Introduction and Overview The legalization of drugs, particularly cannabis, is a fascinating intersection of economic opportunity and societal transformation. This shift prompts significant changes across economic, legal, and social landscapes. Through the theoretical frameworks of Mark Granovetter’s social embeddedness and Karl Polanyi’s market embeddedness, this paper explores the complicated impact of drug market transformations. It examines the economic implications outlined by Steven B. Duke and Albert C. Gross, including potential financial savings and community health benefits, alongside broader effects on employment, real estate, and public policy. Additionally, to deepen the exploration of the economic and social impacts of drug legalization, …show more content…
Granovetter notes, "social relations, rather than institutional arrangements or generalized morality, are mainly responsible for the production of trust in economic life" (Granovetter, 1985, p. 490). This insight is crucial for understanding how formerly illicit networks will adapt to new legal frameworks, potentially altering their operational norms and strategies to fit a legalized marketplace. Karl Polanyi’s concept of embeddedness further extends the ideas put forth by Granovetter by emphasizing that markets are not just social constructs but are also significantly influenced by legal, cultural, and ecological frameworks. Polanyi argues that the economy is "embedded and enmeshed in institutions, economic and non-economic" (Polanyi, 1944, p. 71), which implies that economic systems cannot be thought of as independent from the societal contexts in which they operate. This embedding suggests that the market system is shaped by the various social and institutional norms prevalent within that society. Polanyi’s analysis implies that the sociological and economic implications of legalizing drug markets are significant. The …show more content…
Steven B. Duke and Albert C. Gross detail the potential benefits, stating, "the legalization of drugs would... save the taxpayer money, and generally benefit both individuals and the community as a whole" (Duke & Gross, 1993, p. 1152). They estimate that legalization could lead to "savings on prohibition enforcement expenditures and tax revenue of $47.1 billion annually" (Duke & Gross, 1993, p. 1154). Moreover, they argue that reducing the illicit drug trade through legalization would "likely lead to a reduction in crime" and make neighborhoods "more desirable places to live," potentially increasing property values (Duke & Gross, 1993, p. 1156). Echoing Duke and Gross's analysis, Dr. Espinosa discusses the significant but hard-to-quantify impact of illegal or informal markets, especially in South America. He notes, "It's a big impact; it's just hard to tell how big. In countries like Ecuador, drugs have become increasingly important very quickly, largely due to a reduction in political caution regarding drug transit." This situation escalated following the removal of U.S. airbase surveillance, which had previously helped control drug trafficking through Ecuador. The growing cannabis market in the United States is projected to reach "$42.98 billion by 2024" (Financial Sector Report,
Legalizing the use of soft drugs would help bolster the U.S. economy, partially because the government would have the ability to tax these drugs. This includes marijuana used for medicinal purposes, which, according to a 1995 article in The Journal of the American Medical Association, can “counteract the toxicity of chemotherapy, treat migraines, minimize pain, and treat moderate wasting syndrome in AIDS patients.” The economy would also benefit from the legalization of drugs because fewer drug offenders would crowd the prisons, and the government could spend the money they saved from this reduction in prison populations on other public expenses. With drug busts running at 750,000 cases a year nationwide, (mostly for marijuana,) prisons are bulging, and those imprisoned for drug-related crime account for only a fraction of America’s drug users. In Elliot Currie’s essay, “Toward a Policy on Drugs,”...
We live in a “recreational drug culture”, with the current criminalization of illicit drugs being driven by the common but not entirely universally accepted assumption that negative externalities will instead be placed in on society. Addressing the seemingly ever-infinite "war on drugs", in "Why We Should Decriminalize Drug Use", Douglas Husak argues in favour of the decriminalization of drugs in terms of not criminalizing the use of such recreational drugs. In this paper, I will dispute that Kusak 's argument succeeds because of the lack of justification for prohibition, and the counterproductiveness and how numerically evident the ineffectiveness of these contemporary punitive policies are.
Concerned authorities have focused essentially on criminalization and punishment, to find remedies to the ever-increasing prevalent drug problem. In the name of drug reducing policies, authorities endorse more corrective and expensive drug control methods and officials approve stricter new drug war policies, violating numerous human rights. Regardless of or perhaps because of these efforts, UN agencies estimate the annual revenue generated by the illegal drug industry at $US400 billion, or the equivalent of roughly eight per cent of total international trade (Riley 1998). This trade has increased organized/unorganized crime, corrupted authorities and police officials, raised violence, disrupted economic markets, increased risk of diseases an...
Lately it seems that drug policy and the war on drugs has been in the headlines quite a lot. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the policies that the United States government takes against illegal drugs are coming into question. The mainstream media is catching on to the message of organizations and individuals who have long been considered liberal "Counter Culture" supporters. The marijuana question seems to be the most prevalent and pressed of the drugs and issues that are currently being addressed. The messages of these organizations and individuals include everything from legalization of marijuana for medical purposes, to full-unrestricted legalization of the drug. Of course, the status quo of vote seeking politicians and conservative policy makers has put up a strong resistance to this "new" reform lobby. The reasons for the resistance to the changes in drug policies are multiple and complex. The issues of marijuana’s possible negative effects, its use as a medical remedy, the criminality of distribution and usage, and the disparity in the enforcement of current drug laws have all been brought to a head and must be addressed in the near future. It is apparent that it would be irresponsible and wrong for the government to not evaluate it’s current general drug policies and perhaps most important, their marijuana policy. With the facts of racial disparity in punishment, detrimental effects, fiscal strain and most importantly, the history of the drug, the government most certainly must come to the conclusion that they must, at the very least, decriminalize marijuana use and quite probably fully legalize it.
Zinberg’s theory (1984) proposes that “social controls apply to the use of all drugs”. He describes these social controls as sanctions and rituals that regulate where, why and how drugs are taken. They are devised with the intention of minimising both harm and addiction. Sanctions define whether and how a particular drug should be used. They may be informal and shared by a group, as in the common maxim’s associated with alcohol use, “If you drink and drive, you’re a bloody idiot” for example, or they may be formal, as in various laws and policies aimed at regulating drug use and minimising harm.
In this journal article, Todd Subritzky of the National Drug Research Institute in Perth, Australia, discusses the many different parts of the commercial cannabis market in Colorado. There are some major problems that Subritzky asserts such as the black market and loopholes. he is also able to bring up the dollars that are coming from the state alone along with the market as a whole. The taxes that are raised from this law are then used to help children in school (7) He then shows that when a problem comes about the state can easily change something that is going on. This article is written in easy to follow language, but has some parts that are very complex.
be beneficial.” In: Scott Barbour (Ed.), Drug Legalization: Current Controversies. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2000, pp. 102-108.
Tooley Michael, “ Our Current Drug Legalization: Grounds for Reconsideration,” Newsletter of the Center for Values and Social Policy, vol8, no. 1, Spring 1994. Rpt.in Current Issues and Enduring Questions. Ed. Sylvan Barnet and Hugo Bedau. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1996. 385-89.
“The root cause is a vast, multi-layered incommensurability between the institutions of globalized, market driven society and the basic psychological, social and spiritual needs of human beings” (229). Something that is only briefly recognised in public discussion. The normal methods of intervention are enormously expensive with minimal effects. “Illegal drug business and legal pharmaceutical industries” (229) are financially benefiting from the damaging drugs people use. During a time that is almost complete “domination of Canadian thought by the logic of globalization, it is difficult” (229) to even to come up with a good way of improving dislocation. Dodging these tough realities has created a deadlock and caused us to infinitely endure feeble interventions and ridiculous “war on drugs”
However, legalization will be profitable to global economies in two ways. It will allow for money spent on drug law enforcement to be spent more wisely and will increase revenue. There have been escalating costs spent on the war against drugs and countless dollars spent on rehabilitation. Every year in the United States, ten billion dollars are spent on enforcing drug laws alone. Drug violators accounted for about forty percent of all criminals in federal prisons (Rosenthal 1996).
People ask, “What good does legalizing Marijuana do? It is a drug for a reason.” Well, I, along with numerous others question, “What are those reasons? What good does keeping it illegal do?” One reason to legalize the “drug” is that it can save/earn the United States of America a great deal of money. “Nationwide, law enforcement officials made 1.5 million drug arrests in 2011, more than 40 perce...
International Business, Times. "Will US Marijuana Legalisation Help Smash the Mexican Drug Cartels?."International Business Times 08 Nov. 2012: Points of View Reference Center. Web. 20 Mar. 2014.
65-92 Riga, Peter J. " Legalization Would Help Solve The Nation's Drug Problem. " Greenhaven Press. 52-54 Rosenthal, A.M. " The Case For Slavery." Kennedy, Kennedy, and Aaron 370-372 " Two Crucial Issues in the Argument for Drug Legalization."
With America’s war on drugs being highly focused on the increased use of marijuana, there is not much time for officers to focus on crimes of greater importance. Crimes related to illegal marijuana use are becoming more problematic due to drug deals that go bad, occasionally ending with murder. It has been estimated that one marijuana-related arrest is made every 42 seconds. With marijuana being illegal, keeping crime related activities under control cost the United States approximately twenty billion dollars per year (Sledge). According to Brian Bremner and Vincent Del Giudice, “A 2010 study by the libertarian Cato Institute, forecasted that states could save $17.4 billion annually from reduced drug enforcement costs and increased tax revenue, assuming marijuana production and sales were legal nationwide” (11). Several law enforcement hours are exhausted with pursing, questioning, and arresting citizens that are in possession of or consuming marijuana. There would be a decrease in the number of misdemeanor possession cases that are pending hearing. These cases would be dismissed, decreasing costs affiliated with each case. There are excessive numbers of people who remain incarcerated for nonviolent crimes related to illegal marijuana use. Legalizing marijuana would allow these people to be released, opening jail space for the true criminals. Legalizing marijuana would free up law enforcement officers from focusing on illegal marijuana use and allow focus to be put on more serious
Leading to an increase in drug experimentation by the youth and an increase in crack houses, where most laced drugs are produced. There is a reason why these drugs are illegal and it 's because of their harmful effects and the damage they cause the human body. Drug users, are often recognized as people who commit crimes, murder, rape, and other violence including burglary. With drug laws, it creates a fear in people of getting in trouble with the law and is a major reason to not use drugs. The legalization of drugs would not lower crimes rates as there would be more and more addicts as well as large black markets for drugs. Although these drug users commit crimes to obtain these drugs, it is obvious to see they would still be committing these crimes to obtain the drug even if it is legalized. Either way, a crime is still being committed they just have an easier way to steal the drug from someone. Which means the crime rates would start to rise, leading to the population of prisoners increasing, which also leads to the government spending more money on organizing jail facilities to hold these prisoners. One state in particular where marijuana is now legal, has started to come to the realization that maybe it wasn’t a good idea to leaglize this drug. Kevin A. Sabet, Ph.D., an assistant professor at the University of Florida and President of SAM points out that,