7 ms·

Marijuana loses its profitability, they can switch to other drugs, guns, smuggling, "coyotes", or legitimate enterprise. Not disagreeing with your larger point

Marijuana loses its profitability, they can switch to other drugs, guns, smuggling, "coyotes", or legitimate enterprise. Not disagreeing with your larger point, but the fact of the matter is that it's a lot harder to sell people meth, coke, heroin, etc. than it is to sell people pot. If coca cola were made illegal, something that is bad for you by many metrics but hardly life destroying, people are not going to switch to hard liquor in the same way. Kidnapping, hard drugs, smuggling, all of these are sources of income, but they're dwarfed by pot sales. The hope is that the cartels can only maintain the empires they have with a huge money maker like marijuana, and without it, they may get more desperate and expand the worst of their operations, but they will still shrink in their influence, power, geography and labor force.

unfunco 9y ago
> it's a lot harder to sell people meth, coke, heroin, etc. than it is to sell people pot. Only the first time. Then the opposite is true.
- dwaltrip 9y ago
  OP clearly meant in aggregate.
- freeflight 9y ago
  On what basis are you making such a statement? Afaik many people use meth for performance enhancement and as a cheaper alternative to coke, heroin mostly comes in with people who've built up an opiate addiction through prescription opiates and a cheap escapist solution. Add in a generally very crappy living situation, where these substances are used as means of escapism from reality, and most of the habit boils down to all kinds of circumstances, but very rarely to this urban myth of "it's just so addictive that you can't stop after the first time", as most of it has to do with building habits on top of an already destructive lifestyle. Case in point: I've done meth and coke more than once, and never did I feel the need to "keep on doing it due to withdrawal". If anything, the side-effects of something like meth make it very unpleasant to regularly use due to being physically and mentally very taxing. That's why I don't think there's some kind of "large untapped market" for substances like these. Most people are still rational actors and if otherwise content and happy with their life won't start with destructive behavior on the sole basis of a substance being "super addictive".
  - Fnoord 9y ago
    > On what basis are you making such a statement? That's whats being thought on elementary school traditionally, haha. You don't have to look far though. Look at the usage of Khat by Somalians and Kratom by Thai. If its easily available and socially accepted, its gonna fly and will be very difficult to get rid of. I can't wrap my head around using meth. Speed alone makes my head swirl and everything go fast. Exactly which performance would be enhanced by an even stronger upper? Or is it people with undiagnosed ADHD who resort to meth? In Europe though, I know drugs like these are used in clubs, but so is XTC (MDMA & relatives) and GHB. XTC seems to be more rare in Eastern Europe where speed is more rampant. Whereas heroin usage is on an all time low. But theres people who go to clubs Thu/Fri/Sat (yeah, it starts on Thu for some reason). And if they use multiple times a week, yep then it goes quickly downhill. > That's why I don't think there's some kind of "large untapped market" for substances like these. Most people are still rational actors and if otherwise content and happy with their life won't start with destructive behavior on the sole basis of a substance being "super addictive". Oh, I do! All these young goths who automutilate themselves (though a niche subculture, I admit), teenagers in general cause of being unsure as well as having to perform (study). If its more widely and easier available, its also cheaper, and more accepted. To be fair, I've also seen people addicted to booze, weed, and cigarettes. Its just that these drugs are more socially accepted.
    - freeflight 9y ago
      > Exactly which performance would be enhanced by an even stronger upper? Or is it people with undiagnosed ADHD who resort to meth? I've seen it very popular with people working in shifts doing physically very taxing work, like warehouse workers in logistics, often combined with alcohol as a downer. I have atypical ADHS and a small line will keep me up (and mentally super focused) for 3 days straight. But the crash that follows is really nasty and can last for up to 2 days. Not something I'd want to go through regularly, I can count on one hand how often I do that in a year. That's snorting tho, I've heard and read that smoking it is way different and more comparable to a heroin high (short, very intense, mostly fading away). Nothing I would want to do if I want a downer I'm happy enough with some Indica cannabis. > teenagers in general cause of being unsure as well as having to perform (study). If its more widely and easier available, its also cheaper, and more accepted. Imho this whole phenomenon of "experimenting teenagers overdoing it" is the direct result of decades-long prohibition and stigmatization politics. Educators and adults keep telling young people "Using this will make you instantly go crazy and addicted, all your teeth will fall out!". But when they try it they notice how it's not that bad, so they underestimate the actual long-term effects and consider them as "just more fear-mongering", which then leads to irresponsible long-term abuse. The other side of that is the abuse of legal drugs, where people often overdo them as they consider them "safer" due to being legal. For whatever reason way too many people think this whole legal/illegal distinction is made on a scientific basis of the substances actual effects when it really isn't.
- Gibbon1 9y ago
  Thing generally about pot and other drugs is, pot dealers generally do not traffic other drugs. One reason is the supply networks are different. With pot dealers usually deal with growers or a middle man directly. High level of trust, makes the business generally safe. Other drugs you end up tapping into a deep network filled with really shady people. High chance of being ratted on, robbed, etc. Even for those dealers multiple drugs, generally multiple supply networks. Which is worse.
  - ams6110 9y ago
    According to my kids, the kids selling weed at high school are also selling meth, acid, xanax, DMT, shrooms, etc.
    - azzhohle 9y ago
      Weed and psychedelics go together as far as usage culture is considered. Meth is the outlier on your list.
    - flycaliguy 9y ago
      High School is also a unique market place with very low sales. You can offer a large variety of products when one bottle from your mom’s prescription is all you need to stock a product.
  - rootw0rm 9y ago
    As someone who's had his door kicked in by the cops, tens of pounds of buds seized, kilos of powder, along with stacks of cash, money counters, and firearms....i can tell you that high volume west coast bud/concentrate dealing is the same as, and often in concert with every other illicit thing a person may deal in. you're right about the trust tho, trust is a big thing. although yes, i did deal with my growers directly.
- dalbasal 9y ago
  Is it? I remember being told this about pot, as a 12 year old. I think most drugs have a wide range of users. Some have more or less problem users of various kinds, notably addicts. But all also have large numbers or normative users, even heroin. In the 80s, the most noticeable gays were transexuals, eccentrics, prostitutes or people busted in embarrassing situations. People who couldn't/wouldn't be low key. This led to the impression that gays are mostly fringey people. Same for prostitution. No one knows about the individuals with a phone number and a regular life. Same for all vice. Normative people manage to keep it under the radar. You see street users, not the 32 year old coffee machine shop owner. I don't think there's any drug that will addict many users after one or two times. Obviously, many do lead to addiction in large numbers, so are still risky.
neosavvy 9y ago
Just to debate, but why do you believe: "Not disagreeing with your larger point, but the fact of the matter is that it's a lot harder to sell people meth, coke, heroin, etc. than it is to sell people pot." Funny drug dealer quotes "I don't sell drugs, drug's sell themselves" In all reality though Pot is by far harder to conceal in small/large quantities so per pound profitability on Pot has to be lower than other drugs like Meth / Cocaine / Heroin. Especially with the rise in Opioid addiction here in the US it seems folks with a poor moral compass (drug cartels) are naturally going to flock to something like Fentanyl production to increase the potency of their heroin or opioid sales. Kudos to the legal marijuana industry, but it does shift the "war on drugs" to areas far more dangerous, and in my opinion worth focusing on.
