Rockin' in the free world since 2005.

[Total: 25    Average: 3.8/5]
40 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 10738
Rating: 3.8
Category: Misc
Date: 10/23/12 04:01 PM

40 Responses to Where Did All The Money Go? [Pic]

  1. Profile photo of kitteh9lives
    kitteh9lives Female 70 & Over
    8033 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 3:24 pm
    Link: Where Did All The Money Go? - Maybe while waging `war on drugs` & trying to control drugs they should work on controlling their spending too.
  2. Profile photo of Quackor
    Quackor Male 18-29
    2856 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 4:15 pm
    good thing its keeping it stable
  3. Profile photo of mikelae18
    mikelae18 Male 18-29
    79 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 4:30 pm
    Crime is at an all time low. Incarceration is at an all time high. We tout how we are a beacon of freedom in the world. Yet we have the highest incarceration rate in the world.
  4. Profile photo of mykunter
    mykunter Male 40-49
    2424 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 4:33 pm
    Interesting... `94 was likely my largest drug consuming year.
  5. Profile photo of pladius
    pladius Male 30-39
    27 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 4:33 pm
    Where did the numbers come from?
  6. Profile photo of TruTenrMan
    TruTenrMan Male 30-39
    2553 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 4:42 pm
    I agree, it`s a waste of money. Making it illegal--and therefore harder to obtain--makes it more dangerous.
  7. Profile photo of TheGuySmiley
    TheGuySmiley Male 18-29
    1243 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 4:51 pm
    haha so biased, i`d like to see the actual data for that, i suspect drug use has been increasing.
  8. Profile photo of whyteman
    whyteman Male 30-39
    96 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 5:00 pm
    Citation or gtfo.
  9. Profile photo of whodat6484
    whodat6484 Male 30-39
    3907 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 5:01 pm
    The majority of criminals who are locked up by the "war on drugs" are convicted marijuana related crimes. 88% of those marijuana related arrests are only for possession.
  10. Profile photo of Jury1of1
    Jury1of1 Male 30-39
    132 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 5:03 pm
    43 65 90 10

    Those numbers are the most important numbers to everyone in the world. Don`t worry about where they came from or any other mitigating factors. Just look at those numbers.
  11. Profile photo of skypirate
    skypirate Male 18-29
    2349 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 5:23 pm
    % of what? and Citation or gtfo.
  12. Profile photo of DrProfessor
    DrProfessor Male 18-29
    3894 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 5:49 pm
    @skypirate ....percent of the population, clearly.

    I`ll echo you and whyteman in saying I need citations on my graphs or I ignore them
  13. Profile photo of hauswyfe
    hauswyfe Female 30-39
    280 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 5:55 pm
    Skypirate, I was about to say the same thing but you beat me to it.
  14. Profile photo of Gothicwyer
    Gothicwyer Male 18-29
    3 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 6:23 pm
    I agree we need more data but...

    The increase comes from needing more money to fight more sophisticated smuggling methods. The increase is needed just to keep the other from rising.

    Also inflation is a bitch. The money figure should be done as a percent of GDP like the other figure is for percent of population.

    That being said. Legalize it.

  15. Profile photo of jinxjinx34
    jinxjinx34 Male 30-39
    183 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 6:49 pm
    @Gothicwyer- If the government wasn`t increasing its technology to catch drug smugglers and dealers, there wouldn`t have been a need for dealers and smugglers to get more sophisticated. Anyone who was actually interested in purely stopping drugs in america would have rehashed their strategy around 1983 or 1984 according to the info this graph presents. Just sayin.I agree that pot should be legalized and also mandatory minimums need to be overturned.
  16. Profile photo of trippyhippy9
    trippyhippy9 Male 18-29
    559 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 6:51 pm
    That drug addiction rate in no way accounts for the drugs that the vast majority of addicts are addicted to: caffeine and nicotine.

    Drugs are drugs. If you want to pick and choose which ones to get rid of, you need to ask yourself why.

    Is marijuana more harmful than tobacco? Is THC worse for you than caffeine?
  17. Profile photo of Smutleybutt
    Smutleybutt Male 18-29
    1377 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 7:22 pm
    So in the end, we spend 1.5 trillion to put drug offenders in jail, and the net outcome is that the same % of people are addicted to drugs as they were 40 years ago.
    If the purpose was to get people off of drug addictions (because that`s what we really want, isn`t it? for people to not be addicted to drugs?) then it is a complete failure. Yes, the graph is lacking because obviously no one would ever buy into the sole purpose of the war on drugs to be reducing the number of drug addicted people.
  18. Profile photo of Smutleybutt
    Smutleybutt Male 18-29
    1377 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 7:22 pm
    The point of the graph is to show that no matter how much money has been put into enforcing the ridiculous drug laws, the % of the population addicted to illegal drugs has not changed. This leads to the question "where are the results of $1.5 trillion dollars if the same % of the population is still addicted to drugs as they were 40 years ago".
    We went from roughly 200 million to 300 million in the time frame, so the actual number of drug abusers has gone up. While that in the end equals more people, the real test of success is in percentages.
    The answer to the question "where does all the money go" is the prisons and law enforcement. Prisons earn money based on how many prisoners they have. Law enforcement pays police officers to track down non-violent offenders, and in the end, the citizens pay for most of it. Sure, assets of offenders can be liquidated, but the majority of this is tax money.
  19. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17515 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 8:23 pm
    That`s not adjusted for inflation.
  20. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17515 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 8:30 pm
    whodat: Those people locked up in prison, not county jail mind you, are there for amounts of drugs that are considered `distribution` or `sales`. Addicts with small amounts are routinely given a fine, probation and made to attend narc-anon or some similar group.
  21. Profile photo of VirtualParty
    VirtualParty Male 18-29
    787 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 9:58 pm
    CrackrJak, do you support the drug war and this kind of spending? Have you ever used drugs? Have you ever met a methamphetamine addict? Have you ever met someone who went to prison just because a small amount of weed? Have you ever pulled your head out of your ass your entire life?
  22. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15844 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 10:30 pm
    I`ve given up commenting on the drug war. What`s the f***ing point?
  23. Profile photo of lukeforv123
    lukeforv123 Male 18-29
    1053 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 11:04 pm
    According to who?
  24. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17515 posts
    October 23, 2012 at 11:07 pm
    VirtualParty: Yes, No, Yes, No and Don`t fart or you`ll blow your brains out.
  25. Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 4:18 am
    @CrakrJak

