The Foreign Trade Thread

#1,202
#1,202
n_huffhines said:
Anybody with a brain knows that the war on drugs doesn't work. Demanding Mexico fight it harder is just a demand for wasted effort.
Click to expand...

They don't need to put everybody hitting a bong in prison, but they can certainly do a better job of taking back their country from the cartels. Since so many of their elected officials are on their payrolls, these economic sanctions are a pretty good response IMO. When Mexico's problems spill over and under the border, they become ours as well. It's actually a pretty tepid retaliation. They're being given a great opportunity to create wealth piggybacking on our economy. They have the potential to really profit by taking a big piece of China's piece. They need behave and be a better neighbor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#1,203
#1,203
Thunder Good-Oil said:
They don't need to put everybody hitting a bong in prison, but they can certainly do a better job of taking back their country from the cartels. Since so many of their elected officials are on their payrolls, these economic sanctions are a pretty good response IMO. When Mexico's problems spill over and under the border, they become ours as well. It's actually a pretty tepid retaliation. They're being given a great opportunity to create wealth piggybacking on our economy. They have the potential to really profit by taking a big piece of China's piece. They need behave and be a better neighbor.
Click to expand...

Their problem? These are our problems. Our war on drugs is the reason these cartels have so much money and power. If drugs were legal here, the cartels would be near nothing for us to worry about, and they would be 1/10th of the problem for Mexico if they still wanted to practice prohibition.
 
#1,204
#1,204
n_huffhines said:
Their problem? These are our problems. Our war on drugs is the reason these cartels have so much money and power. If drugs were legal here, the cartels would be near nothing for us to worry about, and they would be 1/10th of the problem for Mexico if they still wanted to practice prohibition.
Click to expand...

If this was true then the cartels would be based in the US. They're in Mexico because that government isn't cleaning it up. It's a sanctuary... just slip a handful of pesos to the officials and run an illegal operation without risk.

There's also the human trafficking. Is there a war on that creating the problem as well?
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#1,205
#1,205
n_huffhines said:
Are you sure about that? Sometimes doing nothing is the right move. Obama paid lip service to being tough on illegal immigration, but anybody with a brain could see that it's a much smaller problem than it was 15 years ago. Now we got Trump leveraging our economy in a completely stupid effort to fix a problem that's already getting fixed. At best, Trump is blowing hot air and will declare victory without ever having to impose a tariff. If goes forward with this, he's an inexcusable moron.
Click to expand...

Obama did deport a lot of illegal immigrants.

But, obviously, economics play a big role in migration. If Mexicans (or others) can make a decent living where they're at, they're much less likely to cross the border.
 
#1,206
#1,206
Thunder Good-Oil said:
If this was true then the cartels would be based in the US. They're in Mexico because that government isn't cleaning it up. It's a sanctuary... just slip a handful of pesos to the officials and run an illegal operation without risk.

There's also the human trafficking. Is there a war on that creating the problem as well?
Click to expand...

Non sequitur.

Yes, prostitution is mostly illegal, which necessarily strengthens the black market
 
#1,209
#1,209
Thunder Good-Oil said:
Bless your heart... you can't understand analogies. Fact is drug lords based here aren't allowed to operate free of consequences.

So you're for legalizing underage prostitution?
Click to expand...

And yet we still are losing the war on drugs at home and it's funding the cartels. You have no point. American $ + prohibition = powerful cartels. Legalization is a very easy solution that would save us $ and generate tax revenue, but no, let's tax Americans with a stupid solution that most definitely will not win the war on drugs.

Of course I'm not for legalizing underage prostitution, I'm saying that banning consensual paid sex among adults creates asn infrastucture for trafficking. You can gut it by legalizing adult prostitution.
 
#1,210
#1,210
n_huffhines said:
And yet we still are losing the war on drugs at home and it's funding the cartels. You have no point. American $ + prohibition = powerful cartels. Legalization is a very easy solution that would save us $ and generate tax revenue, but no, let's tax Americans with a stupid solution that most definitely will not win the war on drugs.

Of course I'm not for legalizing underage prostitution, I'm saying that banning consensual paid sex among adults creates asn infrastucture for trafficking. You can gut it by legalizing adult prostitution.
Click to expand...

I am against legalization of drugs but it looks like the war is over and the cartels won. We have no idea who they have purchased within our government but we know for sure they have purchased someone. They purchased everyone in Mexico/South America. Time to admit defeat and take the cash cow away. Law enforcement has little or no effect on reducing the amount of drugs used by the current population. Sell it to them, pay down the national debt and let evolution takes its course.
 
  • Like
Reactions: n_huffhines
#1,211
#1,211
n_huffhines said:
And yet we still are losing the war on drugs at home and it's funding the cartels. You have no point. American $ + prohibition = powerful cartels. Legalization is a very easy solution that would save us $ and generate tax revenue, but no, let's tax Americans with a stupid solution that most definitely will not win the war on drugs.

Of course I'm not for legalizing underage prostitution, I'm saying that banning consensual paid sex among adults creates asn infrastucture for trafficking. You can gut it by legalizing adult prostitution.
Click to expand...

At one time the FBI focused on gangs. Now the FBI focuses on bringing down lawfully elected presidents. Perhaps if we got off the racist kick and spent some time dealing effectively with the poor disadvantaged felons ... you know the ones who are over represented (for a reason) in prison ... and "effectively" = prompt executions. How many of the daily shootings in Chicago do you suppose are all about up and coming gang members (urban thug scouts) earning merit badges to prove they can be trusted to peddle drugs? Half the population thinks the urban warfare is about guns rather than placing the problem on people themselves. I know for sure I never met a gun walking around firing itself at random.
 
#1,212
#1,212
AM64 said:
At one time the FBI focused on gangs. Now the FBI focuses on bringing down lawfully elected presidents. Perhaps if we got off the racist kick and spent some time dealing effectively with the poor disadvantaged felons ... you know the ones who are over represented (for a reason) in prison ... and "effectively" = prompt executions. How many of the daily shootings in Chicago do you suppose are all about up and coming gang members (urban thug scouts) earning merit badges to prove they can be trusted to peddle drugs? Half the population thinks the urban warfare is about guns rather than placing the problem on people themselves. I know for sure I never met a gun walking around firing itself at random.
Click to expand...

But what does this have to do with the winnability of the war on drugs and sex trafficking? Were we winning before the FBI focused on POTUS?

The point you are making is similar to a point I like to make. Why have the FBI/local law enforcement waste resources on drugs and sex between consenting adults? I'd much rather put those resources into property crime and violent crime. Why do gangs in Chicago beef? They are fighting for real estate for drug peddling. What happens when drugs are sold legally at Walmart? The corner kids get laid off.
 
#1,213
#1,213
n_huffhines said:
But what does this have to do with the winnability of the war on drugs and sex trafficking? Were we winning before the FBI focused on POTUS?

The point you are making is similar to a point I like to make. Why have the FBI/local law enforcement waste resources on drugs and sex between consenting adults? I'd much rather put those resources into property crime and violent crime.
Click to expand...

The FBI went after the mafia or mobs or whatever term you want. They didn't specifically or only target a particular crime like drugs or prostitution or hijacking or any number of other felonies ... they went after the source. Turn a criminal's lights off permanently, and his transgressions go away, too. I don't have a problem with sex between consenting adults ... even if money is involved. I couldn't care less if someone poisons himself or herself with drugs ... except I don't want to foot the bill for Narcan or emergency services or be a victim of incapacitated behavior or need for funding. But you and many others seem to pretend that the other part of the equation doesn't exist ... the money for drugs has to come from someplace and addicts don't tend to be great breadwinners - at least not through legal activity. Legalizing drugs only (maybe) reduces the price (and the theft necessary) to the user and removes the stigma so that more people will fall into the addiction trap. You also selectively neglect to discuss which drugs to legalize and the consequences of legalizing and de-stigmatizing highly addictive substances.
 