- Hasz 9y ago
  I think the poster was getting at the fact that pot users dwarf meth users in quantity, for example. I think the OP got it right -- even if there was no heroin crisis in the US, the cartels would turn to some other money-making proposition. The only way to quash them is to strengthen the Mexican state, whether it be this one or a new structure.
  - neosavvy 9y ago
    I agree with the fact that the Mexican state needs strength to deal with this. I think I just heard on NPR this morning that more poppies are being grown in Mexico as of late due to perfect climate. I also read the farmers get nearly nothing for their crop, and obviously the high end cartels take all the profits anyways. How would the US possibly strengthen the Mexican Government though, barring massive investment?
    - krrrh 9y ago
      > How would the US possibly strengthen the Mexican Government though, barring massive investment? Not creating uncertainty by constantly threatening to pull out of NAFTA would be a good start. Helping to strengthen Mexico's economy was once a mainstream republican position seen to mutually benefit both countries. [1] [1] Excerpt on illegal immigrants from Regan/Bush 1980 primary debate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsmgPp_nlok https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsmgPp_nlok
tomrod 9y ago
> Not disagreeing with your larger point, but the fact of the matter is that it's a lot harder to sell people meth, coke, heroin, etc. than it is to sell people pot. I agree with what you're saying here, with the current conditions they will take a hit. Conditions can change, however, so we can't count them as neutered yet simply because legal pot undermines a part of their portfolio.
2_listerine_pls 9y ago
> but they're dwarfed by pot sales I doubt selling pot is more profitable than the rest of their activities combined. Take The Knights Templar as an example, they operated within a single state and made around a Billion USD in 2013 from Iron ore alone. https://nypost.com/2014/03/17/mexican-drug-cartel-moves-from-meth-to-iron-ore-mining/ https://nypost.com/2014/03/17/mexican-drug-cartel-moves-from...
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- adventured 9y ago
  The total all-inclusive marijuana market is solidly a ~$60-$80 billion market in just the US. A legalized marijuana market would be larger than the cocaine, meth and heroin markets combined in the US. If you remove the marijuana market, the cartels lose half of their revenue. Further, a lot of the other crime by cartels is funded by their marijuana business. It has been a cornerstone of their overall businesses the last 40 years. That example of you gave, is fringe. The Knights Templar are not doing $25+ billion in annual revenue, which is what the implied extrapolation would be. The total annual 'revenue' for all Mexican cartels, is likely to be closer to $10 billion than not (RAND corporation estimated $6.6 billion for their drug trade, which is the majority of what they do). There's a critical distinction between traditional corruption and illegal activities by gangs and similar, which is plentiful in 100+ of 195 nations, and the specific effects of the war on drugs. The war on drugs aspect of it, can be relatively easily neutered. This is a well studied topic. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/magazine/how-a-mexican-drug-cartel-makes-its-billions.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/magazine/how-a-mexican-dru...
gldalmaso 9y ago
If they get hit hard financially from legalized marijuana shops, won't they just come in and extort them for protection money? Or just flat out destroying them or threatening the owners. These guys are not really into fair competition.
- dx034 9y ago
  You need more "infrastructure" to blackmail all Californian weed shops than you need to sell weed. And police (except for federal police) can and will help shop owners. I doubt it's as profitable.

unfunco 9y ago

> it's a lot harder to sell people meth, coke, heroin, etc. than it is to sell people pot. Only the first time. Then the opposite is true.

dwaltrip 9y ago
OP clearly meant in aggregate.
freeflight 9y ago
On what basis are you making such a statement? Afaik many people use meth for performance enhancement and as a cheaper alternative to coke, heroin mostly comes in with people who've built up an opiate addiction through prescription opiates and a cheap escapist solution. Add in a generally very crappy living situation, where these substances are used as means of escapism from reality, and most of the habit boils down to all kinds of circumstances, but very rarely to this urban myth of "it's just so addictive that you can't stop after the first time", as most of it has to do with building habits on top of an already destructive lifestyle. Case in point: I've done meth and coke more than once, and never did I feel the need to "keep on doing it due to withdrawal". If anything, the side-effects of something like meth make it very unpleasant to regularly use due to being physically and mentally very taxing. That's why I don't think there's some kind of "large untapped market" for substances like these. Most people are still rational actors and if otherwise content and happy with their life won't start with destructive behavior on the sole basis of a substance being "super addictive".
- Fnoord 9y ago
  > On what basis are you making such a statement? That's whats being thought on elementary school traditionally, haha. You don't have to look far though. Look at the usage of Khat by Somalians and Kratom by Thai. If its easily available and socially accepted, its gonna fly and will be very difficult to get rid of. I can't wrap my head around using meth. Speed alone makes my head swirl and everything go fast. Exactly which performance would be enhanced by an even stronger upper? Or is it people with undiagnosed ADHD who resort to meth? In Europe though, I know drugs like these are used in clubs, but so is XTC (MDMA & relatives) and GHB. XTC seems to be more rare in Eastern Europe where speed is more rampant. Whereas heroin usage is on an all time low. But theres people who go to clubs Thu/Fri/Sat (yeah, it starts on Thu for some reason). And if they use multiple times a week, yep then it goes quickly downhill. > That's why I don't think there's some kind of "large untapped market" for substances like these. Most people are still rational actors and if otherwise content and happy with their life won't start with destructive behavior on the sole basis of a substance being "super addictive". Oh, I do! All these young goths who automutilate themselves (though a niche subculture, I admit), teenagers in general cause of being unsure as well as having to perform (study). If its more widely and easier available, its also cheaper, and more accepted. To be fair, I've also seen people addicted to booze, weed, and cigarettes. Its just that these drugs are more socially accepted.
  - freeflight 9y ago
    > Exactly which performance would be enhanced by an even stronger upper? Or is it people with undiagnosed ADHD who resort to meth? I've seen it very popular with people working in shifts doing physically very taxing work, like warehouse workers in logistics, often combined with alcohol as a downer. I have atypical ADHS and a small line will keep me up (and mentally super focused) for 3 days straight. But the crash that follows is really nasty and can last for up to 2 days. Not something I'd want to go through regularly, I can count on one hand how often I do that in a year. That's snorting tho, I've heard and read that smoking it is way different and more comparable to a heroin high (short, very intense, mostly fading away). Nothing I would want to do if I want a downer I'm happy enough with some Indica cannabis. > teenagers in general cause of being unsure as well as having to perform (study). If its more widely and easier available, its also cheaper, and more accepted. Imho this whole phenomenon of "experimenting teenagers overdoing it" is the direct result of decades-long prohibition and stigmatization politics. Educators and adults keep telling young people "Using this will make you instantly go crazy and addicted, all your teeth will fall out!". But when they try it they notice how it's not that bad, so they underestimate the actual long-term effects and consider them as "just more fear-mongering", which then leads to irresponsible long-term abuse. The other side of that is the abuse of legal drugs, where people often overdo them as they consider them "safer" due to being legal. For whatever reason way too many people think this whole legal/illegal distinction is made on a scientific basis of the substances actual effects when it really isn't.
Gibbon1 9y ago
Thing generally about pot and other drugs is, pot dealers generally do not traffic other drugs. One reason is the supply networks are different. With pot dealers usually deal with growers or a middle man directly. High level of trust, makes the business generally safe. Other drugs you end up tapping into a deep network filled with really shady people. High chance of being ratted on, robbed, etc. Even for those dealers multiple drugs, generally multiple supply networks. Which is worse.
- ams6110 9y ago
  According to my kids, the kids selling weed at high school are also selling meth, acid, xanax, DMT, shrooms, etc.
  - azzhohle 9y ago
    Weed and psychedelics go together as far as usage culture is considered. Meth is the outlier on your list.
  - flycaliguy 9y ago
    High School is also a unique market place with very low sales. You can offer a large variety of products when one bottle from your mom’s prescription is all you need to stock a product.
- rootw0rm 9y ago
  As someone who's had his door kicked in by the cops, tens of pounds of buds seized, kilos of powder, along with stacks of cash, money counters, and firearms....i can tell you that high volume west coast bud/concentrate dealing is the same as, and often in concert with every other illicit thing a person may deal in. you're right about the trust tho, trust is a big thing. although yes, i did deal with my growers directly.
dalbasal 9y ago
Is it? I remember being told this about pot, as a 12 year old. I think most drugs have a wide range of users. Some have more or less problem users of various kinds, notably addicts. But all also have large numbers or normative users, even heroin. In the 80s, the most noticeable gays were transexuals, eccentrics, prostitutes or people busted in embarrassing situations. People who couldn't/wouldn't be low key. This led to the impression that gays are mostly fringey people. Same for prostitution. No one knows about the individuals with a phone number and a regular life. Same for all vice. Normative people manage to keep it under the radar. You see street users, not the 32 year old coffee machine shop owner. I don't think there's any drug that will addict many users after one or two times. Obviously, many do lead to addiction in large numbers, so are still risky.

neosavvy 9y ago

Just to debate, but why do you believe: "Not disagreeing with your larger point, but the fact of the matter is that it's a lot harder to sell people meth, coke, heroin, etc. than it is to sell people pot." Funny drug dealer quotes "I don't sell drugs, drug's sell themselves" In all reality though Pot is by far harder to conceal in small/large quantities so per pound profitability on Pot has to be lower than other drugs like Meth / Cocaine / Heroin. Especially with the rise in Opioid addiction here in the US it seems folks with a poor moral compass (drug cartels) are naturally going to flock to something like Fentanyl production to increase the potency of their heroin or opioid sales. Kudos to the legal marijuana industry, but it does shift the "war on drugs" to areas far more dangerous, and in my opinion worth focusing on.

Hasz 9y ago
I think the poster was getting at the fact that pot users dwarf meth users in quantity, for example. I think the OP got it right -- even if there was no heroin crisis in the US, the cartels would turn to some other money-making proposition. The only way to quash them is to strengthen the Mexican state, whether it be this one or a new structure.
- neosavvy 9y ago
  I agree with the fact that the Mexican state needs strength to deal with this. I think I just heard on NPR this morning that more poppies are being grown in Mexico as of late due to perfect climate. I also read the farmers get nearly nothing for their crop, and obviously the high end cartels take all the profits anyways. How would the US possibly strengthen the Mexican Government though, barring massive investment?
  - krrrh 9y ago
    > How would the US possibly strengthen the Mexican Government though, barring massive investment? Not creating uncertainty by constantly threatening to pull out of NAFTA would be a good start. Helping to strengthen Mexico's economy was once a mainstream republican position seen to mutually benefit both countries. [1] [1] Excerpt on illegal immigrants from Regan/Bush 1980 primary debate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsmgPp_nlok https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsmgPp_nlok

tomrod 9y ago

> Not disagreeing with your larger point, but the fact of the matter is that it's a lot harder to sell people meth, coke, heroin, etc. than it is to sell people pot. I agree with what you're saying here, with the current conditions they will take a hit. Conditions can change, however, so we can't count them as neutered yet simply because legal pot undermines a part of their portfolio.

2_listerine_pls 9y ago

> but they're dwarfed by pot sales I doubt selling pot is more profitable than the rest of their activities combined. Take The Knights Templar as an example, they operated within a single state and made around a Billion USD in 2013 from Iron ore alone. https://nypost.com/2014/03/17/mexican-drug-cartel-moves-from-meth-to-iron-ore-mining/ https://nypost.com/2014/03/17/mexican-drug-cartel-moves-from...

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
adventured 9y ago
The total all-inclusive marijuana market is solidly a ~$60-$80 billion market in just the US. A legalized marijuana market would be larger than the cocaine, meth and heroin markets combined in the US. If you remove the marijuana market, the cartels lose half of their revenue. Further, a lot of the other crime by cartels is funded by their marijuana business. It has been a cornerstone of their overall businesses the last 40 years. That example of you gave, is fringe. The Knights Templar are not doing $25+ billion in annual revenue, which is what the implied extrapolation would be. The total annual 'revenue' for all Mexican cartels, is likely to be closer to $10 billion than not (RAND corporation estimated $6.6 billion for their drug trade, which is the majority of what they do). There's a critical distinction between traditional corruption and illegal activities by gangs and similar, which is plentiful in 100+ of 195 nations, and the specific effects of the war on drugs. The war on drugs aspect of it, can be relatively easily neutered. This is a well studied topic. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/magazine/how-a-mexican-drug-cartel-makes-its-billions.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/magazine/how-a-mexican-dru...

gldalmaso 9y ago

If they get hit hard financially from legalized marijuana shops, won't they just come in and extort them for protection money? Or just flat out destroying them or threatening the owners. These guys are not really into fair competition.

dx034 9y ago
You need more "infrastructure" to blackmail all Californian weed shops than you need to sell weed. And police (except for federal police) can and will help shop owners. I doubt it's as profitable.