…
‘The War on Drugs’ was officially inaugurated in the U.S. by President Nixon in June 1971.
…
Demand: ‘The War on Drugs’ Failure’s Source
‘Of illicit hard-drug supply & demand; it’s the attack on demand that’s deficient.’
“We don’t produce the weapons, we don’t consume the synthetic drugs, but unfortunately, we are the ones who suffer the deaths due to crime in response to the drug demand from your country”
Mexico President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo, Nov 27, 2024
“You can launch a hundred, a thousand drone strikes. And our demand is going to ensure the continued flow of drugs into the country.”
Craig Deare, National Security Council Senior Director, Trump 1st administration, Nov 27, 2024
‘Illicit-drugs have flowed into the US for decades because of American demand.’
Paul Kelly, Feb 5, 2025
Economic Graphs: The Media, Government, Social-Services Executives & Economists
While graphs (such as the one above) turn many minds off,
it’s a democracy-imperative that economic ones be understood.
Economic graphs should be compulsorily taught at school (then they would appear in newspapers and on TV, which would force journalists to know what they’re talking about) and make public debate relevant – currently, most of the ‘intellectualism’ is counterproductive – for example, misusing the word Socialism, which is ‘public (rather than private) ownership of the factors of production,’ which means, for instance, it has nothing to do with The Universal Subsistence Income (USI).
The solution to our problems starts with raising the standard of our economics’ debate because economics is where fuzzy wuzzy feelings hit reality.
For example, there is a simple method (detailed in Coopetism 5.9) to increase our economy’s efficiency such that the end goods & services we want will be 10-fold what they are now – i.e. with the same resource input, Australia’s economy will go from 8% to 80% of China’s, which means Australia can independently guarantee its sovereignty.
Just as illiteracy disaffects India’s democracy such that many must vote for candidates via symbols on the ballot paper, economic-illiteracy affects all nations. And, while ‘wise-heads’ say “dumb it down” so citizens understand, that also dumbs down the ‘wise-heads.’ Instead, the standard of thinking must be raised and, before the elite begin their snobbery, we all know a language, which is infinitely more difficult than a few economic concepts no matter how scary they may be.
Currently, there’s a critical mass of high-level executives (including in government) who don’t understand basic economics yet are determining our economic systems including with regard to illicit-drugs.
The social-services-industry is chock-a-block with economics-illiterates, which the media love because, with nothing being solved, the waffle never-ends, which means they always have more waffle to waffle about and the social-services’ executives feel validated such that their mouths become waffle-fountains; however, it also means the infrastructurally-Disempowereds’ ‘greatest champion’ is, perversely, the reason for the existence of infrastructural-Disempowerment.
To those social-services executives impacting policy: society needs you to become economically educated and, if you’re unwilling, for citizens’ sake, please self-remove from policy-debate and just stick with grassroots assistance as, with time exponentially evaporating, not only are you taking-up space, your pronouncements (such as the ‘I want to go to Disneyland’ ‘Raise the Rate’ heckling) are usually counterproductive.
To economists: step-up. Currently, you’re [how to, politely, say “useless”?] leaving much to be desired – i.e. all your education counts for nought as you’re making no positive impact. You’re like an Aussie Rules footballer who’s mostly on the bench then, when comes on, never touches the ball. You could start with articulating/highlighting/insisting, ‘Universal Minimum Hourly Wages (UMHoW) is the cause of unemployment.’
Unlike most of the ideas being floated, The Citizens’ Dividend Organisation (CDO) is offering a definitive solution – so, if you disagree with the ideas then, at least get on the field, and state why and if you perceive merit in them then, likewise, using your expertise for the common good (including for yourself and descendants), advocate for them.
The Current Market for Illicit-Drugs
We don’t have an illicit-drugs problem;
we have an economics-problem,
which is easily solved because we already have a successful template
– i.e. the illicit-drugs-associated-economics-problem is similar to that associated with illegal-immigration,
which we already know how to solve.
Regarding the graph above, ignore the 2 coloured boxes and just focus on identifying each of its following 5 aspects:
- Price (P), on the vertical axis (where P2 is, say, $200 per unit and P1 is, say, $120)
- Quantity (Q), on the horizontal axis (where Q2 is only marginally less than Q1)
- The Demand curve, which is very steep
- The Supply (Drug War) curve (top)
- The Supply (No Drug War) curve (bottom).
Via the intersections of the Demand curve with the 2 Supply curves, the graph shows, due to ‘The War on Drugs,’ while the price of drugs dramatically rises, the quantities consumed only marginally decrease, which, given the aim is to eradicate drug consumption, shows why the war is a failure.
[Note: price determines the quantity supplied/demanded, which, as one of economists’ everlasting contributions to confusion, reverses the mathematics’ convention of: y (on the vertical axis) determined by whatever is x (on the horizontal axis). So, look at the price first to, then, determine quantity.]
Regarding demand, why is the curve so steep?
Answer: Because for addicts, no matter the price, they will do everything in their power to get the drug – i.e. hard-drug demand is, predominantly, addiction driven, which means the drug is a ‘quasi-need.’
[Note: Even less physiologically-addictive illicit-soft-drugs such as cannabis can become a psychologically-compelling quasi-need for those who, absent hope, trust & opportunity, therefore seek escapism.]
Thus, addiction is the key to the drug-cartels’ ‘business model’ and, while currently it is their business-model’s greatest strength, this article shows how this can be turned on its head such that it becomes their unrecoverable Achilles’ Heel – i.e. it’s via addiction, we cripple their ‘business model.’
Regarding attempts to impact demand, these have included cultural ‘Just say No’ campaigns, harm-education, user-rehabilitation and user-imprisonment; however, these have failed.
Thus, ‘The War on Drugs’ has, effectively, almost exclusively, been a law enforcement war on drug suppliers, which, in isolation, can’t work because, as the graph shows, every time supplier costs increase (including if shipments are intercepted or, even, one or more drug cartels are dismantled), the price skyrockets, thereby encouraging the remaining suppliers to increase their supply and also attracting new suppliers.
Accordingly, every time a competitor is caught, as the police smile for the cameras and otherwise celebrate, perversely, the other drug cartels also party:
“Yippee ki yay – my drug revenues goin’ to go through the roof!”
That is, regarding the drug war’s effects on drug dealers’ revenue, in total, it increases – i.e. as per the graph, they gain the extra revenue of the red-box & lose the much smaller blue-box, which means, so long as they aren’t the ones caught, ‘The War on Drugs’ helps them, which is why drug-cartels’ footprint, technology, violence and corruption are all increasing.
Thus, Powell’s excellent 2013 article stands as a testament to governments’ failure on the illicit-drug issue because, due to their economics-illiteracy, the same policies are still being used yet, as precisely predicted, the consequences continue worsening.
Twelve years ago, Powell concluded:
The U.S. government’s policy of drug prohibition, like alcohol prohibition before it, is a failure—and not one that can be corrected by a mere tweaking of current policy. The economic analysis of fighting a supply-side drug war predicts that the war will enhance drug suppliers’ revenues, enabling them to continuously ratchet up their efforts to supply drugs in response to greater enforcement. The result is a drug war that escalates in cost and violence.
So, if stopping illicit-drugs is similar to stopping illegal-immigration, which has been solved in Australia with the ‘Stop the Boats’ offshore-processing and, currently, being solved in the U.S., with ‘returning’ via deportation flights, how has ‘The War on Drugs’ become a ‘forever war’?
…
February 22, 2025
Hello
Regarding solving the illicit-drug-related-economics-problem, luckily, the solution to illegal-immigration provides a template.
The Same Economics-Problem: The Markets for Illegal-Immigration & Illicit-Drugs
Both illegal-immigration and illicit-drugs are similar – i.e.:
- Both, as well as being social issues, are economic-problems
- They each have steep demand curves [Illegal immigrants are often desperate such that obstacles (even dangerous ones) don’t prevent their emigrating attempts]
- Just as drug-users may become drug-suppliers to finance their addiction, illegal-immigrants often self-smuggle.
However, there has been great success fighting illegal-immigration yet only failure fighting illicit-drugs, why?
Answer: While both have maintained law-enforcement pressure on supply, only in the case of illegal-immigration has demand been appropriately attacked – i.e. it has been made clear to potential illegal-immigrants even if they arrive at their destination, they will be deported, which, therefore, has destroyed the people smugglers’ ‘business model.’
In contrast, as shown, the drug-cartels’ business-model’ has been enhanced.
Thus, the key to ruining the drug-cartels/dealers’ ‘business model’ is, while maintaining law-enforcement pressure on their supply, also attack the demand they face such that their revenue plummets and, therefore, the supply of illicit-drugs is no longer profitable – i.e. ruin the drug-cartels’ revenue.
So, how can the demand for the drug-cartels’ (especially the hardest- and most addictive) drugs be throttled?
Answer: Government must attack demand by:
- As bizarre as it may initially sound, becoming addicts’ illicit-hard-drug supplier
- Infrastructuralising Universal Empowerment, which will minimise escapism.
1. Government: The Illicit-Hard-Drug Addicts’ Number 1 Supplier of Choice
Regarding government becoming illicit-hard-drug addicts’ supplier, physiological-addicts must be differentiated then siphoned off into the government supplied program so that they don’t contribute to the drug cartels’ profit.
