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

Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organisations?

marginalrevolution.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 183 posts

Re: Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organisations?

#161

Post by TillE »

dx034 wrote: post #159
adventured wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you mind elaborating how the US heavily punished Portugal for its actions around drugs? Or for that matter, what crippling sanctions the US placed on Canada for legalizing pot? The peaks days of the drug war are long over. The US has no real capacity to do anything to nations for such decisions, that has become very clear. As more nations and US states legalize and decriminalize, the pro war on drugs group will…

Don't know why you get downvoted. I also think that states legalising drugs with a sound plan won't face retaliation. Dutch laws on consumption of weed also haven't hurt their relationship to the US.

Marijuana has never been legal in the Netherlands. Laws against cultivation are quite strictly enforced. Only sale and consumption are tolerated, but still technically illegal.

Re: Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organisations?

#162

Post by baud147258 »

adventured wrote: post #121
chrischen wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The United States heavily punishes countries that legalize drugs, if not by direct sanctions, then by pulling aid. See how US threatened UN with pulling aid, and Pakistan.

Would you mind elaborating how the US heavily punished Portugal for its actions around drugs? Or for that matter, what crippling sanctions the US placed on Canada for legalizing pot? The peaks days of the drug war are long over. The US has no real capacity to do anything to nations for such decisions, that has become very clear. As more nations and US states legalize and decriminalize, the pro war on drugs group will…

I'll guess that Portugal does not have a strong relationship with the US, which limits the level of sanctions that could be used. And the European Union would protect one of its member, I think.

Re: Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organisations?

#163

Post by disputatious »

The traffickers and criminal organizations in Mexico are distinct. The cartels responsible for trafficking today only use marijuana to enhance their people smuggling bottom line. The big marijuana industry from Mexico and Colombia were greatly diminished years ago. There is still a thriving local illegal marijuana market in Mexico and Colombia as well today, the ounce costs around $20-$50 depending where you are, there are some good wild strains too that fetch high-dollar in the states among connoisseurs, that market is not cartel controlled. Mexico's politics will be better determined based on what happens in the United States and Canada in coming months. Marijuana was partially legalized in Mexico in 2016, it is quite likely that Canada and Mexico will collaborate closely on this.

Re: Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organisations?

#164

Post by globuous »

falsprofet wrote: post #154
globuous wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't mind me but... I double checked :D and you're right !! :) - https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/make_do - http://grammarist.com/usage/make-do-make-due/ According to the second link, here's where it comes from: 'Make do is short for make [something] do well enough, where do carries the rare sense to serve a specified purpose. So this do is similar to the one used in sentences such as, “I could use a cup of coffee, bu…

You double checked second hand sources which don't link to primary sources, so at best you are speculating (that) I were wrong, thank you very much. Edit: And either way, I didn't contest make do as it is used now, I merely hinted at a different origin. So, by that line of reasoning, if make due is in use, it is correct simply by merit of custom, as well. PS: And this is why these comments are frowned upon, they inva…

You're right you're right. My sources weren't primary. I liked grammatist because they had some sort of ethimological insight as to why it's do rather than due. Anyway, here's a primary source:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/make_do

Happy ? :)

P.S. use 'make due' if you want. Parent was just trying to be nice.

P.S.S Sourcing grammatist again (soooorrryy):

'While it’s tempting to call make due a misspelling and leave it at that, make due appears often enough (about once for every ten instances of make do in a current Google News search) to have gained some acceptance, and some people (including commenters on this post) find it at least as logical as make do. Perhaps due, which is mainly an adjective, could here bear the sense appropriate (as in, we have done due diligence), or perhaps it could mean sufficient (as in, we have due cause to be thankful). And because the phrase is an idiom, its logic can be loose.'

Re: Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organisations?

