Don't get sick, Government taking away your Sudafed in the name of the War on Drugs

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Spencer278

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2002
3,637
0
0
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Your theory is that increasing the price will decrease usage, show an example where that is true for an addictive substance and didn't result in the users moving on to harder substance.
I didn't say people would stop, i said the proliferation of use would slow. I don't need to sight a case-study to prove a basic economic principle: increased price yields reduced demand, if this wasn't true the meth-dealers could charge 10k a gram and expect the increase in user base year-over-year. Substitution with a harder drug is impossible as their is no more damaging drug than meth, less methadone, PCP, and inhalants.

If this was slowing down the availability of on-line marijuana seeds then you could say they might move on to coke. But it's crystal meth and almost any substitute drug would be preferable.

Find one drug where price increase did what ever you claim would happen with meth usage. I'm asking for one example where increased price could be counted as a win in the war on drugs. For it to be counted as a win the use of drug most decrease and the decrease can not be contributed to an increase use of harder drugs.

 
May 10, 2001
2,669
0
0
Find one drug where price increase did what ever you claim would happen with meth usage.
The fact of any market including the drug black-market is that as prices go up quantity demanded will slow. Show me one market ware you increase prices and quantity demanded speeds up.
For it to be counted as a win
win? you can't 'win', you can just reduce the number of new addicts;
he use of drug most decrease
no, for an impact to occur you need to reduce the number of new people who become addicts.
and the decrease can not be contributed to an increase use of harder drugs.
no harder substitute for crystal-meth exists, you don't go smoke PCP or huff paint fumes because you can't do your hot rounds.

the drug war can never 'win' you can't declare war on a market! the only thing the drug 'war' could ever do is make things less available, thus increasing price: a crap deal for the addict, but a definite way to reduce the number of new addicts.
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
"Your theory is that increasing the price will decrease usage, show an example where that is true for an addictive substance and didn't result in the users moving on to harder substance. "


coffee.

 

glugglug

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2002
5,340
1
81
When I lived in FL I'd estimate I averaged about 150-200 sudafed pills a month in addition to other allergy meds.

For a family where the parent is purchasing this for themselves and some children I could easily see it being too limiting.

The other available decongestants are all drowsiness-inducing.
 

Spencer278

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2002
3,637
0
0
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Find one drug where price increase did what ever you claim would happen with meth usage.
The fact of any market including the drug black-market is that as prices go up quantity demanded will slow. Show me one market ware you increase prices and quantity demanded speeds up.
I'm not claiming the demand will increase if you increase price. I'm claim that anything short of a 1000% increase would have no effect on quantity demanded.

For it to be counted as a win
win? you can't 'win', you can just reduce the number of new addicts;
he use of drug most decrease
no, for an impact to occur you need to reduce the number of new people who become addicts.

And that would be a win right. You can define win how ever you want in show that your market BS has worked
and the decrease can not be contributed to an increase use of harder drugs.
no harder substitute for crystal-meth exists, you don't go smoke PCP or huff paint fumes because you can't do your hot rounds.

I'm assuming that the example you give will not be meth which you claim is the hardest drug therefor in your example you most show that you didn't get people to stop smoking and start doing meth. If you choose to use meth as your example then you don't need to demonstrat that it didn't simply cause a subsition to a harder. Anyways I hope that is clear now what is your example?
the drug war can never 'win' you can't declare war on a market! the only thing the drug 'war' could ever do is make things less available, thus increasing price: a crap deal for the addict, but a definite way to reduce the number of new addicts.

Fine define succese how ever the #### you want and show one time your market theory has worked on a highly addicitive drug.

Edit: I'm sure you will get confused again and come up with another way to avoid say that raising drug prices has no effects, so if your going to complain that their can not be "succese" on the war on drugs then just STFU. Also why is it that you break down a pharagraph and qoute signal words are you really that confused by the question.
 

DivideBYZero

Lifer
May 18, 2001
24,117
2
0
Originally posted by: gsaldivar
oh wait... um, looks like you CAN STILL BUY SUDAFED:

"...People buying the pills have to show identification, sign a log book and are restricted to purchasing nine grams, or 300, 30-mg tablets, a month..."

"The Sky is Falling... The Sky is Falling..."

:beer::D

And you are suprised by this.

VOTE FOR A NAME CHANGE FOR DMC TO 'Chicken Little'. Who's with me?

I'll put a request in at FI if we get enough!
 
May 10, 2001
2,669
0
0
so if your going to complain that their can not be "succese" on the war on drugs then just STFU
i will not shut the &*#% up; as i've said numerous times this isn't an argu ment about the 'war on drugs', it's a debate on reducing avalability of sudafed inorder to make meth less avalable. If you spent time reading the thread you'd know i have a diferent opinon on other things and your trying to pick a fight that doesn't exist.
Also why is it that you break down a pharagraph and qoute signal words are you really that confused by the question.
yes, because i'm stupid, just look at my spelling. as in any war: only love can win!