Key – War on P?

17 comments on “Key – War on P? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Draco T Bastard 1

   9 November 2010 at 11:56 am

   Of course the price has fallen – people are poorer than they were in April and can’t afford to buy the stuff.
2. Jeremy Harris 2

   9 November 2010 at 12:06 pm

   Wars on easily manufactured chemicals don’t seem to be going well… Just ask the DEA…
3. Armchair Critic 3

   9 November 2010 at 12:14 pm

   In Question 7 at question time today National are asking:
   JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Customs: What steps has the Government taken to address the importation of pharmaceutical products used to manufacture ‘P’?
   It seems they wish to demonstrate they they are encouraging some locally-based manufacturing.
4. dave brown 4

   9 November 2010 at 12:23 pm

   The phony war on P is just a diversion from the national campaign to celebrate alcohol.
   • bbfloyd 4.1

     9 November 2010 at 4:29 pm

     and meanwhile the only real war is being waged against pot smokers. most of whom live blameless lives, look after their children well, and do responsible jobs successfully.

     it makes me wonder who is getting the payoff for driving people to drink..
5. Lanthanide 5

   9 November 2010 at 12:58 pm

   They were talking about this on National Radio a few months ago. They were saying that the street price of drugs generally doesn’t change very much (indeed, throw on inflation to that $610 and it probably gobbles a chunk of the price increase), but the quality of the drugs do – eg they start being cut with other neutral compounds to make the actual drug go further.

   That obviously doesn’t show up in the price, but it does show up in people generally being turned off the drug – why bother spending $600 for something that doesn’t give you as much of a kick as it used to. People then move on to other drugs instead – apparently LSD is climbing back up in usage after falling to a low around 2002-2003 at the height of the P epidemic.

   So, saying “because the price hasn’t gone up much, obviously they aren’t doing anything” is only using 1 statistic to measure the situation, and therefore insufficient to truly see what is going on.

   Also I’d add that a rising price of drugs can indicate a restricted supply, but a falling price of drugs could also indicate reducing demand which is surely the goal of a war on drugs. Therefore the very stat the you are using to gauge their effectiveness can be interpreted in two completely opposite ways.
   • felix 5.1

     9 November 2010 at 1:09 pm

     The increased demand for acid is more to do with the diminishing quality of E over the past 6 years or so. But other than that, yep you’re on the money.
   • Bunji 5.2

     9 November 2010 at 3:03 pm

     I was more going on John Key’s choice of measure (price). As you say, there is both supply and demand to the equation. And quality – a core problem of the prohibition of drugs in general is that there’s no control of what gets mixed with it (rat poison etc).

     Obviously a better statistic would be total amount sold and/or total number of users – but those are much harder metrics to gather, and this government likes to keep things simplistic and money oriented.
     • Lanthanide 5.2.1

       9 November 2010 at 3:05 pm

       Fair enough then.
   • bbfloyd 5.3

     9 November 2010 at 4:50 pm

     this is just the natural cycle created by human greed/need…. in the usa, metamphetamine use goes up and down in conjunction with the quality.. as use goes up and more addicts come into the market, the need to make more money to feed the addiction means the drugs get cut to make them more valuable… this leads to a drop off of users as they find other drugs to fill the gap..

     when the user level drops, then the drug importers will respond by improving the quality, which equates to a price drop. at that point you will see an upsurge in addict numbers.. and so on and so on ad infinitim.

     the “war on drugs” is nothing more than a pr stunt designed to pander to ignorance and bigotry… the only way to stop drug abuse is to create a social environment that makes it unnecessary for individuals to feel the need to escape their realities in order to feel happy within themselves…
   • Jeremy Harris 5.4

     9 November 2010 at 5:59 pm

     Bloody drug dealers aren’t filling out their GST returns either…
6. Policy Parrot 6

   9 November 2010 at 1:09 pm

   Couldn’t organise a tasting session in a vineyard – God forbid we go to war with Afghanistan with Key as PM – oh, wait…
7. Bored 7

   9 November 2010 at 1:19 pm

   Just love this War on P business, the whole War of Drugs thing has been going on officially since Noah played in the junior grades. So far neither side has claimed victory, but the record would indicate that if one side is playing for continuity then they are definitely winning, and have been since it began. How Key thinks he can change this trend is well beyond the comprehension of a mere mortal.
8. billy fish 8

   9 November 2010 at 1:28 pm

   Couldn’t resist – Bill Hicks on the War on Drugs in the states, late 80’s

   “George Bush says ‘we are losing the war on drugs’. Well you know what that implies? There’s a war going on, and people on drugs are winning it! Well what does that tell you about drugs? Some smart, creative motherfuckers on that side.”
9. Lats 9

   9 November 2010 at 4:23 pm

   I’m not convinced a war on any drug is justified. But then I’m a libertarian at heart, I oppose authoritarian government regardless of its idealogical bent.
10. tc 10

    9 November 2010 at 5:12 pm

    yet another vacuous initiative from sideshow the MSM lack the bollocks to take him on over. As the thread shows alot more resourced focused efforts have failed all over the world.

    A former narc squad detective who left the force after becoming disenchanted with the upper levels of the NZ police wrote a novel about the NZ drug scene summed it up by stating the war was there to be won or lost in the 90’s as gangs were focusing on P whilst the police were focused on pot.

    Guess who won and is still winning today….style over substance or in this case smoke over granules.
11. Bill 11

    9 November 2010 at 9:46 pm

    Why’d you fight a ‘War on Drugs’ anyway…to keep your troops awake til all hours? Or perhaps to aid the development of creative (even musical) strategies?

    It’s all beyond me, it is.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS