no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics

Bad People

March 2nd, 2009

Most people spend so much time worrying about how society is going to deal with the “bad” people, that they’ve completely lost sight of what happens to the good people — if they ever had sight of the good people to begin with. And if you forget about the good people, you’re leaving the door wide open for those you fear the most.

I don’t give a damn what happens to anyone who is objectively “bad,” and therefore, I find it foolish, counterproductive, and wasteful (among other things), to arrange a societal framework round these folk.

If you look closely you’ll see that a society of laws, when organized in such fashion, quickly becomes the antithesis of just.  As the law itself is used increasingly to define what is (or is not) “bad”, people vie to control the law in order to wield its awesome power over others, and class warfare is born!  Viz., good people shouldn’t need a ruler, although some of them they may feel they should have one nonetheless.  Yet, who has the strongest incentive to rule over otherwise good individuals, but he who is least fit for the duty?

Only an evil man finds it necessary or advantageous to rule over good men.

And the law as an apparatus of control is a necessary condition for the establishment of tyranny.

Legalize ALL Drugs

February 27th, 2009

Last week I had a discussion about the legalization of drugs with a friend, who remained convinced that the legalization of drugs would cause an instant and damaging spike in the incidence of use/abuse despite what’s generally accepted as a relatively inelastic demand curve (and despite centuries of evidence to the contrary with alcohol) and that this spike in use/abuse would lead to an increase in violent crimes. Strangely enough he that Big Leaguers should be allowed to Roid Rage whenever they want, but that ordinary people shouldn’t be able to do lines of coke in their own living rooms without the fear that some Stasi Jackboot might kick down their doors, kill their Labrador retrievers, and haul them off to prison. There are countless flaws I could expose in the abbreviated summary of his arguments (above), but I’d like to take a more substantive approach:

People who overestimate the malevolence of human nature are quick to conclude that, upon legalizing marijuana and cocaine, for example, all of these drug dealers would quickly find another lucrative, criminal enterprise in which to engage. I reject this hypothesis for (at least) two reasons which come immediately to mind, but first let’s put the picture in perspective.

  • In Holland, the cannabis trade alone is valued at $3 Billion[1]. It is so profitable only because competition is artificially hindered.
  • Globally, the illicit drug trade is something like $1 Trillion per year. Even the production of opiates in U.S. military occupied and embattled Afghanistan has been increasing![2].
  • The U.S. alone spends over $20 Billion per year on the “drug war”, about one-third of which is used to incarcerate 250,000+ non-violent offenders, at an average cost of about $70/day[3].

If that sounds expensive, don’t stop there. The true cost of the drug war is far greater.

The explicit cost of incarceration is $70/inmate/day. The true cost would correctly include whatever productivity wouldn’t have been sucked out of the economy by the 1 in 3 state employees currently working in a correctional capacity. I’ve previously estimated that the true cost of incarceration is not the $28,000 widely reported, but rather that the true economic cost is closer to $100,000 per inmate, per year[4].

That works out to be $25 Billion annually, or about the size of the GM Bailout, in the U.S. economy alone!

The profits accruing in the illicit drug trade are kept artificially high by prohibition.

Any restriction in supply (partial or complete prohibition, etc.) only serves to cement the profitability of foreign cartels and warlords. If the cartels aren’t making money, then neither are the footsoldiers and corner dealers. Take away the monopoly profits, or eliminate the institution which encourages monopoly profits, and few people will want to waste their time on these endeavors.

Although some people would have you believe that your average, run-of-the-mill drug dealer is truly a “bad” person, the fact of the matter is that for most of them, they believe (rightly or wrongly) that selling controlled substances is the most lucrative opportunity afforded to them, even given the extreme risks involved[5].

In a report funded by the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, researchers concluded that “drug sales in poor neighborhoods are part of a growing informal economy which has expanded and innovatively organized in response to the loss of good jobs.” The report characterizes drug dealing as “fundamentally a lower class response [to the information economy] by men and women with little formal education and few formal skills,” and the report notes “If the jobs won’t be created by either the public or private sector, then poor people will have to create the jobs themselves.”

At least one factor contributing to all crime (not just pseudo-crimes like drug-dealing) is lack of employment opportunities. Unable to earn a licit living, they will find another way to put food on the table. Some of them work off the books fixing cars, painting houses, etc. Others sell dope.

The availability of alternative means of earning incomes is artificially reduced.

There is a chapter in Freakonomics that examines drug gangs[6]. If I recall accurately, the authors find that the average drug dealer only earns something like $3 an hour, so, much less than minimum wage across the country which make it illegal for a gas station owner to hire someone for $4 an hour. There are so many other restrictions on who can be hired, how they must be employed, what they must be paid, what actions people are “permitted” or “licensed” by the state to perform, and the costs of these restrictions are borne disproportionately by the poor and the unskilled (who often happen to be poor). Inner cities everywhere are blights: vacant houses and buildings that man is forbidden to occupy, state-housing projects in gross disrepair, open fields that no man may farm. Unable to find employment, some of these people will eventually decide to take the other $4/hour job, where they face a one-in-four chance of being killed over a few rocks of crack.

Almost all violent crime can be traced back to the drugs, not because of some inherent quality in the drug itself, and not because of some malevolent human element, rather because the monopoly profits earned by cartels in the drug trade are sufficient to compensate for the costs of war, and the illusion of these profits is sufficient to entice those willing to do the dirty work. In reality, if we eliminate all of the pseudo-crimes like smoking pot or selling cocaine, pretty much all that’s left are actual crimes, against person and/or property, crimes against which it is infinitely easier to protect oneself.

  1. Kucharz, Christel. Holland: Cannabis Trade at All-Time High.
  2. No Third Solution archives: Afghanistan and Prohibition. 20-September-2006.
  3. Drug War Facts: Economics.
  4. No Third Solution archives: Police State. 2-May-2008.
  5. Hagedorn, John M., Ph.D., The Business of Drug Dealing in Milwaukee (Milwaukee, WI: Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, 1998), p. 3. (via Drug War Facts: Economics).
  6. Levitt, S. and Dubner, S. Freakonomics, Chapter 3: Why Do Drug Dealers Still Live with Their Moms?

New Hampshire Gold Bill

January 29th, 2009

Steve Gresh posted a link on facebook. The legislature in NH wants to permit the use of gold/silver coins.

Let’s see them permit the use without subjecting their constituents to usurious capital gains taxes!

Under the proposed legislation, those citizens of New Hampshire who prefer to use irredeemable Federal Reserve Notes and base-metallic coinage may continue to do so. But they will make this choice intelligently, knowing of their option to use silver and gold coin instead.

And they would be idiots to use Gold/Silver coins for any on-the-books transactions.

Due to Gresham’s Law (which only applies when one currency is artificially overvalued vs. another currency) most people acting intelligently would choose to hoard gold and spend FRNs. Given the choice, they’d all like to remit payments in FRNs, but would only accept gold/silver as payment, themselves.

The proposed legislation in NH (and elsewhere) stands in direct contravention to the privilege bestowed upon federal reserve notes. Because of Federal legal tender status granted to FRNs, except for rare instances nobody can refuse to accept FRNs as payment.

Holding commodity metal subjects you to the capital gains taxes should the value of the metal in terms of FRNs increase. As long as Uncle Sam is fighting Trillion Dollar Wars, that price is going to keep inching upwards.  If you go off the books, you can escape that slave-fee.  Even if the long-term return on commodity metal like gold or silver is zero, a zero return is <em>excellent</em> in this economy (my 401k is now a 201k, as the saying goes).  Even in better economic times, a zero return is great if you’re not paying taxes.

If you’re going to use gold/silver as payment for goods and services, you should do it off-the-books.

Issues like “Should New Hampshire allow people to use gold/silver coins?” are red herrings, that distract people from the real problem which is the state-enforced banking cartel and legal tender laws.

no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics