Who here in America is responsible for glamorizing cocaine use???
George?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Who here in America is responsible for glamorizing cocaine use???
With drug cartels, we'd never know what the supply level is. My local newspaper does not list commodity pricing for cocaine, pot, and meth. Does yours'?
As far as the supply #'s on oil, maybe you can trust the oil cartel #'s, but I don't, along with many others.
So if you don't know or cannot trust the supply #'s of these two commmodities, eco 101 does not apply. (BAMMMMM!!!!)
Oil and drugs were the only two commodites that I mentioned that the law of supply doesn't adhere to due to cartels.
Last time I checked, tho' I could be mistaken, there isn't a cartel connected to a commodity, say, like pork bellies. If there is Rabbi, please let us know.
You're an economic moron.
Cartels do NOT control the amount of oil available for sale. OPEC controls less than 50% of the worlds oil supplies. There is no one cartel, nation or organzation that controls anything near a majority of the supply.
OPEC controls nearly 66% of the world's proven oil output. If their proven output is under 50%, according to the 'Great economist Sangha', then most experts agree that their output is almost damn near 50%. So taking your stat at almost 50%, OPEC producer gov't's, that mostly lie in the middle east, still out produce non-OPEC oil producers. Therefore non-OPEC oil producers, which are non cartel members, catch a cold when OPEC sneezes. In other words, when OPEC cuts production or says it increases oil production, they follow OPEC's suit oil production-wise.
My final word on this matter is that the stated above, OPEC cutting or not cutting supply, is a good indicator of OPEC managing the world oil market. OPEC can cut supply or increase oil supply, the non-cartel producing countries follow suit, can do that irrespective of demand (even when demand is real-world lower), to drive prices higher if they want to.
(BAMMMM!, my third and last 'bam' today.)
One of the most laughable statements ever made on the subject is any suggestion that any real dent has been made in the supply or the demand.Oh, I don't think ANYONE could argue that the drug cartels have seriously been hurt since the 80s early 90s and that there are in fact less drugs
You are talking about child abuse, which would be subject to intervention by child protective services supported by ordinary police. It doesn't require the attention of narcotics raiders, whose activities typically cause harm and rarely if ever are constructive.tell that to the children who are removed from the homes of people who care more about getting their high than they do about feeding their children by those "scum bags"
Along with the corrupt legislators who refuse to consider critical review of the totally counterproductive drug war. As it was with alcohol prohibition, the graft flows upward -- probably to the very top.All the drug wars have done is made very rich men out of the suppliers.
You are talking about child abuse, which would be subject to intervention by child protective services supported by ordinary police. It doesn't require the attention of narcotics raiders, whose activities typically cause harm and rarely if ever are constructive.tell that to the children who are removed from the homes of people who care more about getting their high than they do about feeding their children by those "scum bags"
Scumbags is what they are.
Some documentation here: Botched Paramilitary Police Raids
You are talking about child abuse, which would be subject to intervention by child protective services supported by ordinary police. It doesn't require the attention of narcotics raiders, whose activities typically cause harm and rarely if ever are constructive.tell that to the children who are removed from the homes of people who care more about getting their high than they do about feeding their children by those "scum bags"
Scumbags is what they are.
Some documentation here: Botched Paramilitary Police Raids
Yep, tell that to the 15 y/o who I happened to come across while participating in a drug raid. Turns out her step father had sold her to his meth dealer. The mother didn't have a clue about anything that had happened. If not for a drug bust that girl probably would never have been returned to her mother.
You are talking about child abuse, which would be subject to intervention by child protective services supported by ordinary police. It doesn't require the attention of narcotics raiders, whose activities typically cause harm and rarely if ever are constructive.
Scumbags is what they are.
Some documentation here: Botched Paramilitary Police Raids
Yep, tell that to the 15 y/o who I happened to come across while participating in a drug raid. Turns out her step father had sold her to his meth dealer. The mother didn't have a clue about anything that had happened. If not for a drug bust that girl probably would never have been returned to her mother.
Once again, it doesn't take a SWAT team to protect a child; that's a job for the "regular" police and child protective services.
Yep, tell that to the 15 y/o who I happened to come across while participating in a drug raid. Turns out her step father had sold her to his meth dealer. The mother didn't have a clue about anything that had happened. If not for a drug bust that girl probably would never have been returned to her mother.
Once again, it doesn't take a SWAT team to protect a child; that's a job for the "regular" police and child protective services.
and ur missing the point, we were there to serve a drug warrant. no one except the step father knew the girl was there, the mother wasn't even aware the daughter was missing yet, we just happened to be there.
Once again, it doesn't take a SWAT team to protect a child; that's a job for the "regular" police and child protective services.
and ur missing the point, we were there to serve a drug warrant. no one except the step father knew the girl was there, the mother wasn't even aware the daughter was missing yet, we just happened to be there.
And you're missing the point.
The poster you're responding complained of SWAT drug raids, and not serving warrants. The link posted was to a map of raids, not warrant service
and ur missing the point, we were there to serve a drug warrant. no one except the step father knew the girl was there, the mother wasn't even aware the daughter was missing yet, we just happened to be there.
And you're missing the point.
The poster you're responding complained of SWAT drug raids, and not serving warrants. The link posted was to a map of raids, not warrant service
No, the poster I originally responded to called ALL drug enforcement agents scum, that means ALL
And you're missing the point.
The poster you're responding complained of SWAT drug raids, and not serving warrants. The link posted was to a map of raids, not warrant service
No, the poster I originally responded to called ALL drug enforcement agents scum, that means ALL
Liar. He clearly called all "narcotics RAIDERS" scum. Not all dea agents
1) drug agents are traitors to freedom loving people
2) those people that may have died if the cocaine got to America should have personal responsibility and not depend on us spending billions to prevent them from doing something stupid. their death is better for the gene pool
No, the poster I originally responded to called ALL drug enforcement agents scum, that means ALL
Liar. He clearly called all "narcotics RAIDERS" scum. Not all dea agents
you're such a lying piece of shit. I did say scum instead of traitor, but he was referring to ALL drug agents, clearly
1) drug agents are traitors to freedom loving people
2) those people that may have died if the cocaine got to America should have personal responsibility and not depend on us spending billions to prevent them from doing something stupid. their death is better for the gene pool
It's irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Anything else?I could have sworn you asked the exact same question a minute ago. But I'll play along.
any interruption of drugs to this or any country is considered to be a good thing to most people. It's the reason that thousands and thousands of narcotics agents get up every morning and go to work. I don't think they are thinking about the profitability going up. They ARE thinking about how many people could have and would have died if all that cocaine made it to the states or elsewhere. I'm assuming you don't agree...but you asked. And that's the answer I have since you didn't like my first one.
What's your stand on the Reagan administration's involvement in cocaine trafficking?
It was wrong. What is your position on slavery in the Islamic world?
It's irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Anything else?What's your stand on the Reagan administration's involvement in cocaine trafficking?
It was wrong. What is your position on slavery in the Islamic world?
Drugs don't abuse people, people abuse people.
Drugs don't abuse people, people abuse people.
Yes..... And?????? Drugs are a tool both for good and evil.
Who here in America is responsible for glamorizing cocaine use???
George?