Found while stumbling. hue.. Step 1) Legalise all drugs (to varying degrees, i.e. no intoxication is permitted within the work place etc), letting the people decide whether or not they are  huehue
Upload
Login or register
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (264)
[ 264 comments ]
Anonymous comments allowed.
91 comments displayed.
#38 - headkicker
Reply +142
(06/26/2013) [-]
Step 1) Legalise all drugs (to varying degrees, i.e. no intoxication is permitted within the work place etc), letting the people decide whether or not they are dangerous, and using them as they choose.
Step 2) Heavily tax the sale of cannabis, cocaine etc., much as is done with tobacco and alcohol to gain a profit from said drugs.
Step 3) Divert a portion of the money that is regained from the defunct war on drugs and the subsequent narcotic taxation towards support programs to help with sobriety, so that those who change their minds about abusing substances have help in getting off the hook.
Step 4) Social Darwinism ensues: Those too weak willed or unwilling to leave hazardous substances alone for their own health will die off, leaving the strong willed and healthy members of society to remain.
Step 5) Reap the rewards of your economically booming master race.

Pic somewhat related.
#69 to #38 - iamphoenix
Reply 0
(06/26/2013) [-]
Heavily taxing them is going to leave the illegal drug trade very healthy and still very dangerous. And number three and number four contradict each other.
#225 to #69 - abstract
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Wouldn't it cost less for big business to start mass producing it, and then in turn would get money from the government (because we know the government loves big business)? You're point seems logical, but I don't think it would actually happen like that because we don't see that happen with tobacco or alcohol.
#230 to #225 - iamphoenix
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Alcohol and smokes aren't like heroin or meth, though. Hardcore drugs have a huge market right now, and if regulation and taxation are heavy enough people will get it illegally. There will never be complete decriminalization - and for good reason - so regulation will happen. And there is a lot of moonshine being produced in our country. Hell, there's a show about it.
#94 to #38 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Social darwinism doesn't work. Period.
#95 to #94 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
for evidence: the birth rate is considerably higher among the poor and uneducated
#197 to #38 - lamarisagoodname
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
While I agree with you on many levels the only issue with said drugs is the fact that they are addictive (I suppose with the exception of marijuana) even if people would use drugs to alleviate stress etc people will still buy them by the bucketloads and end up broke, especially with the heavy taxes. Of course, making them illegal won't help because everyone and their dog knows how to make these drugs and I believe that education is the key to the drug issue.
#221 to #38 - lieutenantderp
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Relax, Hitler
#235 to #38 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Except those too weak willed to leave the heavier drugs alone won't die off, they'll destroy their bodies and suckle the government when they can't work.
#238 to #38 - spysappinmysasha
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
I honestly am ashamed that its come to a point where people actually believe that we should learn things the hard way with Drugs.

Why allow all drugs to be legal? Why allow people to easily ruin their lives? Its bad enough that Cigarettes still exist. I mean, the Government knows they kill peple, but they still allow them to exist because of the money.

