https://thefinancialengineer.net/economics-of-american-prohibition/
This article shows the effects the prohibition in America had economically (and to a lesser extent socially). Today, this becomes relevant once again with the discussions of marijuana legalization state-to-state or federally. The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 provided an incentive for states to change their minimum drinking age to 21, but this is still a state decision; will the same thing be applied to marijuana in the future? What about other drugs? Either way, it seems the tide is slowly changing on this one. It is also interesting to see the support coming from both sides of either argument, both then and now.
9 comments:
Legalization of marijuana within some states but not federally makes the state laws almost invalid. An Act should be passed that aligns both the federal and state laws.
I disagree. I think it should be a state to state matter, otherwise state power would diminish. I think what matters is whether or not the state can benefit from the legalization and experience growth.
Calvin, this is a very intriguing article. Erica, while you raise valid points, I have to agree with Jonel in this case. I believe this is a 10th amendment issue, and the states should handle this. The only way the federal government got consistent alcohol laws was by attaching road grants to having 21 as the legal drinking age.
As an international student, I'm still understanding the difference between federal and state laws. Going through the tax filing process it helps to understand they are separate. In this case I do believe it should be a state matter. It's a large country and every state has different needs.
I would have to agree with Jonel in this case. The states that have legalized marijuana are acting as guinea pigs or experimental states to see how the legalization of marijuana can positively or negatively affect the economy of the state. Every state has a different comfort level with the idea of legalizing marijuana. I think the legalization of marijuana should remain on state by state basis.
I also agree with Erica federal and state laws should be aligned. In the case of marijuana I believe that very soon we will see that the profits the government passes up on taxation of the product will become too great and will have no choice but to federally regulate the sale of the drug. As for other drugs only time will tell and based on history it seems that America is becoming more and more lenient.
I agree that it's should be the state decision to legalize drugs or not. the amendment stated so and should be implemented
I also agree that legalizing marijuana should be a state decision as each state might have different conditions and needs and so they should have their own choice to decide what decision suits them best.
I think a state to state decison is a little reckless and just increases the potential for illegal distribution in the states that are against legalization. I think this should be a federal matter and one law should be made inferior or against.
Post a Comment