• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mexico is just getting worse

samsmart said:
Cigarettes and coffee have addictive properties too. Nicotine and caffeine are drugs too. There are adverse health effects for both nicotine and caffeine. But we allow them to be legal.
Click to expand...


Nicotine, in particular, is actually far more addictive than a number of street drugs.
 
Im totally on board for legalizing pot for reasons totally unrelated to mexicos drug war problem. if as a residual effect it improves their situation? Well...winner winner.
 
lizzie said:
Frankly, the Mexican government is just about as corrupt as the drug cartels. The officials are easily bought off, and answer to no one.

As for sending some of our troops- hell no.
Click to expand...

And the reason why the Mexican government is so corrupt is because they can't generate enough tax revenues to compete with criminal cartels.

And the reason why they can't generate high enough tax revenues is because they cannot develop their economy to one that is more modern and diversified.

And the reason why they can't modernize and diversify their economy is because drug cartels control one of their biggest markets - the manufacture and transport of recreational drugs.

If Mexico were to legalize recreational drugs they could tax it, which would generate a revenue stream for the government, which would allow them to pay their government official decent wages, which would help them become less corrupt as well as allow that money to diversify into other economic sectors.
 
lizzie said:
You're likely right with the Afghanistan/poppy analogy, but I would think that with the level of industriousness among the Mexican people, they would be able to come up with some other industries which could enrich the country as a whole.
Click to expand...

They could - but the incredible violence of the drug cartels is stifling that industriousness. Which means we need to take away the power of the drug cartels. And the most efficient way to do that is to legalize the drug trade.

Free the use of recreational drugs and you free the ability of the Mexican people to develop their own economy.
 
VanceMack said:
Im totally on board for legalizing pot for reasons totally unrelated to mexicos drug war problem. if as a residual effect it improves their situation? Well...winner winner.
Click to expand...


I totally agree that there are other reasons to legalize marijuana. It's basically harmless and has no meaningful impact on anyone. Since we ostensibly live in a free society, we really shouldn't need reasons to make something legal, we should need reasons to make something illegal.
 

If drug were legal, we would still get drug users who engage in violence of a sort.

What we will take away, though, is violence caused by criminal organizations.

There is a difference between having drug addicts who individually flip out and commit acts of violence because they get high on a certain drug and having a large organized paramilitary force that is capable of slaughtering an entire town and commit political assassinations.

If I had to choose between the two, I would pick the former any day.
 

But they weren't doing anything of the sort prior to the advancement of the drug cartels, and corruption of Mexican officials has been common for decades, if not longer. I really think the problem is much deeper than the cartels.
 
Heres the thing about drug cartels. They are in it to win it. Marijuana was easy til it wasnt. Heroin and meth is the new thing. Shut off the profitability of marijuana and they will find another more vicious and viable drug to import. Cocaine was not all that bad a drug to manage until they started to rock it. Now...crack is a bitch to fight. We can change our game and they will adjust tactics, tools, types. At some point...mejico is going to have to do real battle with their cartels. Its going to be brutal. People need to realize who we are talking about. We are talking about people that have been for the last several years leaving headless bodies strewn across their countryside.
 
lizzie said:
But they weren't doing anything of the sort prior to the advancement of the drug cartels, and corruption of Mexican officials has been common for decades, if not longer. I really think the problem is much deeper than the cartels.
Click to expand...

No, you are right. For example, their inability to modernize their economy, and their historical reliance as a source of cheap physical labor. Historically, there are many factors to all that.

But I think right now, in this contemporary time, the emerging narco-terrorist state that Mexico is becoming is inhibiting the development of their country much more than any other factor.
 

Which is why I, personally, am an advocate for legalization of absolutely all recreational drugs.

I admit that I am a radical in this, and so I don't speak for all those who favor drug legalization.

But my thoughts on drug legalization is that allowing people to do recreational drugs - including extremely hard ones such as meth and cocaine - is less of a societal blight that what criminalization of those drugs cause.