This system requires:
- Illicit-drug-classification – i.e. hard and soft
- Government registration of hard-drug addicts
- Government manufacture of hard-drugs
- Locations for government-supplied hard-drug dispersion.
Regarding illicit-drug-classification, it could be:
- ‘Iha-drugs’ – i.e. illicit-hard-addictive-drugs which are both anti-social and highly-physiologically-addictive such as opioids, cocaine, amphetamine and LSD
- ‘Isc-drugs’ – i.e. illicit-soft-compelling-drugs whose addictiveness is predominantly psychological, particularly cannabis and its derivatives.
Accordingly, ‘The War on Drugs’ is separated into 2 battles – i.e. on:
- Iha-drugs whose demand curve is especially steep
- Isc-drugs whose demand curve is flatter – i.e. a change in price has a more dramatic effect on the quantity demanded.
Of these, the government as drug-supplier only applies to the vastly more important former; however, to the extent it defeats the manufacture/sale of iha-drugs, there will be more resources available to deal with other problems including those associated with isc-drugs.
Regarding government registration, while the precise mechanics can be debated, one suggestion is 3 doctors be required to verify a person as an ‘iha-drug-addict.’
And, being registered as an iha-drug-addict entitles that citizen to attend any of the specified locations for the administration of their choice of government manufactured hard, otherwise illicit, drugs for free.
Regarding the government manufacture of iha-drugs, this ensures quality control, which ensures the product is as safe as possible for addicts.
Regarding the locations, the obvious starting point is to upgrade our current ‘Medically Supervised Injecting Rooms.’
At these clinics, there will be trained staff and information for those wishing to break their addiction.
The drugs must be administered/consumed at the location – i.e. unconsumed drugs cannot be taken from the location for later consumption.
So, what will be the effect of this system?
Obviously, the demand facing the drug-cartels will be crucified, which means their revenue will evaporate and their currently burgeoning profit dive into a steep loss. In addition, they will know getting new people addicted will not resurrect that demand, which means they will be totally squeezed out such that they cease to be in that business, which, in turn means, street supply will vanish and there won’t be new addicts.
Hence, within 6 months, hard-drug crime will cease to be a major problem and the government, in line with the decreasing demand for their iha-drugs, will reduce their manufacturing.
Thus, addiction is the iha-drug cartels’ Achilles Heel – i.e. addiction is what makes it easy to attack the demand for drug-cartels’ product.
In economic terms, the demand curve facing drug-cartels will be both much:
- Reduced
- Flatter – i.e. the demand curve for isc-drugs is much flatter than that for iha-drugs.
Also, as well as less illicit-drug business, there is less drug-related crime such as theft.
Meanwhile, there is a virtuous law enforcement cycle – i.e. as both direct and indirect illicit-drug crime plummets, law enforcement is both:
- Increasingly able to focus its resources
- Decreasingly subject to corruption and intimidation because drug-cartels no longer have the incentive (or the resources) to finance them.
2. Infrastructuralise Universal Empowerment
Escapism (often from hopelessness – sounds funny but, hopefully, you know what’s meant) is the core driver of both iha- and isc-drug demand yet this is minimised by Universal Empowerment Infrastructure (UEI).
UEI consists of 5 Citizen Empowerment Infrastructure cornerstones:
- Universal Rule of Coopetive Law (including personal & property security)
- Universal Subsistence Income (USI)
- Universal Liberal Democracy
- Universal Education
- Universal Healthcare.
In sum, UEI infrastructuralises security, hope, opportunity, trust and good-neighbourliness – i.e. it optimises Coopetition (Cooperation first & foremost and, within that context, Competition as the treasured second), which is synonymous with civilised behaviour.
Accordingly, all citizens are maximally infrastructurally empowered and encouraged to lead lives that are:
‘societally-contributively self-actualising.’
And, with Coopetition infrastructurally maximised, escapism (and other anti-social behaviour) is minimised to perhaps less than 10% of the current level.
In the West, to complete our UEI infrastructure, by and large, we only require ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform’ in which The USI is substituted for both:
- Universal Minimum Hourly Wages (UMHoW); and,
- Income-Welfare.
This reform is self-funding such that it leads to government-budget-depressurisation because it eradicates: Subsistence-Income-Servitude (SIS), poverty, unemployment, employee-exploitation, anti-Coopetive regulation, infrastructurised-hopelessness etc.
This is of even greater benefit in Developing countries such as Mexico because, without an income ‘safety net,’ currently, as well as many being subject to Subsistence-Income-Servitude (SIS), many are also impoverished such that they are forced to take any job even if it’s illegal.
Zero: The Social-Services Industries’ Big Picture Contribution
“We don’t give up on any individual,” a drug think tank CEO thundered.
