3 ms·

With meth, you don't really need to import it. I would think the cost of meth is more fixed than other drugs.

by alttab 14y ago

maxerickson 14y ago
It plays out at a slight remove: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/etc/cron.html http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/etc/cron.html The part I think is pertinent here is that there is little illicit manufacture of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine (so the availability of meth varies with the availability of them).
- kyllo 14y ago
  This is why drug stores are required to alert law enforcement if they notice anyone trying to buy a large amount of Sudafed, or trying to buy a small amount very frequently. So now there are people whose jobs are to drive around to every drugstore in the town, buying small amounts of Sudafed at each one, so as not to raise any suspicion.
jcnnghm 14y ago
It would depend on the cost of acquiring the chemicals necessary to produce, as well as externalities. For example, in the short run you could increase your supply of chemicals by hijacking trucks, but that increases your economic costs substantially because of the increased risk of "heat" from law enforcement. You typically can't purchase massive quantities of the necessary chemicals easily. In the long run, you may be able to purchase in sufficient quantity that you can import entire containers from overseas, with the knowledge that some will be intercepted, and you'll incur non-negligible cost for the smuggling. Also worth noting is that the economic costs associated with law enforcement attention will tend to rise (I'd bet non-linearly) as scale increases, just look at Pablo Escobar. In any case, I'd still bet that the per unit cost of production is much lower at scale. The only way that I see that cost could be fixed, is that the economic cost of law enforcement activity exactly offsets reductions in production costs from scaling up.

With meth, you don't really need to import it. I would think the cost of meth is more fixed than other drugs.

by alttab 14y ago

With meth, you don't really need to import it. I would think the cost of meth is more fixed than other drugs.

It plays out at a slight remove: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/etc/cron.html http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/etc/cron.html The part I think is pertinent here is that there is little illicit manufacture of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine (so the availability of meth varies with the availability of them).

kyllo 14y ago
This is why drug stores are required to alert law enforcement if they notice anyone trying to buy a large amount of Sudafed, or trying to buy a small amount very frequently. So now there are people whose jobs are to drive around to every drugstore in the town, buying small amounts of Sudafed at each one, so as not to raise any suspicion.

jcnnghm 14y ago

It would depend on the cost of acquiring the chemicals necessary to produce, as well as externalities. For example, in the short run you could increase your supply of chemicals by hijacking trucks, but that increases your economic costs substantially because of the increased risk of "heat" from law enforcement. You typically can't purchase massive quantities of the necessary chemicals easily. In the long run, you may be able to purchase in sufficient quantity that you can import entire containers from overseas, with the knowledge that some will be intercepted, and you'll incur non-negligible cost for the smuggling. Also worth noting is that the economic costs associated with law enforcement attention will tend to rise (I'd bet non-linearly) as scale increases, just look at Pablo Escobar. In any case, I'd still bet that the per unit cost of production is much lower at scale. The only way that I see that cost could be fixed, is that the economic cost of law enforcement activity exactly offsets reductions in production costs from scaling up.