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

How a Mexican Drug Cartel Makes Its Billions

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 248 posts

Re: How a Mexican Drug Cartel Makes Its Billions

#91

Post by vlisivka »

mrbgty wrote: post #76
paulhauggis wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, I doubt it will help. Why? The cartels thrive in countries where you can essentially buy off any official. When you legalize drugs, they aren't going to suddenly stop selling it. They will now have a legal business which will continue to fund their criminal empires. We most likely will see an increase in other crimes, like extortion and kidnapping. Drugs are still illegal in the US and we don't really…

Why would the largest consumer (US) purchase drugs from the drug cartels if it were legal in the US and could be sold at every 7-11? The drug cartels would lose a lot of the revenue which makes them powerful.

Why you are worrying about revenues of cartels? If you think that selling drugs is legal, then their business is equally legal to business of Apple or Microsoft. Why you are not worrying about revenues of Microsoft or Apple?

Re: How a Mexican Drug Cartel Makes Its Billions

#92

Post by objclxt »

jlmendezbonini wrote: post #55
paulhauggis wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, I doubt it will help. Why? The cartels thrive in countries where you can essentially buy off any official. When you legalize drugs, they aren't going to suddenly stop selling it. They will now have a legal business which will continue to fund their criminal empires. We most likely will see an increase in other crimes, like extortion and kidnapping. Drugs are still illegal in the US and we don't really…

>Drugs are still illegal in the US and we don't really see >the same kind of crime in our country because the police >actually (for the most part) do their job. I strongly disagree with your statement. Police? Mexico is not using your usual police officers to fight drug violence neither Colombia. They are using highly trained military forces. Why? Cartels have very advance military equipment that is, sometimes, even…

"Police? Mexico is not using your usual police officers to fight drug violence neither Colombia. They are using highly trained military forces. Why? Cartels have very advance military equipment"

If you read the article, you'd see the reason Colombia and Mexico use the military is mainly because the cartels own the police. Virtually ever person has been bribed. That's the core problem here.

Re: How a Mexican Drug Cartel Makes Its Billions

#93

Post by sstrudeau »

AJ007 wrote: post #54
dsrguru wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While that would reduce violent crime, it would also sanction people using recreational drugs besides alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine. Many voters and politicians find it against their religious or moral beliefs to allow other people to do recreational drugs besides the ones they themselves are doing.

Arguably it would take time for the violent crime to subside. A culture of violence does not vanish over night, but rather over generations. My prediction is Mexico's violent crime spilling over to the US resulting in a drug war surge (both already happening to some degree.) In the background, regulators slowly loosen up laws as to not lose face (would explain the toleration of medical marijuana.) I can only imagine…

Homicide and other violent crime rates tracked pretty tightly to the creation (and eventual repeal) of alcohol prohibition laws in the US. Homicide rates dropped dramatically immediately after prohibitions repeal. We likely wouldn't need to wait "generations" to see a benefit.

One reference for prohibition homicide data: http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/alcohol-pro...

Re: How a Mexican Drug Cartel Makes Its Billions

#94

Post by vlisivka »

jlmendezbonini wrote: post #68
vibrunazo wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They make most of their money from cocaine and methamphetamine (which can be legally acquired, but that didn't stop traffic). 90% of all cocaine in the US come from mexico. [1] Do you mean cocaine should be legalized? Alcohol is a bad analogy to legalizing cocaine, you should probably be comparing to the Opium Wars instead, which didn't really end well. [2] [1] http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34215.pdf [2] http://en…

Let me quote [1] "An estimated 90% of cocaine entering the United States transits Mexico." The key word here is "transits". Every other country in Central America, and some in northern South America are part of that "transit" too. Mexican just happens, to its bad luck, to be next to the biggest consumer. Nobody is arguing to have cocaine accesible by kids at the grocery store. The argument is to legalize it to regula…

What will happen to consumers when prices will be so low, so no body will want to sell drugs, because they are no longer profitable?

Re: How a Mexican Drug Cartel Makes Its Billions

#95

Post by objclxt »

praptak wrote: post #37

I admit that I (in a way) root for those guys. If they can move around such quantities of physical illegal stuff then we can be sure we can move around any strings of bits we choose to.

It is a matter of priorities - drug enforcement isn't high up the agenda.