I say all the more power to our future robotic dictators who will put an end to human stupidity.
#271 to #38 - wizzerdofaus
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Holy ******* ****.
#90 to #38 - greenstrongworld
Reply +1
(06/27/2013) [-]
So basically, the taxes harvested from drug sales is an investment in recovery if you want to get out of it?
#101 to #38 - crimsondynamo
Reply +1
(06/27/2013) [-]
Wouldn't the taxing thing cause people to repeat creating the drugs without government consent and regulation? They mainly do it to make a large profit, and with heavy taxation, they wouldn't be making as much profit. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, just pointing out possible holes.
#124 to #101 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Good point, but a government regulated sale of a drug, let's use weed for this example, would still be cheaper than on the street. On the street, it's about 20 dollars for approximately 1 gram of weed and 300 for an ounce from a regular dealer in my area. Now honestly, how much does it really cost to make that much weed, possible 40 bucks for an ounce with labor, nutrients, and location; also 40 bucks, in my opinion, is still a bit much to make an ounce of this stuff. The government regulated means more dealers on the market meaning more supply. More supply with same demand (law of demand/Microeconomics) means decrease in price. Dealers will deal with a much, much lower price, even with heavy taxation, most likely half the original price now. In my opinion, dealers might still sell, but they are risking too much to sell for smaller profit so they would leave the market for something else.
#129 to #124 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Well, currently, the prices at dispensaries in California are almost exactly the same as the street prices in my state for comparable quality product. The difference is that there is so much less risk on the buyers end getting it legally that dealers would be pointless. They only exist now out of necessity.
#98 to #38 - bitchpleaseshutup
Reply +3
(06/27/2013) [-]
#150 to #98 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Sauce?
#119 to #38 - pedrophile
Reply +3
(06/27/2013) [-]
Step 6: Become the Netherlands
Pic Related
#195 to #38 - kenleyP
Reply +4
(06/27/2013) [-]
#43 to #38 - ctenop ONLINE
Reply +9
(06/26/2013) [-]
I still think hardcore drugs should be illegal, or say only available at certain places, so if **** goes belly up you can get help, and it'll be safe. Also teach drug awareness like they do about alcohol. Mexico (or somewhere) allows all drugs, but in a personal limit (i.e. 1g cocaine, 1/8 of weed, not exact numbers, sorry)
#58 to #43 - osboom
Reply +1
(06/26/2013) [-]
not soGlorious Portugal
And I like the ideas of both of you.
#61 to #58 - ctenop ONLINE
Reply +2
(06/26/2013) [-]
Also lower the age on alcohol and smoking to 16. No more hiding it, getting arrested. If you don't have to hide and hence binge, it's better. Remember being a child and not being allowed sweets one time? And I used to buy a big bar, eat it all in one go. Now I live alone and allowed it whenever, I hardly ever eat it. Same with my xbox, I used to be "limited" to 3 hours, I thought that was unfair, no I game less than that a week sometimes. I drink, and smoke cigars, again living alone I can have both in moderation, I've had beer and vodka and sherry for ages, not touched em, but other people get smashed as often as their parents are out/away...
#62 to #61 - ctenop ONLINE
Reply +4
(06/26/2013) [-]
And the age of consent, holland has the lowest in europe, and the lowest teen pregnancy rate. If you can be open, honest, taught about it etc, it's better. I still stand by the philosophy that education and freedom (to an extent) will eliminate most problems in childhood and the world, give a child the freedom to stay up till whenever, but make sure they go school, and they'll learn a time suitable for their body.
#280 to #43 - thediablo
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
I'm from Mexico, and, despite the amount of drug cartels, all kinds of drugs are banned here, except of course, cigars and beer
#283 to #280 - ctenop ONLINE
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Was another country then, sorry buddy. And hey, cigars are awesome
#54 - ascendedwings
Reply +60
(06/26/2013) [-]
#278 to #54 - stlassassinfhc
Reply -1
(06/27/2013) [-]
Would probably not be any just like all cigs
#63 to #54 - theugandanhero
Reply +1
(06/26/2013) [-]
Why don't you ask the people from colorado?
#132 to #63 - Sunburn
Reply +1
(06/27/2013) [-]
Weed being legalized has actually managed to piss me off because of the kids who drive around while using vaporizers, then walk into my gas station absolutely wreaking of pot.
#189 to #132 - xjvlezmerised
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
wait isn't it ilegal to smoke in public places ?
#244 to #189 - setittowumbo
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Vaporizing
#255 to #244 - xjvlezmerised
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
........i feel stupid
#65 to #54 - skilletpanhead
Reply +1
(06/26/2013) [-]
"Dude, this **** is dank. Buy some if you don't have any already. Yo, Jamal, where the Cheetos at?"
#210 to #65 - mcderper
Reply +2
(06/27/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#91 to #54 - dadukesta
Reply +1
(06/27/2013) [-]
>leAgalized
#208 to #54 - thequickster
Reply +4
(06/27/2013) [-]
#115 to #54 - ompalomper
Reply +8
(06/27/2013) [-]
they would probably look like the cigarette commercials
#131 to #115 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
I see what you did there
#24 - theponified
Reply +56
(06/26/2013) [-]
wouldn't it be far more productive to decriminalize all drugs and put that 1.5 trillion to harm reduction and education instead of incarcerating millions of Americans for non violent drug offences?
#27 to #24 - cudlefish [OP]
Reply -7
(06/26/2013) [-]
And legalize Marjuana for recreational use DDD It would stimulate the economy
#140 to #24 - rhiaanor
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
The point is that we don't want humans to destroy themselves.. but putting them in jail for 20 years is kind of doing it anyways.
#198 to #24 - xgarthx
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Well that would be just stupid. Lets just use Crack for an example, millionaires have spent their entire fortunes on that and become broke, and since they're broke and can't afford their drug addiction they usually tend to steal because jobs won't hire them because of drugs ability to effect human behavior. So now because drugs are legalized we have a huge amount of theft and other various forms of crime that comes with it. Besides, drugs aren't good. Many people cannot handle drugs and end up committing crimes or hurting themselves, not to mention the long term effects. Your argument is that of a child if you really took about a minute or two to think about it.
#240 to #24 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
NO
#241 to #24 - saladtongsofdeath
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
isnt that what iceland did??
#114 to #24 - ompalomper
Reply +1
(06/27/2013) [-]
yes, that would be the sensible, humane and wise choice t make

shame we are talking about 'Murrica (**** yeah) who can't make sensible, humane or wise decisions
#30 to #24 - Millybays
Reply +2
(06/26/2013) [-]
Depends on what you consider productive, the current US prison system literally rakes in billions, so its economically productive for those who invest in that business.
If you consider improving the publics well being productive then yes, you're completely right.
#51 to #24 - gotrekgurnisson
Reply +3
(06/26/2013) [-]
They're trying to build a prison.....
#100 to #24 - newforomador
Reply +3
(06/27/2013) [-]
Maybe some drugs but not all. Lower class drugs like marijuana and (possibly) some psychedelics that aren't addictive could be legalized, but some things like meth or heroin should stay illegal because of how they endanger the general populace.
#26 to #24 - themastermorris ONLINE
Reply +31
(06/26/2013) [-]
Whoa there buddy, logic like that may make our government productive. Can't have that now
#200 to #26 - likeabox
Reply +1
(06/27/2013) [-]
Thank you, I'm going to use that one day.
#206 to #200 - themastermorris ONLINE
Reply +1
(06/27/2013) [-]
Glad to be of service!
#14 - cudlefish [OP]
Reply -4
(06/26/2013) [-]
Here is another graph about incarceration rates   
And this one isn't ********
Here is another graph about incarceration rates
And this one isn't ********
#15 to #14 - wertgf
Reply -2
(06/26/2013) [-]
Gifs Don't enlarge
#17 to #15 - cudlefish [OP]
Reply +1
(06/26/2013) [-]
I didn't know it was a gif D:
#18 to #17 - wertgf
Reply -2
(06/26/2013) [-]
Yeah, File types are annoying since gifs aren't always animated. :/
#44 to #14 - mistercookie
Reply +1
(06/26/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#20 to #14 - duudegladiator
Reply +41
(06/26/2013) [-]
#84 to #20 - killerblue
Reply +2
(06/26/2013) [-]
#137 to #84 - duudegladiator
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#32 - sloar
Reply +30
(06/26/2013) [-]
I like how there are absolutely no souces provided.

No one would lie on the internet, so I guess it's fine.
#223 to #32 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Pretty rare to see someone here actually support their aguments or statements with sources; whenever I see such a thing, though, I applaud.
#259 to #32 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
The requested Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 National Drug Control Budget demonstrates commitment to these goals, requesting $25.6 billion to reduce drug use and its consequences in the United States. This represents an increase of $415.3 million (1.6%) over the FY 2012 enacted level of $25.2 billion.

that was taken from the white house website itself
[url deleted]
#260 to #259 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
[url deleted] . whitehouse . gov/ondcp/the-national-drug-control-budget-fy-2013-funding-highlights
#39 to #32 - misfitsftw
Reply +5
(06/26/2013) [-]
take this
#33 - debee
Reply +22
(06/26/2013) [-]
Here guys this is a totally legit graph trust me I made it myself
#143 to #33 - pwnmissilereborn **User deleted account**
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Why 17?!
Why 17?!
#149 to #143 - twillight
Reply +1
(06/27/2013) [-]
Why not?
#152 to #149 - pwnmissilereborn **User deleted account**
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
I cannot argue with that.
#201 to #33 - likeabox
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Label your ******* x and y axis.

