Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacques Chitte who wrote (18081)	5/4/2000 12:42:00 AM
From: haqihana	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

LRR, I think Lewis was trying to say that a lot of those who are on drugs, are among the poorer, an less educated segment of society, and would be looking for more tax dollars if it became legal. Kind of like going on the public dole for treatment of their problems, and there is always the door to class-action law suits that will be opened. Something like that anyway. In some areas, a large portion of addicts are poor, and uneducated as Lewis said, but I know that there is growing abuse by the yuppie types. At one time, as I recall, the drug of choice was cocaine, snorted, but now a lot of the younger people of the affluent side of the tracks are going to "Ecstacy" Since I have heard of heroin being so much cheaper than years ago, that is becoming more attractive to all segments. I don't know what will work. Prohibition did not work in the 20s on booze, and doesn't seem to be working on drugs but, if legalized, the only way that will work is having a lot of people employed in investigating the industry. When it is so easy to go to Mexico, from where I live, there will be wholesale smuggling to avoid any taxation, and it will be extremely difficult to police it. Not only is drug abuse a problem, it is also the lengths addicts will go to obtain the money to buy the stuff. Whatever the solution turns out to be, it will not be easy to come by, and I will bet that it will take a lot of tax money along the way. BTW, Lewis will be out of town for a few days, so if your post is not directly responded to, that will be the reason. ~H~

To: Jacques Chitte who wrote (18081)	5/4/2000 12:50:00 AM
From: Colleen M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Would you want your 10 year old to be able to shoot up smack? Of course only people of legal age would be able to legally buy these drugs. But it would be much easier for a kid to get it. Kids die of alcohol poisoning all the time. Look at it from that perspective. Forget about the tax issue. I'm not in favor of any intoxicants. Would you want to answer that call and have to identify your dead child?