Originally posted by Draco69
Not true. The cig. and alc. have a legion of supporting corporations and vast monopolic history to support them. Drug corporations would not have that luxury.Where would we grow them? We need land to grow the plants. I've already proven that the supply cannot meet the demand. Land would be bought and used to grow the plants. And it would increase. Would we be willing to sacrifice land for food for drugs. Believe it or not some cigarette corporations have succeed just this.
Well duuuh, they have supporting corproations because they are LEGAL. If all other drugs were legal they would too.
And what are you talking about?! Have you never heard of Colombia? Napal? India? Thiland? Various places around Africa? What do you think they grow there? Roses?
Where does coffee come from? What about tea? Coca plant grows in the same circumstances as coffee...omg, please find out something about it before talking.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You like to ignore things and pretend they don't exist when you're wrong, don't you? You show your hypocritical nature when you do that. Lest we forget I didn't insult you. Just lobbing that factual chestnut out there. Hopefully you will enjoy it. Or make like a squirrel and store it so that you're not caught out next time 🙂. All in fun.Draco, answer my question please. You said what about more devestating drugs? I said what about them?
I'm asking you the same as I asked Capt. As long as you don't get involved with them, what business is it of yours what drugs people take? It isn't. Just because you don't like them, doesn't mean you can say "Nah, not letting you take that. But I wanna smoke pot." Because a normal smoker could say "I don't want you to smoke pot, but I wanna smoke cigarettes." I'm sure you and Capt would argue there.
-AC
I'm not ignoring anything. But, there is a civility that you immeadiately toss out the window when someone disagrees with you. It's not necessary. Word like ignorant are insulting, and you only make such statments because you want to insult people.
I never said that this was about freedom. Rat poison is legal, and I have no problem with people taking it as a drug.
If we lived in a real world, and not the pretend world that if force fed to us, we would know that drugs aren't that bad. But, the government does have an obligation to protect it's own citizens. And, in this case, lies are being used by the governement to justify economic alternatives and keep harmless drugs illegal. Now, I've taken sleeping pills and gotten more ****ed up than I ever have on pot or shrooms. They're legal. In fact, I have an easier time getting sleeping pills than I do getting pot.
Originally posted by Draco69
It would be an inefficent market. If drugs impair the mental faculties of people to do their job than the corporations would suffer. The costs of healthcare after the legalization of drugs would dwarf the income of drug money.
It would be a very efficent market. As you said earlier, the people who will use drugs after they're legal wouldn't increase very dramatically. So, their impact on the healthcare system is already a factor. As for lost effeciency on the job, I have seen some extremely productive people fired because of random drug tests. Now, which would be more economical? Letting the guy smoke pot when he's at home, or firing him, paying for random drug tests, and hiring and training another guy to do his job?
i can't believe this thread...
i live in ireland, the alcohol capital of the world, i see on a daily basis what alcoholism does to people...
legalising all drugs will only ruin more people's lives...
fair enough something like marijuana, sure, if cigarettes are legal then why not that...
anything else is too much imo...
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I'm not ignoring anything. But, there is a civility that you immeadiately toss out the window when someone disagrees with you. It's not necessary. Word like ignorant are insulting, and you only make such statments because you want to insult people.
Ignorance isn't an insult. If you possess it and wield it for all to see, that's your own problem. Not mine.
I don't insult those who disagree with me. You just don't like that I'm disagreeing. Which is fine, but don't accuse me of doing things which I am not.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I never said that this was about freedom. Rat poison is legal, and I have no problem with people taking it as a drug.If we lived in a real world, and not the pretend world that if force fed to us, we would know that drugs aren't that bad. But, the government does have an obligation to protect it's own citizens. And, in this case, lies are being used by the governement to justify economic alternatives and keep harmless drugs illegal. Now, I've taken sleeping pills and gotten more ****ed up than I ever have on pot or shrooms. They're legal. In fact, I have an easier time getting sleeping pills than I do getting pot.
Well there you go then. My point was, should all drugs be legalised? Yes. If you only believe that the drugs YOU deem good should be legal, you're a hypocrite. Because I know people who don't think pot should be legal, but it should be. Because you deserve the right to take what you want. As does anyone, regardless of how it affects them, because it doesn't affect me.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
It would be a very efficent market. As you said earlier, the people who will use drugs after they're legal wouldn't increase very dramatically. So, their impact on the healthcare system is already a factor. As for lost effeciency on the job, I have seen some extremely productive people fired because of random drug tests. Now, which would be more economical? Letting the guy smoke pot when he's at home, or firing him, paying for random drug tests, and hiring and training another guy to do his job?
Precise-actly.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Good thing I never insulted you then. Moving on....-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No, not bad. Exaggerated. The point was responsibility. Here's my main question, because we all know you hate drugs. So I say this: WHAT BUSINESS IS IT OF YOURS WHAT SOMEONE TAKES INTO THEIR BODY? Answer: Zero, nada, none. You don't like it, great. I agree on most fronts. The difference between us is that I'm not willing to stop someone doing what they like because I don't like it.
What business is it mine? None. However that is not the topic here. I'm not concerned with the individual. I'm concerned with society and the economy as a whole. You're not seeing the big picture. What are the international reprucussions. What are the future consequences? How will this affect our education, state, monopoly, etc.? You don't see beyond the spectrum of the individual.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Marijuana is an illegal drug. We all know how much of a killer that is don't we?.
It kills people. Not as much as cocaine or heroin but alot nonetheless. If it was legalized it would kill even more people. Cigarettes kill alot people. Imagine what would happen if we have an "alternative cigarette?"
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No. You're wrong. Illegal drugs made legal just give more people access. If you're not interested in heroin now, you won't be when it's legal. Legalisation doesn't immediately mean that all of a sudden there is gonna be millions of people who never touched it, buying it purely because it's legal. Your rationale is extremely holy. By that I don't mean gospel, I mean full of holes.
More access means more consumers. If the price of an Ipod dropped to only $50 then more people would be willing to buy it. You fail to think about advertisements. Do you believe that drug corporations wouldn't advertise their products? Advertisements boost sales. More consumers would become interested in the product. The number of people buying heroin would increase. Simple economics.
I'm not trying to be "holy". I'm trying to look at the big picture. Which nobody seems to be doing. Your arguement is very narrow.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I don't degrade what isn't already stupid. I've debated with people on here before to no effect like that. If you talk shit, I'll say you do. And you sir, are coughing it up. That's no insult, it's fact.
Wow. That's rhetoric if I ever heard it. You believe that my arguement is stupid...so that gives you the right to degrade me? It's not fact. That's opinion. Which is why some people see you as being pompous and pretentious.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Like Milla said, we've not run out of cigarettes, or alcohol. What makes you think we'll run out of the rest if it was being produced to be sold worldwide legally?.
I've already answered this. Illegal drugs as a whole are more addictive. As the addiction increases so does the demand. The demand cannot meet the supply. Production costs land and resources. If the demand continues to rise so must the supply to meet it. And so must the production which drains more natural resources. For drugs no less.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Talk about uninformed. You actually have no clue what you're talking about.
Actually I do. However you refuse to think yourself as equal to anybody else. I'm afraid your arguement on the other hand is extremely flawed and narrow. It doesn't see the big picture.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Not only are you not aware of Shrooms, you think they're harmful. Shrooms are just about the best mind opening substance there is. Take it from someone who uses them every once in a while. Not from someone who is just judging them coz they're illegal..
Don't know what the heck Shrooms are....so what? You are not aware of the basic principle of macro/micro economics. Which is depressing to say the least. I'm not judging anyone. Which goes to show that you haven't truly understood my arguement. I am simply arguing the negative consequences of drug legalization to society and the economy as a whole.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If they're made legal they would have that support because they would be getting manufactured.While I too respect your honesty in saying alcohol should be illegal, it's evident that you're clutching at more straw than a blind farmer.
-AC
Christ! People SLOW DOWN! Give me a minute or two then respond. I'm arguing against at least a half dozen people here.
If drugs were made legal they would require the support of corporations willing to manufacture the drugs. Which is next to nil. The alcohol/cigarettes have international support and years of monopolic support. The population was much lower back then. They could gain more profit thusly. If a corporation entered the market with limited supplies and enormous demand the corporation would fall.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
What's your problem. I don't think anyone feeling sorry for your loss is going to change their opinion on legalizing drugs. Besides, alcohol is legal.
Originally posted by WillKempsgirl
Look I don't want nobody to feel sorry for me o.k. FINE! if you want to get high all the time be my guest but if you need a organ transplant and it has to be a healthy one I guarantee your not getting it from me.
If it make syou feel better, I don't feel sorry for you at all. In fact, I couldn't be less apathetic.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Well duuuh, they have supporting corproations because they are LEGAL. If all other drugs were legal they would too.And what are you talking about?! Have you never heard of Colombia? Napal? India? Thiland? Various places around Africa? What do you think they grow there? Roses?
Where does coffee come from? What about tea? Coca plant grows in the same circumstances as coffee...omg, please find out something about it before talking.
You don't understand. Merges and partnerships take years of paperwork and authenticity to happen. Support doesn't just happen out of the blue. Laws have to be followed (not to mentioned created), corporations have to built, positions must be placed, and resources must be put on "layaway"
You also refuse to ignore something else. Addictions INCREASE. Thus DEMAND increases. To meet the demand, corporations must increase the supply by production. Thus more land must be used. The countries you mentioned would not be so willing to expend any more land than necessary. Thus when the demand surpasses the supply the market won't function.
And would you be willing to use hundreds of acres of valuable land to produce mind-altering drugs. Guess what? These countries aren't willing either. They have food to produce after all.
Originally posted by WillKempsgirl
Look I don't want nobody to feel sorry for me o.k. FINE! if you want to get high all the time be my guest but if you need a organ transplant and it has to be a healthy one I guarantee your not getting it from me.
nobody here owes you an apology, sympathy...or anything...so you have nothing to refuse... so get over yourself. 😬
Agh. People I have to go to dinner. I'm a little surprised with the reactions from some people but it is enlightening. However I'm not gonna use another hour to argue for this case.
I DO thank you guys for the material to use in my drug legalization paper....which is do in about three hours. I have more of a mindset.
And for god's sake, everybody has their own opinion. Personally I don't know why some people are taking this to heart. It will never happen (in America anyway) and if you use drugs that's your choice. I was not insulting or degrading you. I was just explaining the possible negative consequences of legalizing drugs on society and the economy as a whole.
Peace out!
Originally posted by Draco69
What business is it mine? None. However that is not the topic here. I'm not concerned with the individual. I'm concerned with society and the economy as a whole. You're not seeing the big picture. What are the international reprucussions. What are the future consequences? How will this affect our education, state, monopoly, etc.? You don't see beyond the spectrum of the individual.
It's not your responsibility to watch after society. That's the worst thing you could do, get involved with something that isn't your place and then tell everyone as a collective society, what they can't do.
Originally posted by Draco69
It kills people. Not as much as cocaine or heroin but alot nonetheless. If it was legalized it would kill even more people. Cigarettes kill alot people. Imagine what would happen if we have an "alternative cigarette?"
Yeah, called a joint. One that has never killed anyone ever. It'd be tremendous.
Originally posted by Draco69
More access means more consumers. If the price of an Ipod dropped to only $50 then more people would be willing to buy it. You fail to think about advertisements. Do you believe that drug corporations wouldn't advertise their products? Advertisements boost sales. More consumers would become interested in the product. The number of people buying heroin would increase. Simple economics.
More access does not mean more consumers. If you build 80 internet cafes in a city of people that didn't ever want to use computers, they wouldn't get used.
Originally posted by Draco69
I'm not trying to be "holy". I'm trying to look at the big picture. Which nobody seems to be doing. Your arguement is very narrow.
My argument is narrow? Keep telling yourself that Mr. I'm I'm uninformed.
Originally posted by Draco69
Wow. That's rhetoric if I ever heard it. You believe that my arguement is stupid...so that gives you the right to degrade me? It's not fact. That's opinion. Which is why some people see you as being pompous and pretentious.
Someone bring me a violin, jeez.
I'm not degrading you. I think your ARGUMENT is stupid, your ARGUMENT. It's fact that you're coughing up crap in this debate. "More access means more consumers."
Originally posted by Draco69
I've already answered this. Illegal drugs as a whole are more addictive. As the addiction increases so does the demand. The demand cannot meet the supply. Production costs land and resources. If the demand continues to rise so must the supply to meet it. And so must the production which drains more natural resources. For drugs no less.
How are they? I know many more passive weed smokers and mushroom users than I do cigarette smokers.
Originally posted by Draco69
Actually I do. However you refuse to think yourself as equal to anybody else. I'm afraid your arguement on the other hand is extremely flawed and narrow. It doesn't see the big picture.
Oh my. Here's what I don't get. Why on Earth does everything come back to me? Apparantly you all think I think I'm better than I am. I see the big picture, you ONLY see the big picture. What's more narrow? Exactly.
Originally posted by Draco69
Don't know what the heck Shrooms are....so what? You are not aware of the basic principle of macro/micro economics. Which is depressing to say the least. I'm not judging anyone. Which goes to show that you haven't truly understood my arguement. I am simply arguing the negative consequences of drug legalization to society and the economy as a whole.
So don't comment on how all drugs should be illegal if you A) Don't know some of them and B) Don't know what they're capable of. Simple.
But obviously you have the more varied and wider argument, AKA the narrowest on this entire thread.
-AC