English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Is it true that enforcing serious anti-drug policies poses great risks to unbridled economic liberalism? (Nadia Yassine --- a Muslim writer said this in her book --- Full Sails Ahead)
If so, how and why? (Please only real answers -- no jokie jokeyz lol)

2007-11-19 10:09:58 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

6 answers

No, it would pose a great risk to dealers, users and suppliers. And it is time we got serious about it. Drugs kill a lot more people than terrorists. We should treat it that way.

2007-11-19 10:19:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

First thing, I'm not involved with any drugs, dealers or such. When it comes to drug control don't you think the government has a hand in it just like gas prices. Trash all the drug control and anti-drug policies and see where the market would go. You're still going to have drug problems, but the high money making wouldn't be there, crime among the dealers would be down because of the lack of demand. There are many factors that because of this big effort that's not going anywhere is in place we have the problems we do with drugs and deaths of people..

2007-11-19 11:12:46 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well, it could work either way. The enforcement of drug policies would force those in the drug industry (illegal drug industry) to work underground. So their economy is essentially all black market. This means it is outside the scope of the government, and thus economic liberalism. But at the same time, if the government is successful in keeping the drug industry small, the economy is more suppressed, and thus in a way under the control of the government, and heavily suppressed. So it would stop economic liberalism. I guess it depends on the situation and status of the policy and enforcement.

2007-11-19 10:29:16 · answer #3 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 1 0

As far as I can see, the greatest risk it poses is that it creates the possibility of a huge illegal market which is not subject to any taxation or quality control. Liberal economics would therefore be best served by Government control of all substances in ensuring, quality, appropriate access, and due process including Inland Revenue

2007-11-19 10:41:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well, if you think it's true, then it's true and you concur with Yassine. If you don't think it's true, you'd have to do your research and find out why. Since, like most political topics, the answer is neither black nor white, there's room for a diversity of opinion.

For what it's worth, it is true that western governments have been dealing in drugs for the last 700 years (starting with opium trade) to generate unaccountable revenue for their various and sundry "efforts".

2007-11-19 10:56:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

That may be her belief but the only people making money on it are the growers and the other economic issues are being paid in the way of rehab, crime, incarceration. I think she believes what she says but she is not looking over the whole issue. not having anti drug policies will cause more harm than good.

2007-11-19 10:46:25 · answer #6 · answered by debbie f 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers