You have a problem with reading comprehension, don't you? Where have I ever stated that I was for or against legalization of pot? I simply asked how legalizing it would make the cartels go away.
You kept throwing out the phrase "well-regulated" to support your case that the cartels would simply melt away in the face of a smooth operating government program, but failed to provide any specifics.
So there you go. Your "well-regulated" licensing, manufacturing, distribution and sales model for pot has been compared to a well-oiled Marxist machine and you make fun of me? LOL!
I gave you the specific example of alcohol being a well regulated market. It has reasonable taxes and controls, so a black market does not thrive. There would simply not be enough profit for a black market in marijuana to be worthwhile if it were taxed and controlled like alcohol.
So there you go. Your "well-regulated" licensing, manufacturing, distribution and sales model for pot has been compared to a well-oiled Marxist machine and you make fun of me? LOL!
You were the one that played the Marxism card. I made no mention of it all, other than to ridicule your bringing it up.
So I ask you: Do you support federal drug laws based on the New Deal Commerce Clause... YES or NO?
They would not go away, but they would have new names like R.J. Reynolds, Philip Morris, Safeway, Costco, Associated Grocers, Walgreens, Walmart, etc.
Cartels are just an efficient business model to control the production and sale of any commodity.
If marijuana were legalized, Mexican growers would have to compete with American farmers and they would lose, adios Mexican cartels.