In Jeffrey A. Miron’s Drug War Crimes: The Consequences of Prohibition, he discusses the current battle with the regulation and legalization of drugs in the United States and provides an analysis of the problems associated with prohibition. One important aspect of this book, which makes it an excellent, read and economic analysis of prohibition is that he plays both sides of the coin, providing arguments for both prohibitionists and people in favor of the legalization. However, his main point is that prohibition, rather than drug use, causes the evils typically attributed to drugs.
Miron offers a balanced, sophisticated and in-depth analysis of the true costs, benefits, and consequences of strictly enforcing drug prohibition. He argues that …show more content…
Federal Law first prohibited cocaine and heroin in 1914 and then Marijuana in 1937. The United States current annual government expenditure on prohibition enforcement exceeds $33 billion, making 1.5 million arrests per year on drug charges. In Chapter 2, The Economic Analysis of Drug Prohibition, he provides an economic analysis of prohibition without taking a stand on whether prohibition is good or bad. In Chapter 3, The Effect of Drug Prohibition on Drug Consumption, he addresses the effect of prohibition on drug consumption by comparing it to the cirrhosis death rate during the Prohibition era. In Chapter 4, Prohibition and Violence, he examines the prohibition advocates’ idea that drug use causes violence, while critics claim prohibition generates violence by forcing black markets to form to satisfy the drug consumption. In Chapter 5 and 6, Is Prohibition Good Policy and Alternatives to Prohibition and other Drug Policies, he turns to a normative analysis of whether prohibition is a good policy or not and what policy is ideal for achieving the best balance of costs to …show more content…
On the supply side, the obvious effect is an increase in the cost of drugs due to a contraction in availability and the higher costs for supplying drugs illegally. The implication is that because costs are higher, consumption is lower, but this is only true with ceteris paribus, which is usually not the case. Black market suppliers of drugs can easily evade government regulation, occupational health and safety regulations, tariffs, import restrictions, income taxes, social security taxes and excise taxes which might offset the increase in costs. On the demand side, prohibition should reduce demand through legal penalties, but drug users are not rational choice makers and demand can increase by creating a “forbidden fruit.” If drug consumers view legal goods as close substitutes, then, with a decreased demand for drugs, price increases elsewhere are possible. Alternatively, if they are complements, then both drug consumption and consumption of the other good
Miron offers a balanced, sophisticated and in-depth analysis of the true costs, benefits, and consequences of strictly enforcing drug prohibition. He argues that …show more content…
Federal Law first prohibited cocaine and heroin in 1914 and then Marijuana in 1937. The United States current annual government expenditure on prohibition enforcement exceeds $33 billion, making 1.5 million arrests per year on drug charges. In Chapter 2, The Economic Analysis of Drug Prohibition, he provides an economic analysis of prohibition without taking a stand on whether prohibition is good or bad. In Chapter 3, The Effect of Drug Prohibition on Drug Consumption, he addresses the effect of prohibition on drug consumption by comparing it to the cirrhosis death rate during the Prohibition era. In Chapter 4, Prohibition and Violence, he examines the prohibition advocates’ idea that drug use causes violence, while critics claim prohibition generates violence by forcing black markets to form to satisfy the drug consumption. In Chapter 5 and 6, Is Prohibition Good Policy and Alternatives to Prohibition and other Drug Policies, he turns to a normative analysis of whether prohibition is a good policy or not and what policy is ideal for achieving the best balance of costs to …show more content…
On the supply side, the obvious effect is an increase in the cost of drugs due to a contraction in availability and the higher costs for supplying drugs illegally. The implication is that because costs are higher, consumption is lower, but this is only true with ceteris paribus, which is usually not the case. Black market suppliers of drugs can easily evade government regulation, occupational health and safety regulations, tariffs, import restrictions, income taxes, social security taxes and excise taxes which might offset the increase in costs. On the demand side, prohibition should reduce demand through legal penalties, but drug users are not rational choice makers and demand can increase by creating a “forbidden fruit.” If drug consumers view legal goods as close substitutes, then, with a decreased demand for drugs, price increases elsewhere are possible. Alternatively, if they are complements, then both drug consumption and consumption of the other good