Skip to comments.
Milton Friedman - Why Drugs Should Be Legalized
You Tube 8 minutes ^
| Milton Friedman
Posted on 10/03/2009 3:56:31 PM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
Milton Friedman puts forward a compelling case for the legalization of drugs
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: drugs; drugwar; libertarians; miltonfriedman; wod
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-100, 101-150, 151-200 ... 451-473 next last
This ought to make for an interesting discussion.
Worth noting is that it seems that Friedman looks at this exclusively as an economist.
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
This ought to make for an interesting discussion.
Countdown to stereotypical Cheech and Chong / Ridgemont High response...3...2...1...
2
posted on
10/03/2009 3:59:22 PM PDT
by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
LEO oppose it because it would remove pre conviction asset forfeitures.
And without those asset forfeitures, the drug lords lose a way to pay off the LEOs with cars, cash, boats, real estates, etc.
3
posted on
10/03/2009 4:01:24 PM PDT
by
Eagle Eye
(Kenya? Kenya? Kenya just show us the birth certificate?)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
I choose freedom.
People can destroy themselves in any number of ways. We can’t stop self destructive people from harming themselves and virtually every attempt to do so comes at someone else’s expense.
You can’t have freedom if you aren’t free to make less than the best choices for yourself and for your family. As they say freedom isn’t free, well one of those “costs” is people can make bad choices for themselves and suffer the consequences without government to bail them out.
4
posted on
10/03/2009 4:03:25 PM PDT
by
DB
To: Eagle Eye
5
posted on
10/03/2009 4:03:36 PM PDT
by
Halfmanhalfamazing
(MSM bias is dead. They are no longer "biased", they are complicit. The complicit progressive media)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
LEOs?
Law enforcement officers...LEO
6
posted on
10/03/2009 4:04:28 PM PDT
by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
My idea is better than Friedman’s. Make it legal to buy small quantities of a drug for personal use, provided that you have a license from the government. In order to get such a license, you’ve got to convince a government doctor that you are addicted, and that you need these drugs to feed your addiction while you undergo therapy to get off drugs. You’ve also got to commit to treatment. You can only buy these drugs from the government, and the government will sell you only small quantities at a low price, provided that you stick with the treatment regimine.
It will still be illegal to use or possess drugs in any other circumstance. It’ll be illegal to buy them from anyone other than the government. It will be illegal to import them, to sell them (unless you’re the government).
The government will get the drugs that it sells by using narcotics that it seizes in drug busts.
That way, you are putting a bigger squeeze on the industry than Friedman would. You are undercutting their price, and at the same time, increasing their costs. Pretty soon, the industry will be extinct.
7
posted on
10/03/2009 4:05:16 PM PDT
by
Brilliant
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
Purely from a financial standpoint he is correct however, drugs have never led to a better society.
8
posted on
10/03/2009 4:06:09 PM PDT
by
edcoil
(If I had 1 cent for every dollar the government saved, Bill Gates and I would be friends.)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
Does anyone think that the statists won’t find a way to grow government while legalizing drugs?
9
posted on
10/03/2009 4:06:56 PM PDT
by
GeronL
(meow)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
I have advocated it for years. First, it takes a HUGE amount of power away from the state and federal governments. Second, it removes funding from tens of thousands of members of organized crime. Third, the idiots who take drugs will soon kill themselves.
10
posted on
10/03/2009 4:07:22 PM PDT
by
Blood of Tyrants
(The Second Amendment. Don't MAKE me use it.)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
I have advocated it for years. First, it takes a HUGE amount of power away from the state and federal governments. Second, it removes funding from tens of thousands of members of organized crime. Third, the idiots who take drugs will soon kill themselves.
11
posted on
10/03/2009 4:07:24 PM PDT
by
Blood of Tyrants
(The Second Amendment. Don't MAKE me use it.)
To: Eagle Eye
Without taking a position on the Drug War itself, I still easily can make the observation that we wouldn’t have asset-forfeiture laws if it wasn’t for the Drug War. Which pretty much makes Friedman spot-on with his observation about the role of government.
12
posted on
10/03/2009 4:07:37 PM PDT
by
1rudeboy
To: Brilliant
Not bad. and it doesn’t crminalize the addicts.
13
posted on
10/03/2009 4:08:16 PM PDT
by
GeronL
(meow)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
I just heard Gov. Arnold tell Wolf Blitzed on CNN several minutes ago that he believes that the legalization issue should be up for discussion. It was very good to hear someone in a position of power admit that.
14
posted on
10/03/2009 4:08:18 PM PDT
by
ChrisInAR
(The Tenth Amendment is still the Supreme Law of the Land, folks -- start enforcing it for a CHANGE!)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
However, most conservatives don't look at issues from a purely economic viewpoint. Otherwise we could make a case in favor of abortion and euthanasia for the elderly and chronic invalids. Which as true conservatives, we can't and don't.
15
posted on
10/03/2009 4:08:21 PM PDT
by
mrsmel
(Put the Gitmo terrorists near Capitol Hill.)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
Have you ever seen how these Libertarians on "Reason's" "Hit and Run" blog argue?
And they accuse Michelle Malkin of driving a lesbian to suicide? We need our drug laws or we'll be a population of idiots who make mental connections as those Libertarians do.
Incidentally, Ann Coulter tried to join the Libertarian party, but had to leave out of disgust. She also, since then, came out strongly against legalization of those narcotic drugs the Libertarians tout so much.
16
posted on
10/03/2009 4:08:33 PM PDT
by
Stepan12
(Palin & Bolton in 2012)
To: Brilliant
Make it legal to buy small quantities of a drug for personal use, provided that you have a license from the government.
Why not do the same to vegetables from a home garden? You can't have a small home garden, or eat any of the product thereof unless you have a license from the government.
Do I really need an /sarcasm?
17
posted on
10/03/2009 4:08:37 PM PDT
by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
If you legalize drugs you won’t have an American culture. You’ll have a culture where all the men sit and chew/smoke/swallow/inject happy drugs and then dream all day long. It would be like letting women run the culture while men watch porn/sports/games all day lo....
Never mind.
18
posted on
10/03/2009 4:08:50 PM PDT
by
donna
(I never really had roots in any one place or culture or ethnic group. - Obama Olympics speech)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
How will the government tax it if its legal and you plant in your backyard?
19
posted on
10/03/2009 4:09:07 PM PDT
by
lmarie373
(*These little guys might look cute and cuddly, but trust us: they will kill you.-on emanuel brothers)
To: philman_36
As soon as there are tests to determine CURRENT USE, thus protecting my family from those who are driving under the influence, then I’ll say LEGALIZE them all ..and TAX THE EFF OUT OF THEM!!!
20
posted on
10/03/2009 4:09:12 PM PDT
by
gwilhelm56
(I will DIE with Israel BY MY SIDE, rather than LIVE with the CHAINS of ISLAM on my Back!)
To: Stepan12
We need our drug laws or we'll be a population of idiots...
As readily available as drugs are now your supposition is incorrect.
21
posted on
10/03/2009 4:09:49 PM PDT
by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
I say only legalize meth. Totally, no barriers to purchase at any retailer.
Then we’d see how it goes. If that goes fine, we can do others as well.
22
posted on
10/03/2009 4:10:33 PM PDT
by
Tolsti2
To: GeronL
Yes, I would also just legalize marijuana. It’s not much worse than alcohol or tobacco, and just not worth messing with.
To: Brilliant
Good idea. Massive regulation, massive tax, massive fees. I’m for it because the government can go to town on it nad leave all the other industries alone.
24
posted on
10/03/2009 4:11:19 PM PDT
by
Niuhuru
(The Internet is the digital AIDS; adapting and successfully destroying the MSM host.)
To: Tolsti2
Or we could just Legalize all drugs and have the government GIVE THEM AWAY... and as the IDIOTS OVERDOSE they can take the STRAIN off of Social Security at the same time.
25
posted on
10/03/2009 4:12:46 PM PDT
by
gwilhelm56
(I will DIE with Israel BY MY SIDE, rather than LIVE with the CHAINS of ISLAM on my Back!)
