics/drug-policy
And honestly, it's not surprising considering their editorial viewpoint.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)at the same time very "The Economist." I've read it less lately, just when googling some issue takes me there, but it's always been pretty liberal on social issues, and, by the way, not what most would consider consistently and definitely conservative on economic issues, more centrist and...loose was always my take, sometimes seeming rather libertarian, but that is the opportunistic fad of the times.
My initial response to this article was "lighten up" on the laws bit a bit, but the cautious note is certainly explained by all the problems bad laws will inevitably cause, including people still going to jail for one product and living free with another, as well as inadvertently retaining and creating new markets for vicious cartels. Certainly we don't want those earnest clerks in state offices setting up templates that just sort of morph into national policy.
Good article. Thanks for posting it, Eridani.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)And it's a great revenue enhancer. And you don't have to pay for all those drug cops any more. They can become pot farm inspectors instead.