The US federal government spent over $15 billion on the drug war last year. The point is, why isn't this an option for cutting? If we legalized drugs and taxed sales, we could easily start heading in the right direction towards balancing the budget. Republicans claim they want to cut spending, but moral imperialism is obviously not on the table. I do not consume drugs on a regular basis, but it's obvious that as long as somebody is consuming something in their private residence, there should be no legal consequences as long as no one else was harmed. Prohibition at least needed an amendment, the federal government is arrogant enough to wage this "war" without even bothering to look at the constitution. Not only does it hurt drug users, but it harms industry and home chemists who have a harder time purchasing chemistry equipment because of overregulation. The DEA pretty much has free reign to do anything it wants to find and arrest suspected drug producers, and the courts have repeatedly shown the 4th Amendment is no concern to them when prosecuting the victims of statist control. We need to realize that our bodies are private property, and the state cannot regulate what individuals put consume in private.
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-18 9:24
While I totally agree that the war on drugs is a complete waste of time and money, and that the state should have no such say in people's lives, $15 billion is a drop in the ocean of the budget.
The current deficit for 2011 is $1.65 trillion. $15 billion is something like 0.009% of that.
Name:
Libertarian Transhumanist2011-03-18 9:34
That's a good point. It's a start at least, and I'd rather them cut the drug war before teacher's salaries. I think that it would act as a good "gateway," in that realizing drug criminalization is similar to a lot of other problems stemming from legislating morality. My ultimate is hope is that it could lead to cutting the ultimate sacred cow, military spending. So you could say drug legalization is a means to rational spending, not the end.
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-18 10:00
15 billion divided by the U.S. population works out to almost 50$ each. Make up your own conclusions.
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-18 10:02
>>3
My ultimate is hope is that it could lead to cutting the ultimate sacred cow, military spending.
For the 2010 fiscal year, the president's base budget of the Department of Defense rose to $533.8 billion. Adding spending on "overseas contingency operations" brings the sum to $663.8 billion.[1][2]
When the budget was signed into law on October 28, 2009, the final size of the Department of Defense's budget was $680 billion, $16 billion more than President Obama had requested.[3] An additional $37 billion supplemental bill to support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was expected to pass in the spring of 2010, but has been delayed by the House of Representatives after passing the Senate.[4][5] Defense-related expenditures outside of the Department of Defense constitute between $319 billion and $654 billion in additional spending, bringing the total for defense spending to between $1.01 and $1.35 trillion in fiscal year 2010.[6]
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-18 10:40
>>3
Here's an idea: Privatize schools. No cutting of teacher's salaries by the government, no more failing education system, no more state indoctrination imposed on children.
>>5
I would rather cut social security before anything else.
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-18 16:11
The DEA could easily win the war on drugs but corruption is stopping them.
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-21 11:48
>>8
Prohibition and the current war on drugs have proved that you can't win a war on an artificial substance that people want. As long as people understand the chemistry behind drugs, there will be those to make them for profit. The only way to "win" the drug war would be to ban any chemical in drugs (protip: They're all very common) or turn into a police state. Neither of which sounds appealing.
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-21 12:40
The "War on Drugs" is such a f-n scam! Alcohol and Tobacco are just as addictive as cocaine and alcohol combined with driving kills almost 40,000+ people per year. The only reason the US Govt tolerates them is they collect tax revenue on the sale of the same. Tobacco use keep the medical industry awash in cash. It's all so obvious it's all about money. Bastards.
>>13
Are you saying the raping of European culture, niggers, sand niggers, atheists, homosexuals, prostitution, and a rise in general crime is a good thing?
>>9
No. The reality is government does not want to "win" a drug war. It wants maximum destruction and cost on our nation.
"libertarian" by and large is a jew ideology, telling whites to do whatever makes them feel good.
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-24 22:43
>>16
I'm pretty sure jews both agree and disagree with libertarianism, since jews are composed of many individuals, not a single hive mind collective.
Why do you think in terms of collectivism so much? You're like a socialist or something.
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-25 0:10
>>11
Apples to oranges my friend. What works in other countries will not necessarily work in the US.
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-25 9:42
>>18
That only means we should take into account environmental factors when deciding the best policy to impose on others.
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-25 12:59
>>19
Fair enough. And I do think >>9 is full of shit. But the US "War on Drugs" is fundamentally unwinnable.
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-27 1:38
>>11
Singapore solves drug distribution by killing everyone. We rarely do capital punishment for murders anymore. Good luck trying to convince people to kill drug offenders, a completely victimless crime. The general trend is that people in the US are more opposed to capital punishment every year.