That's my very personal opinion, though. I'm fine with people getting high with whatever they want to. I'm tired of paying so much money trying to stop people from doing it.
 

This is the only problem I have with legalization across the board: With American culture the way it is, what we would end up with is a never-ending string of addicts which we would be supporting with tax dollars. It would become a "disability", and we would be paying for perpetual rehab for basically non-productive people (much more than we currently have on the rolls). If we could legalize, and make it the responsibility of the users to pay for their own rehab, and pay for their own means of living, I'm with you on the issue.
 
Im all for the legalizing of all recreational drugs...provided that ANY users be denied ALL government social services.
 
VanceMack said:
Im all for the legalizing of all recreational drugs...provided that ANY users be denied ALL government social services.
Click to expand...

You have obviously never been stuck on a Las Vegas hotel elevator with a meth freak at 2 AM.
 
Last edited:

We could set up the structures for these things.

Hell, at the very least we would allow those people who are wealthy enough who can afford their addiction and possible rehab to no longer support criminal organizations. Just because someone is a drug addict doesn't inherently mean they can't earn a living while an addict.
 
VanceMack said:
Im all for the legalizing of all recreational drugs...provided that ANY users be denied ALL government social services.
Click to expand...

How about we make a compromise?

Our compromise will be that any tax revenue generated from sales of all recreational drugs will be used for social support programs for drug addicts. That way, collectively as a group, they will be supporting themselves.

Is that fair enough?
 

To the bolded: I agree, but alot of folks would see it as an easy way out.
 

As a libertarian, I advocate for freedom to do things which may be harmful, but along with that, comes the responsibility to fix your own screw-ups.
 
lizzie said:
To the bolded: I agree, but alot of folks would see it as an easy way out.
Click to expand...

Then let's build together a society in which people don't feel they need to take drugs as an easy way out.
 
lizzie said:
As a libertarian, I advocate for freedom to do things which may be harmful, but along with that, comes the responsibility to fix your own screw-ups.
Click to expand...

I'm an anarcho-syndicalist and understand that economies of scale are a good thing. So we can attain them in regards to social support by having them pay for it collectively. We could also ban such social programs from achieving funding in any way other than through taxes on these drugs. That way, other people won't be paying for social programs to drug users as a whole.
 
samsmart said:
Then let's build together a society in which people don't feel they need to take drugs as an easy way out.
Click to expand...

That would take an entire cultural change, which isn't going to happen at any time in the forseeable future. The life of a drug addict is so tied in with emotional and psychological factors, that they are going to do the drugs regardless of legality, health risk, or any other deterrent. They wouldn't take them as an easy way out. They would become addicted, and then try to find the way to continue supporting their habit without any input of their own.
 
Im all for compromise...especially since I dont see us really dictating policy!

However...Id offer sale of Marijuana, but while I wouldnt arrest people for using heroin/crack, etc, I damn sure wouldnt allow for commercial sales.
 
Aderleth said:
Nicotine, in particular, is actually far more addictive than a number of street drugs.
Click to expand...

Physically, yes. Psychologically, no. Nicotine isn't mind-altering, except that you might get a little pick-up in mental energy. As someone who did quite a bit of experimenting when I was in my late teens, I assure you there is no comparison.
 
VanceMack said:
Im all for compromise...especially since I dont see us really dictating policy!

However...Id offer sale of Marijuana, but while I wouldnt arrest people for using heroin/crack, etc, I damn sure wouldnt allow for commercial sales.
Click to expand...

How about we permit commercial sales, because then that would allow the government to easily regulate the quality of manufactured drugs as a safety measure, but prohibit advertisement to consumers, limit the quantity that can be purchased via a databank, and allow them to be purchased only at licensed distributors, such as pharmacies?
 

Keith Richards, Rush Limbaugh, Jack Kennedy, Hunter Thompson, Billie Holliday, Plexico Burgess (if he wasn't a drug addict he should have been), Ted Haggard, to name a few.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…