BigBallinStalin wrote:betiko wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:betiko wrote:I'm certain that if 1g of cocaine costed only 5$ people would use it much larger quantities.
Governments wouldn't have money for any anti-drug campaigns, drug addict centers, or simply reinject the money in the regular healthcare system.
If I look at tobacco though, here in france the price of a pack might have doubled in the past 10 years. does it make me smoke less? hell no. Is it the government's excuse to keep increasing the tax on it? hell yes.
Do you really think you'd smoke 300 cigarettes in a day if the price went from $10 per pack to $1 per pack?
It depends on how different individuals value different drugs in different quantities, so a priori neither of us can say for certain what future consumption will be.
I think your concern overlooks many other benefits which may offset the increase in consumption. We may have to accept the fact that some people prefer greater quantities at lower prices, so we should either convince them to be more responsible or whatever. As long as they're not physically hurting people, I don't really mind.
And if they're "hurting themselves," then it's about time people started to seriously address the problems of addiction with more efficient means--instead of supporting this ridiculous and harmful prohibition on drugs, which results in creating more harm than good.
are you saying that people on drugs can only harm themselves?
take drugs and driving no good; take drugs and go beat wives and kids no good; take drugs and receive some "godly advice to go harm people" ect mostly if you can afford great quantities for a minimum price; take drugs while you work no good... God know all the crazy shit people do on drugs so no, this can't be a free market.
I gave the example of tobacco, and it doesn't apply because the price doesn't influence the quantities nor quality I consume (never better said). I know that people with less money like students would buy rolling cigarets because it's cheaper.
Now I know for sure that out of my entourage people would consume more weed or coke if the price was lower, and this wouldn't benefit society.
If drug users are hurting people, then I have a problem with it. If they aren't hurting people--regardless of the amount they consume, then I don't really mind. It's probably bad for some of them, but like Haggis said, I'm not their dad.
The free market position doesn't advocate snorting cocaine and then beating up people, so I'm not sure how that applies to free markets.
RE: No you don't. Neither of us know how future demand will be, but the main point is that you'd still have to weight the benefits and the costs.
take an semi-addictive product such as cocaine. let's say some people using it spend 500$ a month and have a roughly average monthly salary of 2000$. It is more than likely that they are restricted by their budget and that they couldn't afford to buy much more and that they struggle at the end of the month. I think that with a product 10 times cheaper people would buy 50-100% more. Prices are prohibitive enough for most users to reach the break even point of consumption and makes them be a bit more moderate that they would like to.