#165

Post by SE4L »

tomrod wrote: post #10

The "Drug Trafficking Organizations" are the cartels. It is important to remember they don't exist to traffic drugs, they exist for the top leader(s) to obtain and maintain power, like a state-in-waiting. As other activities become more profitable, they switch over to those. Marijuana loses its profitability, they can switch to other drugs, guns, smuggling, "coyotes", or legitimate enterprise. This is what unfettered…

Cartels exist to make money. The criminal element is not created by unfettered capitalism, it is created by prohibition. Prohibition is what raises the risk level to the point where people who are willing to break the law are able to demand a high enough price to make it worthwhile. If you compare the impact of the drug war with alcohol prohibition, the similarities are hard to miss.

Re: Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organisations?

#166

Post by paulddraper »

spraak wrote: post #17
IgorPartola wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meth is actually really interesting. It's a very democratic drug in that it's really easy for the user to make it themselves. Pot is another one that theoretically lets you grow it yourself, but it's significantly harder and requires a larger investment. From what I gather, as long as you manage to not blow yourself up, the shake and bake method requires very little supplies and tools to make meth. Edit: to be clear,…

I'm not sure what would be more fitting, but "democratic" seems like thewrong word here. I understand what you mean, though. The easiest drug to make yourself is probably alcohol e.g. people making their own in prison.

Could be "accessible" or "egalitarian".

Re: Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organisations?

#167

Post by rootusrootus »

sunyata wrote: post #39
snarfy wrote: post #33

Northwest Cannabis Solutions, one of the largest cannabis growers in Washington State, is run by the Russian Mafia. I'm not sure about Mexican cartels, but legalization certainly hasn't stop organized crime involvement.

Do you have a citation for that? Ive been to a shop or two that felt a little sketchy but this interests me.

I was curious too. The only noteworthy conclusion I could make from my research is that there are a lot of people associated with the company that have sort-of-Russian-sounding names. That's a pretty weak argument that they are Russian Mafia, however, and I didn't see any stronger evidence.

Re: Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organisations?

#168

Post by spiralx »

adventured wrote: post #121
chrischen wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The United States heavily punishes countries that legalize drugs, if not by direct sanctions, then by pulling aid. See how US threatened UN with pulling aid, and Pakistan.

Would you mind elaborating how the US heavily punished Portugal for its actions around drugs? Or for that matter, what crippling sanctions the US placed on Canada for legalizing pot? The peaks days of the drug war are long over. The US has no real capacity to do anything to nations for such decisions, that has become very clear. As more nations and US states legalize and decriminalize, the pro war on drugs group will…

None of those countries legalised - they merely decriminalised usage, avoiding having to break their treaty obligations.

Re: Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organisations?

#169

Post by spiralx »

baud147258 wrote: post #162
adventured wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you mind elaborating how the US heavily punished Portugal for its actions around drugs? Or for that matter, what crippling sanctions the US placed on Canada for legalizing pot? The peaks days of the drug war are long over. The US has no real capacity to do anything to nations for such decisions, that has become very clear. As more nations and US states legalize and decriminalize, the pro war on drugs group will…

I'll guess that Portugal does not have a strong relationship with the US, which limits the level of sanctions that could be used. And the European Union would protect one of its member, I think.

It's simply that Portugal hasn't legalised anything, so they're not in conflict with their treaty obligations. The same as the Netherlands, use is simply decriminalised, not legalised.

Re: Is Legal Pot Crippling Mexican Drug Trafficking Organisations?

#170

Post by godelski »

lmm wrote: post #155
tomrod wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't just substitute things and expect them to keep the same market. Of course not. What we face is an organized, unregulated, lawless group of dangerous criminals who find one of their primary income sources dwindling. I did not intend for my original point to debate foundations of economic theory, only to point out that they are likely to continue diversifying their product -- apparently they are switching t…

If those other activities are profitable, why wouldn't they be doing them already? Your post implies reducing their ability to sell cannabis will increase their other activities, which I see no reason to believe.

I'm confused by the downvotes you got, because you basically said the conclusion of my post.
Post reply on HN