    You haven`t used drugs? You`ve never used alcohol, caffeine, cocoa (chocolate), or any kind of painkillers or medication.

    Ever?

    Note, he said drugs, not illegal drugs.

    Try your answer again, CrakrJak.
  26. Profile photo of trippyhippy9
    trippyhippy9 Male 18-29
    559 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 5:53 am
    CrakrJak may not use drugs, but his avatar is a pothead.

    Apparently the dude does not abide.
  27. Profile photo of AvatarJohn
    AvatarJohn Male 30-39
    1059 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 6:42 am
    Do one on the war on poverty! Equally worthless. Everyone ready for the government to just go away and do nothing but national defense? We could cut the budget by 80% tomorrow and life would continue along just fine without all the worthless crap our federal government does with our money.
  28. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 7:16 am
    So @Crakr will whine and moan about government spending too much money, yet when something as visibly ineffective as the drug war is concerned, well then that money deserves to go down the bottomless hole. *eye roll*
  29. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 7:19 am
    Explanation on this image here.
  30. Profile photo of panth753
    panth753 Female 18-29
    9186 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 7:33 am
    1986 must of been a bad year.
  31. Profile photo of som-tam
    som-tam Male 18-29
    713 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 7:42 am
    ok so just in case no-one else has worked it out, this is pure propaganda. it uses a percentage for the drug addicts, this does not take into consideration the growing population. and it uses dollars for the amount spent, not taking into consideration inflation and the increase in addicts. all being said it`s money well spent to keep the % at a level rate.
  32. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 8:02 am
    all being said it`s money well spent to keep the % at a level rate.
    Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
  33. Profile photo of som-tam
    som-tam Male 18-29
    713 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 8:04 am
    that`s right patchgrabber, just ignore what the facts that this is pure propaganda.
  34. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 8:22 am
    @som-tam: If you`d have looked at the link I gave to an explanation of this graph i.e. where it`s wrong and where it`s right, you`d be less propagandized.

    But I fail to see how all this money was spent to keep addiction rates low. It was spent to incarcerate people (doesn`t help addiction) and stop illicit drug trade. If it had any effect on addiction rates then that would not be due to the billions spent on prisons and law enforcement.
  35. Profile photo of som-tam
    som-tam Male 18-29
    713 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 9:00 am
    once agian you failed to see the point i was making.
    -the number of addicts id measured in % this hides the raising number of addicts due to population increase; 203,392,031 in 70 - 314,636,000 in 2010, a 50% rise.
    -the amount spent is measured in dollars which doesn`t take into account inflation or the extra cost of a rising population.
  36. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 9:25 am
    @som-tam: I see your point, and the graph is poorly presented, but the % for addicts is reasonable, because it is a rate, which could be presented as a ratio or a percentage. The dollar number is incomplete, but for the drug war to be useful, you should see the addiction rate go down, or drug usage go down. You don`t see either of these.

    Nixon`s initial drug budget was $100 million, now it`s $15.1 billion, which is 31 times Nixon`s amount, and that`s AFTER inflation adjustment.


    Yet spending is increasing much more for the useless policies of imprisonment and policing instead of useful programs like treatment.
  37. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17515 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 11:11 am
    patchgrabber: Ineffective? Seems that the graph shows it is effective at keeping the rate at a lower, nearly constant level.

    Illicit drugs have become more addictive in the last 40 years, if we hadn`t been fighting the drug war even more people would be addicted than are now.
  38. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 1:07 pm
    @Crakr: Obviously you missed my comment earlier: post hoc ergo propter hoc. The most you have to show for your country`s policy is ridiculously large rates of imprisonment. Usage in the US is still something like twice the amount of the Netherlands for weed and cocaine. Drug war policies are antiquated and counterproductive. The Dutch have also had addiction rates fairly constant for decades, but at least they don`t lock up 1% of their population.
  39. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 1:11 pm
    Illicit drugs have become more addictive in the last 40 years
    Says the guy who`s never done drugs. Care to cite that?
  40. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15844 posts
    October 24, 2012 at 10:00 pm
    Illicit drugs have become more addictive in the last 40 years.
    I don`t know about "addictive," but they certainly have increased in strength and purity. Marijuana today is much stronger than it was 40 years ago. However, this is a natural and inevitable consequence of prohibition. If you can grow pot with 5 times as much active ingredient, you can sell it for 5 times as much, but it still takes up the same amount of space to transport it.

    Prohibition incentivizes concentration. Just look what happened during alcohol prohibition. We were turned from a nation of beer drinkers into a nation of liquor drinkers, because bootleggers couldn`t haul enough beer to make it worth their while.

    And if you still have doubts as to the perniciousness of prohibition, remember that Alcoholics Anonymous didn`t even exist before prohibition.

Leave a Reply