In Sydney City, Australia, in 1999 (preceding Australia’s 2001 first ‘Medically Supervised Injecting Room’), while the author was completing the ‘Salvation Army Volunteer Training Course,’ we were gathered for a presentation by the above-mentioned special guest.
Packed-out with perhaps 200+ students and staff, he gave a speech and then took questions at which time the author asked, ‘What do you think about the idea of the government providing drugs to drug addicts for free so that the drug dealers are denied the profit, have no incentive to get others addicted and go out of business?’
As his face instantly became a tempest, he answered as above with a vehemence that dumbfounded those present then took another’s question.
Imagine if, way back then, that one influential person had been intellectually-humble long enough to have given himself the opportunity to ‘see the light.’
The social-services-industry is full of naïve self-righteous stubborn arrogant aloof closed-minded do-gooders who fiddle and ferret at the edges without doing anything to eradicate infrastructural-Disempowerment, which, therefore, makes them the Disempowereds’ (and society per se’s) greatest walking/talking problem …
‘To be sure, there are no easy answers to the challenges of today, but half measures will avail us nothing as we question the complex issues facing us. Right now, there has never been more drug use, that includes our families and loved ones, and the drugs being used have more dangerous cross-contaminants than ever before.’
- Jon Owen, CEO & Pastor, Wayside Chapel, newsletter, December 5, 2024
‘No easy answers’ Jon – are you sure?
While Jon Owen does tremendous grassroots work, unfortunately for the Disempowered, he’s also frequently in the media – i.e. the prefacing of comments with there’s ‘no easy answers’ perpetuates the myth and acts as a copout encouraging everyone, before even trying, to give-up on solving infrastructural-Disempowerment.
In Australia, someone of the hundreds of journalists could ask the likes of Tim Costello, Cassandra Goldie, Sally McManus, Jon Owen or any of the other thousands of social-services-industry executives what they think about the government supplying drug-addicts as an interim step in, ultimately, winning ‘The War on Drugs’?
Why not ask??
Social-services-executives are a dime-a-dozen because of the existence of infrastructural-Disempowerment, which can easily (and with sugar) be solved; yet, they’re getting a free unaccountable ride and you’re paying for them via taxes, donations and air-wave pollution.
To date, the social-services-industry’s Big Picture policy contribution has been zero, which is why matters are worsening – i.e. after all, if they’d got it correct then how could it be worsening?
One reason for their collective failure is, while they usually start with good intentions, by the time they get to the top, they’re happy in their pig-in-mud ignorance, ‘don’t rock the boat’ gutlessness, faux outrage and, of course, their pats-on-the-back-attracting-waffle.
Too many drift into protecting their careers, incomes, political-wins, social-status, friendships, egos, self-identities and world-views rather than putting the Disempowered first.
As for the media, they’re happy with their salaries and, a bit like the drug-cartels, their ‘business-model;’ meanwhile, they’ve the temerity to condemn social-media misinformation.
Politicians are happy being elected.
Economists are happy being wheeled-in for little ridiculous nerdy cameos before wheeling themselves out.
So, out of the media, government, economists and the social-services-industry, who is the best hope for kickstarting the mentioning of the 2 Big Picture solutions of:
- Government supply of iha-drugs to addicts
- ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform’?
Out of the 4 groups mentioned, the best hope may start with social-services executives – i.e. if just 1 or 2 of them can sufficiently harness their passion to become intellectually humble and motivated enough to learn a little economics and brave enough to tell the truth then they can feed the media the actual infrastructural-Disempowerment solution, which the media will then report, which, in turn, will lead economists to comment and politicians will be forced to respond.
Thus, though social-services-executives are the ones most letting-down the Disempowered, which are their core constituents, they can turn that on its head today and, via Democracy’s dominoes, become the walking/talking solution, not only for the Disempowered, but for society per se.
Wrap-Up
Up to the present, ‘The War on Drugs’ has almost exclusively been a war on the supply of drugs.
However, as with illegal-immigration, demand is the key – i.e. if the demand facing drug-cartels’ can be sufficiently impacted then their revenue will be ruined, their profit become a loss and, therefore, they no longer have a viable ‘business model.’
The solution is, while keeping law enforcement pressure on supply, attack the demand facing the illicit-drug-cartels via, differentiating addictive-demand, and having the government become addicts’ (and, only addicts’) Number 1 illicit-hard-drug-supplier of choice via outcompeting on price (i.e. it’s free), quality, safety and morality.
Also, to minimise escapism, our social-infrastructure must be completed via implementing the self-funding ‘USI-4-UMHoW Reform.’
Regarding solving the various problems facing our societies, a good start would be compulsorily teaching economics graphs in school.
This can all be achieved if just one social-services-executive kickstarts it.
Thank you.
Best regards
Paul Ross
The Citizens’ Dividend Organisation (CDO)