To: Brilliant
That’s how my sister and her friends started....just on marijuana. Then they wanted something a little stronger and a little stronger.
Eventually, one died
26
posted on
10/03/2009 4:12:55 PM PDT
by
SideoutFred
(B.O. Stinks...it really does)
To: gwilhelm56
Problem is actual OD’s are fairly rare. There’s usually years of being a worthless bum, decades even, before. If meth alone was legalized, it might be a good way to prove the idiocy of the idea when society takes such a massive hit from it. The idea would be repulsive for a long time.
27
posted on
10/03/2009 4:14:48 PM PDT
by
Tolsti2
To: gwilhelm56
As soon as there are tests to determine CURRENT USE, thus protecting my family from those who are driving under the influence, then Ill say LEGALIZE them all ..and TAX THE EFF OUT OF THEM!!!
And yet another illogical argument.
Alcohol use is a perfect example of how wrong headed your argument is. There are tests currently in use that in no way protect you or your family from those who are driving under the influence. Up and until the drunken driver just happens to be pulled over for a traffic violation your family is in danger. No test can prevent that.
28
posted on
10/03/2009 4:15:35 PM PDT
by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: donna
All kinds of interesting things could be had from pharmacies in the late 1800s. Very few were stupid enough to get themselves hooked, as that was a well known dead end.
The difference today is that we have a kind of soft socialized medicine. We will pay for, say, the treatment of an indigent coke fiend.
29
posted on
10/03/2009 4:15:47 PM PDT
by
HiTech RedNeck
(The Democrat party is a criminal enterprise.)
To: SideoutFred
Yes, but some people do the same thing with alcohol and tobacco. I suspect that if you look at drug addicts, you’ll see that they all pretty much started that way. It doesn’t necessarily mean that alcohol and tobacco got them addicted to drugs. It just means that they started small. If you ban the small stuff, they’ll just start at the next level instead.
To: Brilliant
“Make it legal to buy small quantities of a drug for personal use, provided that you have a license from the government.”
FRiend, the Declaration of Independence says people have the right to pursue happiness, not necessarily find it. It is their right to try to find happiness in heroin, if they want. (Not that I expect they'll actually find it.) Let them try, and make 1st offense DUI a capital offense.
Besides, you think we need ANOTHER government bureaucracy to find excuses to never shut down?
31
posted on
10/03/2009 4:16:56 PM PDT
by
Old Student
(We have a name for the people who think indiscriminate killing is fine. They're called "The Bad Guys)
To: Brilliant
Bullshit. You are inviting government corruption. Think of a plan just like the one you just described but instead for tobacco.
32
posted on
10/03/2009 4:16:56 PM PDT
by
mamelukesabre
(Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum (If you want peace prepare for war))
To: Tolsti2
We subsidize bums in ways that in earlier centuries were not countenanced. If we had a strict rule “Choose between street drugs and welfare” this hazard would be minimized.
33
posted on
10/03/2009 4:18:52 PM PDT
by
HiTech RedNeck
(The Democrat party is a criminal enterprise.)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
I think an occasional xanax would be nice since i don’t drink. Recreational Heroin would be real cool
34
posted on
10/03/2009 4:19:34 PM PDT
by
al baby
(Hi Mom ;))
To: Eagle Eye
Cops were busting druggies long before asset forfeiture ~ and shooting more of them too! Now there’s so much paperwork we’re building up a big surplus of druggies ~ a culling is in order.
35
posted on
10/03/2009 4:19:40 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
To: SideoutFred
Eventually, one died I guess it's good that drugs are illegal then, so that this never happened.
36
posted on
10/03/2009 4:19:44 PM PDT
by
Ramius
(Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
To: Ramius
Lets legalize everything then, since crime is never fully stopped even with laws.
37
posted on
10/03/2009 4:20:33 PM PDT
by
Tolsti2
To: Tolsti2
I say only legalize meth.Meth is already legal. See
Desoxyn (Methamphetamine).
What is illegal are certain acts undertaken
with controlled substances.
38
posted on
10/03/2009 4:20:43 PM PDT
by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
LEO = Law Enforcement Officer/Organization
39
posted on
10/03/2009 4:20:54 PM PDT
by
Eagle Eye
(Kenya? Kenya? Kenya just show us the birth certificate?)
