Archive for the ‘Milton Friedman’ Category

Milton Friedman, National Party and Economics of Good Health

October 30, 2008

{{enImage adapted from Image:MiltonFriedman.j...Image via Wikipedia Milton Friedman, Nobel laureate and proponent of the Chicago School of Economics that the New Zealand National Party hold dear..

The same Milton Friedman that I drew to the attention of MP Tony Ryall at his Christchurch “Health Issues” public meeting – presenting to him (and his audience) that the philosophy and principles of the Nat’s is undermined by the double standards and that ‘economic professors the world over hold the drug laws in disrepute.’ (in NZ, drug laws are enacted under Warrant of the Minister of Health)

I invited Tony to view the list of 515 Professors of Economics that supported Prof J. A. Miron’s ‘economics of drug prohibition’ study. ( Miron is a professor of economics at Boston and Harvard University; E-Mail: miron@fas.harvard.edu)

Lets face it. Ryall, as a prospective Minister of Health and his Nat’s ‘tough on crime’ colleagues are utterly compromised by this.

Ryall! Look where we went today. It's a

Image by Chris Ryall

Every opportunity to stick it to them should be made.. so to should attention be given to ACT, its party ‘membership, supporters and specifically candidates’, along with Sensible Sentencing and the rest of the Christian “fellowship” parties. (there is nothing Godly about idiocy or ignorance…)

The following interview is as relevant today as when it was made in 1991. The only difference is that in NZ we can substitute Methamphetamine for Heroin and Cocaine. Its got nothing to do with the pharmacology, and everything to do with our geographic location. (see also another economist from Hawaii, Prof James Roumasett on methamphetamine and cannabis.. )

Meanwhile LABOUR calls for a inquiry on gangs… are we stupid? /Blair

Here is an excerpt from “Friedman & Szasz On Liberty and Drugs.” It is from a 1991 interview on “America’s Drug Forum,” a nat’l public affairs talk show that appears on public TV stations. http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/friedm1.htm

Randy Paige is an Emmy Award-winning drug reporter from Baltimore, MD; Prof. Milton Friedman has been a Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Inst. on War, Revolution, and Peace at Stanford since ’77, & is considered the leader of the Chicago School of monetary economics. The Presidential Medal of FreedomPresidential Medal of Freedom
Image via
Wikipedia
Professor Friedman won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science in ’76, & is also the recipient of the Nat’l Medal of Science & the Presidential Medal of Freedom by the U.S. gov’t in ’88.

======================

Paige: Let us deal first with the issue of legalization of drugs. How do you see America changing for the better under that system?

Friedman: I see America with half the number of prisons, half the number of prisoners, ten thousand fewer homicides a year, inner cities in which there’s a chance for the poor people to live without being afraid for their lives, citizens who might be respectable who are now addicts not being subject to becoming criminals in order to get their drug, being able to get drugs for which they’re sure of the quality. You know, the same thing happened under prohibition of alcohol as is happening now.

Under prohibition of alcohol, deaths from alcohol poisoning, from poisoning by things that were mixed in with the bootleg alcohol,
went up sharply. Similarly, under drug prohibition, deaths from overdose, from adulterations, from adulterated substances have gone up.

Paige: How would legalization adversely affect America, in your view?

Friedman: The one adverse effect that legalization might have is that there very likely would be more people taking drugs. That’s not by any means clear. But, if you legalized, you destroy the black market, the price of drugs would go down drastically. And as an economist, lower prices tend to generate more demand. However, there are some very strong qualifications to be made to that.

The effect of criminalization, of making drugs criminal, is to drive people from mild drugs to strong drugs.

Paige: In what way?

Friedman: Marijuana is a very heavy, bulky substance and, therefore, it’s relatively easy to interdict. The warriors on drugs have been more successful interdicting marijuana than, let’s say, cocaine. So, marijuana prices have gone up, they’ve become harder to get. There’s been an incentive to grow more potent marijuana and people have been driven from marijuana to heroin, or cocaine, or crack.

Paige: Let us consider another drug then, and that is the drug crack.

Friedman: Crack would never have existed, in my opinion, if you had not had drug prohibition. Why was crack created? The preferred method of taking cocaine, which I understand was by sniffing it, snorting it, became very expensive and they were desperate to find a way of packaging cocaine…

Prohibition Doesnt Work

July 27, 2008

PROHIBITION DOESN’T WORK (no matter which way you hold your mouth)

Cover of Cover via Amazon

The White House had the National Research Council [www.nationalacademies.org/nrc/] examine the data being gathered about drug use and the effects of U.S. drug policies. NRC concluded, “__the nation possesses little information about the effectiveness of current drug policy, especially of drug law enforcement.__” And what data exist show “little apparent relationship between severity of sanctions prescribed for drug use and prevalence or frequency of use.” In other words, there is no proof that prohibition “the cornerstone of U.S. drug policy for a century” reduces drug use. = National Research Council. Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us. National Academy Press, 2001. p. 193.

“There is no logical basis for the prohibition of marijuana.” = Milton Friedman (an economist of note that BERL might recall)

Image adapted from Image:MiltonFriedman.jpg ht...Image via Wikipedia

In the “The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition,” a report recently done by Harvard economics professor Jeffrey Miron, on the causes of drug crime, Miron said his research “very much suggests that it is prohibition. It’s not drug-consumption-related, it’s fighting-over-disputes-in-the-illegal-drug-trade-related. And that’s a result of prohibition, not a result of the drug.”

Hubert Williams, President, Police Foundation; former Chief of Police, Newark, New Jersey said “Miron persuasively demonstrates, the net effects of prohibition, both past and present, are to increase violence, enrich criminals, threaten civil liberties, and make drug users more ill. The right question for policy makers, he concludes, is not whether drugs are misused but whether the benefits of prohibition outweigh its exorbitant costs. All in all, this is a solidly researched and dispassionate discussion of a topic that is too often couched in moral and emotional terms.”

Aside from the NZ Police’s questionable use of the DRUG HARM INDEX to self interestedly perpetuate an unaccounted policy, demanding as it were ‘more resources’ without any accounting for ‘deliverable outcomes’ is entirely contestable in managerial let alone economic terms. The Drug Squad is in effect ‘deficit funded’ without as much a skerit of evidence that the resources AND priorities are allocated with ANY efficiency.

This is POOR management. This was roundly critiqued by visiting top cop and former head of Scotland Yard Narcotics/London Metro, Chief Super Det. Eddie Ellison to the Ministry of Justice in 2004. (Eddie was also a founding member of TRANSFORM, now with UN consultative standing )
“It wouldn’t pass muster at Police College in let alone the Home Office. There is no room in modern policing for unaccountable deployment blindly following political directives” -(private conversation with the writer)
Eddie presented to 17 MoJ Officials alongside Snr Detective Jack Cole, both of whom were executive directors of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition [www.leap.cc] also recently

LondonImage via Wikipedia

accredited by the UN. Eddie also conveyed this to Gregg O’Conner of the Police Association.
Some months later the MoJ couldnt find a single person who attended the board meetingroom presentation, declaring again in a recorded telephone conversation to the writer “we have a very high staff turnover’

The BERL DRUG HARMS report and the subsequent Police Intelligence claims that cananbis is the problem, bring the POLICE once again into disrepute.

There is no accounting the POLICE and JUSTICE stupidity of continuing to bang ones head against the wall and hoping it will soon stop hurting….

/Blair

Related articles by Zemanta