Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bay Area drug kingpins lured low-level dealers, promising cheap rent (2020)

eastbaytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Bay Area drug kingpins lured low-level dealers, promising cheap rent (2020)

#41

Post by 4ggr0 »

pengaru wrote: post #10
ta1234567890 wrote: post #4

I remember seeing dealers selling crack in plain sight on 9th and mission every day. Cops would drive by and the dealers wouldn’t even try to hide. It really seemed like there was some sort of arrangement going on there. But what would I know. On a side note, those dealers had pretty long hours, they’d be there from before 7am some times (and people buying too). It was also sad to see that most of their customers see…

> It really seemed like there was some sort of arrangement going on there. There's no arrangement needed, the entire state of CA has effectively decriminalized drug possession. Getting busted for dealing with just a small stash sufficient to support a few hours of selling amounts to a slap on the wrist. So unless the dealer is A Problem, there's not really any interest in wasting time on it. You're not putting them b…

That's why I absolutely dislike the concept of decriminalization. Just seems like an unnecessary, ineffective step instead of legalization.

With legalization, you get rid of black markets and dealers, taxes flow and product quality rises.

Decriminalization just means that addicts and dealers don't get fucked as hard when caught.

Re: Bay Area drug kingpins lured low-level dealers, promising cheap rent (2020)

#43

Post by violetgarden »

I went to SF two years ago. I was just shocked by the amount of drugs around. Walked out of my hotel at 8 AM and was offered crack. Waiting at the walk signal, there would be people in the throes of a high hallucinating and screaming at no one in particular. I brought sandals with me on the trip but had to stick to close toed shoes because of the needles/human waste on the streets. I used to just love SF when I was younger, but my recent trip really put me off.

The sad thing is, I think it’s good that SF is trying to treat addicts differently. However, I don't know if they’re attracting more addicts because they are lax or maybe you just see more because they aren’t thrown in jail? I’m not from Cali so I don’t know the situation too well. Sadly, it just seems like it’s spiraled out of control whatever they’re doing.

Re: Bay Area drug kingpins lured low-level dealers, promising cheap rent (2020)

#44

Post by rayiner »

ixacto wrote: post #31
boomboomsubban wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people argue that's the inevitable result of fully free market capitalism too.

Exactly, assuming that we are operating in a non-lawful space would that not enable the most “pure” result of free market capitalism?

What makes you think that? Free market capitalism is premised on the existence of a “market.” A “market” is not something that exists in the state of nature. In particular, you need some sort of property rights. If you can kill people and take their stuff, as in the state of nature, or use violence to coerce labor, then you don’t have “markets.”

You don’t need a government necessarily to enforce those rights, but free exchange of goods and labor cannot exist if violence is possible to coerce those exchanges.

Re: Bay Area drug kingpins lured low-level dealers, promising cheap rent (2020)

#45

Post by boomboomsubban »

rayiner wrote: post #44
ixacto wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, assuming that we are operating in a non-lawful space would that not enable the most “pure” result of free market capitalism?

What makes you think that? Free market capitalism is premised on the existence of a “market.” A “market” is not something that exists in the state of nature. In particular, you need some sort of property rights. If you can kill people and take their stuff, as in the state of nature, or use violence to coerce labor, then you don’t have “markets.” You don’t need a government necessarily to enforce those rights, but fre…

So for free market capitalism you need these "markets" that eliminate the ability for money to be used for violence. Anytime violence is involved, it's automatically not free market capitalism, so any negative result does not reflect the ideology.

Re: Bay Area drug kingpins lured low-level dealers, promising cheap rent (2020)

#46

Post by swiley »

FounderBurr wrote: post #35
mathattack wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rent control and subsidized housing protects a few at the expense of the rest.

Tell me more about this anarchist paradise you hint at.

I live on the east coast near DC. There's no rent control here. Instead there's very aggressive construction and housing is very cheap. I'm able to live in a fairly large luxury apartment on a junior engineer salary and there are plenty of much cheaper options.

Re: Bay Area drug kingpins lured low-level dealers, promising cheap rent (2020)

#47

Post by danvayn »

violetgarden wrote: post #43

I went to SF two years ago. I was just shocked by the amount of drugs around. Walked out of my hotel at 8 AM and was offered crack. Waiting at the walk signal, there would be people in the throes of a high hallucinating and screaming at no one in particular. I brought sandals with me on the trip but had to stick to close toed shoes because of the needles/human waste on the streets. I used to just love SF when I was y…

It could be worse now, but to be honest what you describe doesn't seem very new. Maybe you didn't notice the first time around.

Re: Bay Area drug kingpins lured low-level dealers, promising cheap rent (2020)

#48

Post by amanaplanacanal »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #45
rayiner wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think that? Free market capitalism is premised on the existence of a “market.” A “market” is not something that exists in the state of nature. In particular, you need some sort of property rights. If you can kill people and take their stuff, as in the state of nature, or use violence to coerce labor, then you don’t have “markets.” You don’t need a government necessarily to enforce those rights, but fre…

So for free market capitalism you need these "markets" that eliminate the ability for money to be used for violence. Anytime violence is involved, it's automatically not free market capitalism, so any negative result does not reflect the ideology.

There is still violence, it’s just centralized in the government instead of distributed in the gangs.

Re: Bay Area drug kingpins lured low-level dealers, promising cheap rent (2020)

#49

Post by boomboomsubban »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #48
boomboomsubban wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So for free market capitalism you need these "markets" that eliminate the ability for money to be used for violence. Anytime violence is involved, it's automatically not free market capitalism, so any negative result does not reflect the ideology.

There is still violence, it’s just centralized in the government instead of distributed in the gangs.

So if you pay the government for violence it's free market capitalism but if you pay a gang it's not?

Re: Bay Area drug kingpins lured low-level dealers, promising cheap rent (2020)

#50

Post by quickthrowman »

ball_of_lint wrote: post #17
imwillofficial wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Often times it’s not, and there are other social benefits, like being invited to all the parties, etc.. It’s not simply a numbers thing.

Who cares about parties when you can't buy food.

You can make 30-50% net margin selling weed to end users, and 10-25% selling pounds to dealers (in black market states). Your overhead is time, gas, and plastic bags. There’s plenty of money to be made with low risk (don’t sell cocaine if you don’t want to have to carry a gun)
Post reply on HN