Just kidding I'm not an math Nazi. I am however; a math-debater.I
#265 to #201 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
enlarge it
#222 to #33 - mugiwaraluffy
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Just try and stop me!
Just try and stop me!
#268 to #33 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Comes from here:
[url deleted]
#10 - anon
Reply 0
(06/26/2013) [-]
maybe the lines would have been the other way round if spending was kept flat?
#36 to #10 - anon
Reply 0
(06/26/2013) [-]
All other countries that have made their drug policies more about rehabilitation/ decriminalization have no increase in drug use.
#57 to #10 - anon
Reply 0
(06/26/2013) [-]
our incarceration rate is ridiculous, especially for pot (i don't smoke, but the fact we waste money putting potheads in jail is ridiculous). but i'd also note that people should take into account inflation with the graph, it is over 40 years after all. plus it has no source. i don't doubt it's close to accurate though, i've seen others like it. we should focus on rehabilitation but also crack down on drugs that actually ruin lives, like crack and heroin. rehabilitation is a hard sell because no democratically elected leader can afford to appear soft on crime.
#146 to #10 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
Problem: Your taxes on the drugs make them crazy expensive, people still buy from dealers because it's cheaper.
#263 to #10 - gasmastero
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
one is a rate, the other is a sum. Even if the rate is constant, the growing population means that the total number of druggies will increase, meaning that the money spent on drug control is likely responding to the increased drug use in an expected manner.
#220 to #10 - makethingsworse
Reply +1
(06/27/2013) [-]
Well...yeah...but 1.5 trillion is a little ******* much don't ya think? The income of all of the users on FJ, Reddit, 4Chan, and Tumblr combined still isn't nearly as much as 1.5 trillion. I am pretty confident in this assumption.
#22 to #10 - mortulance
Reply +17
(06/26/2013) [-]
we will never know...

though I doubt it, the Dutch have been able to keep drugs legalized (the government actually makes money out of it) and we don't have the whole country smoking weed.
The stuff just ain't interesting if you could just buy it anytime.
#23 to #22 - mortulance
Reply +1
(06/26/2013) [-]
though a sudden change of plans might be too drastic ├žause everyone would want to try it at once I guess
#102 to #23 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
actually the alchol prohabtion would be could indecater for it
#243 to #22 - anon
Reply 0
(06/27/2013) [-]
The only thing that's legalized here is the possession of a maximum amount of five grams cannabis for personal use.
Don't go think you can just go crazy with any drug you can think of.

- Some Dutch guy
#67 - carlose
Reply +16
(06/26/2013) [-]
#4 - anon
Reply 0
(06/26/2013) [-]
>> Graph shows 20bln
>> Says 1.5bln

Implying this is a credible source and not a gif made by a teenage stoner. huehuehue
#5 to #4 - anon
Reply 0
(06/26/2013) [-]
Trillion* pardon.
#7 to #5 - billybong
Reply +1
(06/26/2013) [-]
I haven't done the math, but $20b was for 2010, so $1.5 t would be the total spent since 1970.

#9 to #4 - anon
Reply 0
(06/26/2013) [-]
huehuehue

It says 1.5 trillion, not billion.
Also, that's the total cost over the entirety of the graph shown (the green area).

Implying you are not retarded, but in reality are.
#6 to #4 - nightdude
Reply +3
(06/26/2013) [-]
I think it means 1.5 trillion total spent from 1970-2010
#16 to #4 - wertgf
Reply +14
(06/26/2013) [-]
Area= Total spent.

#42 to #16 - redagency
Reply 0
(06/26/2013) [-]
But the math was still wrong. Even if the US had spent $20 billion every year from 1970 on it wouldn't have totaled a trillion dollars.
#8 - captainganto
Reply +13
(06/26/2013) [-]
bring forth the source