If the government wants to raise more revenue what makes more sense, legalizing all drugs and prostitution?

[Britnayyyy]

Sure, why don't we legalize murder while your at it.

[Chem Flunky]

Both? Either?

Personally, I'd go for legalizing most drugs and prostitution, and regulating them (the former about how we do alcohol, the latter about how Nevada does it), which will reduce costs by reducing the number of people in prison, then raise taxes on the rich to at least 35%, since I think that's about the tax burden (including payroll taxes) of the average middle class family...

[Ryan]

No Legalize just weed and we will have $500billion extra every year, legalize industrial hemp it will replace timber and end deforestation we could also produce clean renewable hemp oil. Prostitution is another issue thats up for the states to decide. The war on drugs is unconstitutional.

[WallyZ]

Neither. Cutting corporate welfare to the big oil companies and defense contractors. z

[Adam]

NO. well number 1 if weeds legal alot more ppl will be growing it and it will be cheeper.2 the government already is pushing perspiration pills so alot of illegal drugs would ruin that industry.and we have lobbiest from anybody whos product can be replaced with hemp and the dea and prison guards and such that want more ppl in prison for there jobs. and lastly we have private prisons where its literally slave labor. you need to relise how much money is in imprisoning ppl

[Pestybasket451]

Hundreds of years and trillions of dollars of government spending have given us roads and bridges, schools and clinics, police and fire stations, courts and prisons, and the armed services that protect everything else. Spending is good!

To stay ahead of China, we need to spend trillions of dollars more, not less, on infrastructure, including defense. Spending is good!

By spending more, government could put to use such idle resources as the twenty-five million unemployed and underemployed Americans who are drawing benefits instead of creating wealth. Real government waste is caused by NOT spending to convert idle resources into wealth. Spending is good!

Government spends too much only when it buys scarce resources that could be better used by the private sector. Our scarcest resource is energy and the only way to increase it is by spending more, not less, on energy resources: wind, solar, geothermal, nuclear, coal, and oil. Spending is good!

What’s bad? Borrowing is bad and paying interest to bond-holders is worse. Why can’t we just print our own damn money? In wartime, both Lincoln and Roosevelt printed money with great success. Out of desperation, both resorted to an excellent idea that should be used just as successfully in peacetime. Our great industrialists, Ford and Edison, believed that borrowing for public projects was a stupid idea. http://prosperityuk.com/2000/09/thomas-e...ree-money/


In fact, any stinking little corner branch bank can create money out of thin air so that you can buy a home and pay back the loan with interest. So, why can’t our almighty Congress create money out of thin air to repair a bridge which will pay for itself over 50 years?

Pros and cons? Pro: Print just enough money, not more, and full employment will create Heaven on Earth. Con: inflation, if you either print or borrow too much money. The only difference between printing and borrowing is that borrowing and paying interest enriches the 1% and hurts the 99%.

When idle resources become scarce and inflation begins, that’s the signal for government to reduce printing and raise interest rates. It’s like sprinkling the lawn: stop when it’s wet enough! Voila! Heaven on Earth!

Stop borrowing and paying interest! Print the damn money!

Google: Economics faculty, UMKC; http://www. NewEconomicPerspectives.org