<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with warondrugs and economics</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/warondrugs+economics</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'warondrugs' and 'economics' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2005 23:22:01 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2005 23:22:01 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>Costs of cannabis prohibition is lot more potent than in the 70s</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/42463/Costs%2Dof%2Dcannabis%2Dprohibition%2Dis%2Dlot%2Dmore%2Dpotent%2Dthan%2Din%2Dthe%2D70s</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.prohibitioncosts.org"&gt;The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition&lt;/a&gt; by Jeffrey Miron of Boston U.. So far, endorsed by 500+ economists, including Milton Friedman.
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Key points: &lt;br /&gt;
*End prohibition and save $7.7 billion in govt. expenditure.&lt;br /&gt;
*Tax its sale, like alcohol, and generate $6.2 billion in revenue.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2005:site.42463</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2005 23:22:01 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>cannabis</category>
		<category>druglaws</category>
		<category>drugpolicy</category>
		<category>drugreform</category>
		<category>drugs</category>
		<category>economics</category>
		<category>marijuana</category>
		<category>prohibition</category>
		<category>publicpolicy</category>
		<category>warondrugs</category>
		<dc:creator>daksya</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Economists on drugs</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/32165/Economists%2Don%2Ddrugs</link>
		<description> A slim majority of sampled economists favor drug decriminalization, according to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.econjournalwatch.org/pdf/Thornton%20Do%20Economists%20April%202004.pdf&quot;&gt;this .pdf article&lt;/a&gt; in the newly-launched &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.econjournalwatch.org/main/about_us.php&quot;&gt;Econ Journal Watch&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;br&gt; &lt;small&gt;&lt;small&gt;Via &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.marginalrevolution.com/&quot;&gt;Marginal Revolution&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/small&gt;  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2004:site.32165</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2004 21:00:24 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>decriminalization</category>
		<category>drugwar</category>
		<category>economics</category>
		<category>legalization</category>
		<category>warondrugs</category>
		<dc:creator>trharlan</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/5494/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18702-2001Jan19.html"&gt;We are the world.&lt;/a&gt; No matter what you think of this expansion into Ecuador to stamp out the drug trade in Columbia, you have to love the great economic ramifications for locals as they open facilities and raise prices for their wealthy neighbors from the north.  No mention, alas, of the prostitutes who usually move close to military facilities.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.5494</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2001 06:58:22 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>Colombia</category>
		<category>drugs</category>
		<category>economics</category>
		<category>Ecuador</category>
		<category>WaPo</category>
		<category>WarOnDrugs</category>
		<category>WashingtonPostbrokenlink</category>
		<dc:creator>Postroad</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/5110/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,418006,00.html"&gt;&quot;If US drugs policy were a company, it would have gone bankrupt years ago.&quot;&lt;/a&gt; This, see, is why Bush needs to increase military spending. long before the dot-com era, the same mentality fuelled the War on Drugs: spend now, and hope for profits... well, some time in the future.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.5110</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2001 14:14:12 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>Bush</category>
		<category>Colombia</category>
		<category>drugs</category>
		<category>economics</category>
		<category>GeorgeBush</category>
		<category>Guardian</category>
		<category>GWB</category>
		<category>WarOnDrugs</category>
		<dc:creator>holgate</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