To: donna
LOL — That’s the funniest comment I’ve seen on one of these threads for a VERY long time! :)
40
posted on
10/03/2009 4:21:23 PM PDT
by
LibertyRocks
( http://LibertyRocks.wordpress.com ~ ANTI-OBAMA STUFF : http://cafepress.com/NO_ObamaBiden08)
To: Blood of Tyrants
I agree with your points...but the govt control of drugs and resulting imprisonment, etc is already its own industry and keeps itself protected like any govt entity.
they won’t go down easy.
41
posted on
10/03/2009 4:22:07 PM PDT
by
Recovering Ex-hippie
(Pray for Israel! And Georgia ! And the Iranian people! and Honduras!)
To: philman_36
Damn you sound like one of those RON PAUL LIBTARDS... Give me the tests... then I’ll support your legalization.. UNTIL THEN ... you meet me on the street and you been USING... no threat... FACT!!!
42
posted on
10/03/2009 4:22:20 PM PDT
by
gwilhelm56
(I will DIE with Israel BY MY SIDE, rather than LIVE with the CHAINS of ISLAM on my Back!)
To: Halfmanhalfamazing; Bender2
Dude, I just wanna say...

...uh, uh, yeah...huh?
43
posted on
10/03/2009 4:22:29 PM PDT
by
big'ol_freeper
("Anyone pushing Romney must love socialism...Piss on Romney and his enablers!!" ~ Jim Robinson)
To: Tolsti2
The Chinese effectively legalized opium smoking (and every other thing) back in the 1800s.
They are still recovering from that particular piece of stupidity. Amazingly the Brits are enamored of the idea of controlling addiction by providing maintenance amounts.
I would imagine their new Sunni government will put an end to that with reinstatement of the death penalty.
44
posted on
10/03/2009 4:23:17 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
To: Halfmanhalfamazing
Here’s another reason the drug war needs an exit strategy. Livestock producers have been wondering for a couple of years why we can’t get levamasole - an old standby wormer. There used to be three categories of wormers for domestic animals - fenbendazole which parasites had become resistant to, the ivermectin family (the monthly dog heartworm drug) and levamasole.
It turns out that levamasole has been used to cut cocaine and maybe other drugs and supposedly gives it an added kick.
So now it is no longer available as a livestock dewormer.
It was also used in chemotherapy against cancer in human patients, but I don’t know if that has been restricted as well.
It has become a crazy world.
To: Brilliant
And the government should license what one ingests because...?
46
posted on
10/03/2009 4:23:50 PM PDT
by
Eagle Eye
(Kenya? Kenya? Kenya just show us the birth certificate?)
To: Tolsti2
Lets legalize everything then, since crime is never fully stopped even with laws.Drugs are "controlled", not
illegal. You're being hoodwinked and you don't even see it.
An aside...health care will be "controlled" too.
47
posted on
10/03/2009 4:24:10 PM PDT
by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: finnsheep
Can’t buy some cold meds without ID and permission from feds.
So much for land of the free.
48
posted on
10/03/2009 4:25:41 PM PDT
by
Eagle Eye
(Kenya? Kenya? Kenya just show us the birth certificate?)
To: gwilhelm56
Damn you sound like one of those...
Damn, you sound like one of those who engages their mouth before they engage their brain.
49
posted on
10/03/2009 4:25:44 PM PDT
by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: Brilliant
Make it legal to buy small quantities of a drug for personal use, provided that you have a license from the government. In order to get such a license, youve got to convince a government doctor that you are addicted, and that you need these drugs to feed your addiction while you undergo therapy to get off drugs. Youve also got to commit to treatment. You can only buy these drugs from the government, and the government will sell you only small quantities at a low price, provided that you stick with the treatment regimine. They have it already, it's called the methadone program. It's a frikken mess.
50
posted on
10/03/2009 4:26:07 PM PDT
by
Fido969
("The hardest thing in the world to understand is income tax." - Albert Einstein)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-100, 101-150, 151-200 ... 451-473 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson