1. Harlequin romances, a countercyclical asset?
2. By request: Tyrone on the crisis, here and here.
3. Has Portuguese drug decriminalization been a success? Possibly so.
4. Ten Chinese proposals for stimulating economic growth.
5. Life at GMU.
6. Steven Johnson on the future of the newspaper.
First off, congratulations for this marvelous blog. I have been reading MR for a couple of months now, during which I have certainly improved my general and economical knowledge.
I would like to point out that talking about drug decriminalization in Portugal… is a pseudo-argument! I am Portuguese and perfectly aware of what goes on. Our streets are filled with addicts parking cars for small tips, making sufficient income for the next doseage. While it still is illegal to deal drugs in Portugal (thankfully), those who posess drugs up until a certain small amount will not face criminal charges, for it is not considered ‘dealing’ (though the substances will be aprehended).
I really do not understand where that research is coming from, the only thing drug decriminalization brought us was a blatant lack of shame from every junky in the country. No success comes from a system which encourages marginalization of the weak and ill-educated.
Joao,
In the United States, where drugs are very much illegal, we have streets filled with addicts, too. The only difference is that we arrest more than 1.5 million people every year on simple drug possession charges (which account for more than 80% of all drug law arrests), straining the courts and preventing law enforcement from dealing with violent crime, without measurably reducing drug use. Drug laws also disproportionately target the poor and minority groups, even though illegal drug use occurs at comparable rates across races, see: “Decades of Disparity” by Human Rights Watch, leading to all sorts of social problems (polling data from last summer, see: “Black America Today,” indicates that nearly 90% of black Americans DO NOT TRUST THE POLICE!!!!!!!). Junkies will be junkies no matter what the law says. And the purpose of the law should not be to “shame” people into conforming with whatever social values you propose, but to protect the individual from those who wish to do her harm.
LS,
Thank you for your reply.
If the problem is in the strain those arrests cause, maybe it is time to change the way the judicial system faces such small cases. I agree that arresting the “small fish” is not a smart solution, but it is one that we must face, or your country will be presented with the lovely reality of the Portuguese society : Potheads in high schools, crackheads on the streets, wherever you go.
Theoretically, if you stop the drug inflow, you can stop its comsuption, but is it wise to dream that high? Or is it wiser to clean the streets of drugs addicts, shooting their latest supply in the corner, for starters? And if the problem, besides the lack of resources in courts, also resides in the non-(re)socialization that happens in jailhouses, maybe that is another point of modern society which needs to be looked at and reformed.
Do not get me wrong, I understand your point of view, though, the way I see it, the problem is drug use in its essence and maybe in our means of reaction, not in the values we try to transmit with the enforcement of such “punitive” laws.
Sorry for my English, I am not a native speaker as you know, but it should at least be comprehensible.
“that nearly 90% of black Americans DO NOT TRUST THE POLICE!!!!!”
I oppose mandatory sentencing, but I don’t see that this is either a new issue, or one that stems solely from drug enforcement, or one that is compelling. That 90% of blacks may not trust the police does not mean the police deserve that distrust. I might also suggest that Washington, D.C. is in many ways not “representative” of much of the rest of the U.S. socially or criminally.
LS,
I guess the view I have of my own country is grimmer just because of an overall sense of inaction from both the government and the society as a whole. Maybe decriminalizing drugs in the US is a better solution than opting for the status quo, both as a change of direction in drug combat and as a way to reduce the stress on the judicial system. I find myself not sufficiently informed to make an accurate statement on that matter. What I can say is that, having been twice to the US in two major cities, I feel safer over there than I do in my own, small sea-sided, Portugal. Specifically, I did not see junkies as I do here and I certainly did not feel frightened by them. But then again, maybe that is due to the risk of arrest. Even so, the mere possibility of arrest does make me feel safer.
“I don’t doubt that you will see more junkies if you walk in a straight line in Portugal than if you walk in a straight line in the United States–also in part due to the risk of arrest in the U.S.”
And this is prejudicial for society. An uncountable number of addicts on the streets, unconscious of their actions and driven by their primative needs, will certainly harm the society’s safety and perception of it. The risk of arrest, in a way, is perfectly reasonable way of maintaing public order. After all, that is a big part of the definition of saction.
“Drug courts and treatment programs may be better than mandatory minimums and incarceration, but the data do not seem to support the conclusion that these programs are at all effective in actually reducing drug abuse.”
As I was posting my comment, I instantly thought that you could misinterpret my words. ‘Mea culpa’, that was not what I meant. Like you said, I also do not believe in drug courts and treatment programs but surely there are other ways to reduce bureaucracy in judicial procedings.
“We perhaps just need to accept the likely fact that junkies will always exist and that it’s not the end of the world if they do.”
As far as safety is concerned, you cannot trust someone who is absent of its perfect judgement. As such, junkies might not be the end of the world but they certainly can be a threat if let loose.
Your points certainly look valid to me, I just approach problems differently. If this kind of debates were more frequent in my own society, they would generate greater results than the so called “success” of the Portuguese drug decriminalization, I assure you!
- Joao, a Portuguese 17 year old.
Joao,
While greatly amazed at the clarity you have in your arguments, I fear your youth betrays you in this matter in that you have very little experience with how your society conducted itself with an active war on drugs. The issue of drug addiction is not one of a criminal nature but that of man falling to a vice. Criminalizing a vice will not make it go away or cure those who have the misfortune to not be strong enough to resist it.
From what I can tell you understand this part of it, can I then ask why you feel some level of criminal accountability must be laid upon them, as opposed to say the same accountability we ask from other hedonist acts (excessive food consumption, etc)?
Raivo Pommer
raimo1@hot.ee
UniCredit krise
Die italienische Großbank UniCredit will wegen der anhaltenden Finanzkrise staatliche Unterstützung in Milliardenhöhe beantragen.
Der Aufsichtsrat habe Konzernchef Alessandro Profumo ermächtigt, Hilfen in Höhe von bis zu 4 Milliarden Euro auszuhandeln, teilte das Unternehmen am Mittwoch in Mailand mit. Die deutsche Tochter HypoVereinsbank (HVB) sieht sich hingegen auch nach einem Verlust im vergangenen Jahr nicht als Kandidat für das staatliche Banken-Rettungspaket in Deutschland.
Mit einer Kernkapitalquote von mehr als 14 Prozent liege die Kapitalbasis der HVB auch im internationalen Vergleich deutlich über dem Branchendurchschnitt, sagte der neue Vorstandschef Theodor Weimer am Mittwoch in München.
Angesichts dieser Kapitalausstattung werde ein Antrag auf Unterstützung beim Rettungsfonds SoFFin nicht ansatzweise in Betracht gezogen. Im vergangenen Jahr machte die HypoVereinsbank unter dem Strich einen Verlust von 671 Millionen Euro – nach einem Gewinn von gut 2 Milliarden Euro im Vorjahr. Besonders betroffen war die Sparte Investmentbanking.
Ihre Kunden versorge die HypoVereinsbank aber auch weiterhin mit Geld, eine Kreditklemme gebe es nicht. “Wir entziehen uns dieser Verpflichtung nicht, wir sind eine Bank und stehen zu unseren volkswirtschaftlichen Aufgaben”, sagte Weimer. Die HypoVereinsbank gelte bei den Kunden als krisensichere Bank. “Bei uns hat man keine Angst, dass wir über den Bach gehen.”
Comments on this entry are closed.