Sunday, October 31, 2010

Drug Control Advocacy Debating Arguments

Illegal drugs means income and employment for the Supply Side. Crimes are committed by the Demand Side because of the effect of drug on the mental state of the individual which blocks his sense of moral inhibitions. But why are laws made in such an odd way that punishment on the Supply Side is much more cruel than on the Demand Side?


My college thesis in University of the Philippines is The Market Structure of Prohibitted Drugs (BS Economics 1997, UPLB). I figured out that increasing the punishment for Suppliers will increase the price of the drug. Because of the addiction-effect, the demand curve of the drug is inelastic, hence, no matter how the price will increase, the buyer will still find a way to get it. With budget constraint, the user has to level up his income sources and this lead to the onset of income-generating crimes such as drug pushing, swindling, theft, robbery. I was able to prove in theory and data that increasing the punishment on the supply side will increase crimes committed by the demand side. In the end, to eradicate the illegal drug market, I was proposing to increase the punishment on the demand side to create an irreconcilable price gap between the willingness to sell and willingness to buy.


Alex P. Vidal : In Mexico, two drug cartels--the Sinaloa and Juarez-- have been tearing each other apart trying to eliminate each other in bloody drug wars that have escalated in the United States. The police are no match to these drug cartels and they have police chiefs, judges, prosecutors, mayors and governors in their payroll. Those who refused to be bribed are killed together with their families.


RESPONSE: In the Philippines, there is no war among drug-suppliers. There is no such thing as competition-relatad crimes. We only have demand-side crimes here.

In the case of America, I think George Soros' twin ideas are brilliant and workable, which are to (1) legalize the recreational use and small-scale cultivation of marijuana and (2) invest in effective education.

But take note, this twin ideas has to work together simultaneously. It will be a disaster if you legalize it and stop investing in education.

In the Philippines, I believe the illegalization will have to remain the same, but we have to increase punishment and education on the demand side.

I just figured out that the Marijuana Legalization debate and Jueteng Legalization debate follows the same arguments.

Ang marijuana ang pinaka magaling na herbal plant na cheap i-grow and more effective substitute than any pain killer drugs. It's been used for thousands of years. Naputol lang ang use nyan sa early 1900s for some reason na walang kwenta. Ang ayaw ko lang sa Marijuana ay pag ini-smoke yan kasi meron din nicotine yan. Meron kasi akong Anti-Smoking Advocacy na masasagasaan nyan, pag ini-smoke lang ha.

Marijuana have been used by mankind for thousands of years. In the early 1900, it took them 20 years to brainwash the mind of the people into believing that marijuana is addictive and makes people crazy criminals. When we decriminalize it now, I think it will also take us 20 years to remove the stigma.

If you have tried drinking a bottle of beer, marijuana gives the same effect at a cheaper cost, at a least fattening result. You can't grow beer in your backyard, you can't make pain-reliever medicines in your kitchen; but with a marijuana in a pot in your backyard, it's like having access to instant beer and pain-reliever.