#1,214
#1,214
AM64 said:
The FBI went after the mafia or mobs or whatever term you want. They didn't specifically or only target a particular crime like drugs or prostitution or hijacking or any number of other felonies ... they went after the source. Turn a criminal's lights off permanently, and his transgressions go away, too. I don't have a problem with sex between consenting adults ... even if money is involved. I couldn't care less if someone poisons himself or herself with drugs ... except I don't want to foot the bill for Narcan or emergency services or be a victim of incapacitated behavior or need for funding. But you and many others seem to pretend that the other part of the equation doesn't exist ... the money for drugs has to come from someplace and addicts don't tend to be great breadwinners - at least not through legal activity. Legalizing drugs only (maybe) reduces the price (and the theft necessary) to the user and removes the stigma so that more people will fall into the addiction trap. You also selectively neglect to discuss which drugs to legalize and the consequences of legalizing and de-stigmatizing highly addictive substances.
Click to expand...

1) making drugs legal does not remove the stigma
2) making drugs legal does not necessarily increase addiction (look at Portugal)
3) all drugs should be made legal for adults to take, if they so choose
4) legality is the biggest reason drug addiction interferes with employment; plenty of very successful people are addicted to hard drugs or are regular users or recreationally use "soft" drugs. Alcohol results in some people's inability to maintain honest work, but it's not a reason to ban alcohol

Yeah, the stigma associated with marijuana has been reduced, but I would say that has to do with the fact that the stigma was stupid in the first place. Marijuana is a much better vice than alcohol. If heroin becomes legal, decent people are not going to be open about heroin use because it'll still have a terrible stigma. Nobody volunteers that they are pill poppers, even tho their pills are legally acquired.
 
#1,215
#1,215
n_huffhines said:
1) making drugs legal does not remove the stigma
2) making drugs legal does not necessarily increase addiction (look at Portugal)
3) all drugs should be made legal for adults to take, if they so choose
4) legality is the biggest reason drug addiction interferes with employment; plenty of very successful people are addicted to hard drugs or are regular users or recreationally use "soft" drugs. Alcohol results in some people's inability to maintain honest work, but it's not a reason to ban alcohol

Yeah, the stigma associated with marijuana has been reduced, but I would say that has to do with the fact that the stigma was stupid in the first place. Marijuana is a much better vice than alcohol. If heroin becomes legal, decent people are not going to be open about heroin use because it'll still have a terrible stigma. Nobody volunteers that they are pill poppers, even tho their pills are legally acquired.
Click to expand...

Alcohol is generally much easier to detect, and remove the person from doing something that might harm you or me. Why would the stigma of any opioid (either synthetic or vegan :D) use not decrease with legalization just like you state is/was the case with marijuana? Impaired is impaired whether a surgeon, an engineer, a pilot, a banker, or even a forklift operator ... we can all be harmed physically or financially by their inadequacy when it matters.

As for marijuana use and "proven" safety. Yesterday there was an article quoting even "25 cups of coffee per day won't harm the heart" ... and, of course, there are other "studies" saying just one cup a day will lead you to an early grave ... same deal with alcohol. It is known that with CBD use it takes a lot more anesthesia to sedate a patient for surgery ... and anesthesia is generally not good for your health. Draw your own conclusions ... and I know you will.
 
#1,216
#1,216
AM64 said:
Alcohol is generally much easier to detect, and remove the person from doing something that might harm you or me. Why would the stigma of any opioid (either synthetic or vegan :D) use not decrease with legalization just like you state is/was the case with marijuana? Impaired is impaired whether a surgeon, an engineer, a pilot, a banker, or even a forklift operator ... we can all be harmed physically or financially by their inadequacy when it matters.

As for marijuana use and "proven" safety. Yesterday there was an article quoting even "25 cups of coffee per day won't harm the heart" ... and, of course, there are other "studies" saying just one cup a day will lead you to an early grave ... same deal with alcohol. It is known that with CBD use it takes a lot more anesthesia to sedate a patient for surgery ... and anesthesia is generally not good for your health. Draw your own conclusions ... and I know you will.
Click to expand...

The stigma with marijuana was unmerited. That's why it's going away. The stigma with heroin has merit. That's why it wouldn't go away. Nobody is saying surgeons should be operating high. Legalizing it for recreational use doesn't mean it's OK for professionals to be high on the job, just like it's not OK for them to be drunk on the job.

The 2nd paragraph is incoherent and without context.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top