Stopping the Failed War on Drugs Would More than Pay for the Sequester Cuts

Eric Zuesse notes that this year’s subsidy to Wall Street – $83 billion -  exactly equals the amount of the this year’s sequester cuts.

Spiegel reports that ending the failed “war on drugs” would pay for the sequester cuts by itself:

Harvard University professor Jeffrey Miron has advocated the legalization of drugs for decades.


Miron: [P]rohibiting drugs is expensive.

SPIEGEL: How expensive?

Miron: If it legalized drugs, the United States could save $85 billion to $90 billion per year. Roughly half that is spent on the current drugs policy and half that is lost in taxes that the state could have levied on legal drugs.

(Of course, stopping government support for drug dealers might be one place to start.)

And there are many other painless and easy ways to cut $83 billion per year.

Category: Think Tank

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

One Response to “Painless and Easy Ways to Cut $83 Billion”

  1. ger says:

    On the first point – the “subsidy to Wall Street” – it is more correct to say that is a subsidy from the credit markets. No one in the government is writing a check for $83bn. No one in the government is guarantying wall street banks. The credit markets think it is likely the banks will be bailed out. But there is no obligation on the government to bail them out. Also – it is likely these lower borrowing costs are passed onto consumers. Credit markets pay the subsidy (free choice – their money), banks and consumers get the benefit. What’s the problem?