The DEA has a budget of $2.4 billion. The NSA's budget is classified, but most analysts estimate it's at least $6 billion - over double that of the DEA. And that's just one intelligence agency. The total intelligence budget of the USA is $80 billion.

Cartels could easily be dismantled if the will and money was there - it isn't, because we would rather spend that money on other things, such as nation state intelligence and counter-terrorism.

Re: How a Mexican Drug Cartel Makes Its Billions

#96

Post by refurb »

mrtron wrote: post #85
vlisivka wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meth is very cheap already. Any changes?

From what I understand meth is produced really poorly by regional producers. I think it would end up more expensive at your local pharmacy if legalized. The benefit would be you know you won't lose your teeth from the odd chemicals the producer is using. (I could be horribly off on the details)

You are horribly off.

Methamphetamine is currently available at your local pharmacy. It's a generic drugs and costs less than a $1 per dose.

You don't lose your teeth from meth because of chemicals used in it's production, you lose them due to a combination of poor oral hygiene and reduced saliva production. The same thing happens if you abuse the stuff you can get at the pharmacy.

Re: How a Mexican Drug Cartel Makes Its Billions

#97

Post by iandanforth »

astrodust wrote: post #75
mrtron wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should any substance be illegal? If we start banning substances rationally, wouldn't cigarettes top the list.

Cigarettes, while harmful, don't result in instant death. Banning cigarettes would result in the same problem banning other drugs has created. The only things that should be "banned" are those that are so intrinsically harmful they cause severe, immediate, measurable harm to both the abuser and society. There aren't many drugs that people consume that qualify for this standard since to be able to continuously abuse s…

I agree with the spirit of your argument, but for reference 30mg of nicotine is fatal. It's a potent neurotoxin and is actively used as a pesticide. It would easily qualify as something "so intrinsically harmful [it] cause[s] severe, immediate, measurable harm."

Re: How a Mexican Drug Cartel Makes Its Billions

#98

Post by bmelton »

blazingice wrote: post #74
vlisivka wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alcohol is already legal, so why gangs are not gone?

It looks like you're being downvoted, so I'll provide a reason. Alcohol is legal. The gangs that formed around producing, smuggling, and selling alcohol (e.g. Capone) are gone. The hope is that once other drugs are legal, the same thing happens to their producers.

Of note, since I was curious as to the answer myself and just found out, there are still 'gangs' (though less the urban variety we're used to seeing) based around moonshining.

That prompted me to ask "why is moonshining illegal", and the best (wrong) answer I could come up with was for production and delivery to dry counties.

Turns out, it's just a matter of taxation. Moonshiners are welcome to go legit, but they then have to pay $2.14 for each 750ml bottle they make, which cuts into profitability.

As they likely don't have reputations and/or massive marketing budgets, they still and distribute illegally, which turns it into a pure profit + overhead scenario.

Re: How a Mexican Drug Cartel Makes Its Billions

#99

Post by jimmar »

guelo wrote: post #31

The only way to stop these large criminal enterprises is to legalize the stuff. Just like alcohol prohibition created some of the most notorious American criminals, South American drug prohibitions produce powerful criminals down there. There isn't any large crime related to South American cocoa or coffee imports. Legalize it and then spend money and make laws regulating consumption, it would greatly reduce the miser…

I don't think drug legalization is the final answer the problem of cartels. Like the article says, '“The goal of these folks is not to sell drugs,” Tony Placido, who was the top intelligence official at the D.E.A. until he retired last year, told me. “It’s to earn a spendable profit and live to enjoy it.”'

If you shut down their income from drugs, they will find another way to make money. I had the opportunity to talk to a former U.S. Border Patrol sector chief in San Diego about the cartels. He said that in San Diego, they achieved some level of success in constraining the drug trade. The cartel response? Kidnap people and hold them for ransom. Like any business, they will find another way to make money when the market changes. As their innovations in finding new ways to bring drugs into the country shows, they can be creative when faced with a business problem.

Re: How a Mexican Drug Cartel Makes Its Billions

#100

Post by pjscott »

debacle wrote: post #77
mrtron wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should any substance be illegal? If we start banning substances rationally, wouldn't cigarettes top the list.

I'd rather not be driving around on the same road as someone tripping on LSD.

I agree, and feel the same way about people on alcohol -- which, incidentally, has a much greater risk of toxicity than LSD if you overdose. Which of these substances, if any, do you think should be illegal?
Post reply on HN