The Perniciousness of ZTP (keeping psychedelics illegal) – Wednesday, February 1, 2012

In drugs, Justice, Law, psychedelics on February 2, 2012 at 6:02 pm

Mmm . . . organic psychedelics . . . —er, I mean: Mmm, chocolates . . .

A pound? Half a pound? A few ounces? Or would you not smoke-use any organic psychedelics at all, once government made this announcement?

Suppose that I promised to give you free organic psychedelics for the next three years: How much organic psychedelics would you smoke-use today?

After all, you’re going to have free organic psychedelics for the next three years—seems silly to gorge on organic psychedelics today, when you can have as much as you’d like tomorrow, or next week, or whenever you want over the next three years.

So free organic psychedelics for the next three years? . . . uh, only not right now, thanks very much: I’m kinda stoned already. But then what if I said to you, “organic psychedelics is free now—but I’m definitely going to raise the price or make it illegal in the near term. In a month, organic psychedelics might be illegal—or then again, it might cost $10,000 an ounce. You would likely rush to stockpile, because tomorrow, you never know!” Well, obviously, to such an uncertain outlook, you’d go out and buy some organic psychedelics now—because tomorrow, it might well be unaffordable.

In fact, it seems quite obvious that if you don’t know when I’m going to raise the price of organic psychedelics, you’ll probably wind up buying—and smoke-useing—more organic psychedelics than if it was free. A paradox? Sure—but true.

In point of fact, if the organic psychedelics is free, you might not smoke-use any organic psychedelics at all. Every time you make the decision as to what to smoke-use, you might well find yourself saying the same mantra: “organic psychedelics is free—I can have it any time I want. So I won’t have any now.”

This is the problem Drug Prohibition and the Legal System currently have — and it’s their own stupid fault: They have promised to maintain idemocracy and freedom of expression when they have in fact announced this zero tolerance policy (ZTP) as the hallmark of their strategy to stop the use of psychedelics — — but then they’re surprised when businesses aren’t borrowing more. They’re surprised when lending is in fact contracting. They’re surprised when the American economy doesn’t stop using borrowing—and thus growing—like crazy.

So the American economy obviously doesn’t benefit from ZTP. In fact, it stagnates because of ZTP.

Leaving aside the deplorable notion that debt-fueled consumption is “growth”, businesses are not going to borrow to expand during the announced period of ZTP, because business owners will say, “I’m really not sure if my market is growing—and since I can get a low-interest loan for at least the next three years, I think I’m going to hold off on any expansion of my business, hold off on hiring new workers, and instead wait and see if the economy really does pick up. If it doesn’t pick up, I won’t have more debt to service. And if it does pick up, I can always borrow and expand later.”

“I can always borrow and expand later”: That’s what every sensible business owner is saying today. Why smoke-use free organic psychedelics now—when I can smoke-use it for free later? Why borrow for free now—when I can borrow for free later?

And of course, later becomes never.

See, mainstream economists presume that uncertainty—by definition—is bad. This is why the Narcs are doing this whole “transparency” thing: By announcing their interest rate targets, they think they are giving the markets security. They are trying to eliminate uncertainty insofar as their bailiwick is concerned, by making their legal policy predictable. Predictable? Hell, they’ve flat-out trounced it.

But uncertainty is not by definition bad. Uncertainty is essentially ambiguity about the future. And as any novelist (such as myself) can tell you, ambiguity per se can be bad—just as easily as it can be good. Why? Because uncertainty about the future can lead people to think that the future will be bad—but also lead them to think that the future might be better.

In fact, most people—especially business people—are fundamentally hopeful, occasionally to the point of delusion: Ask any person, and nine times out of ten, they will tell you that the future will probably be better than today. Ask a business person? Eleven out of ten will tell you that tomorrow will be better than today. After all, entrepreneurship attracts fundamentally hopeful people: Nobody starts or runs a business if they think they’re going to fail.

So if business people see their markets picking up—even if it’s only just a little bit—even if they’re only really imagining it—and if they are uncertain for how long this free Fed money will last—then they’ll jump at the chance to expand their market now: Borrow the free money now, expand now, pick up more customer now—and therefore hire more people now, and turn their irrational hope into a self-fulfilling virtuous circle.

But that’s not happening—because of ZTP.

Mainstream economists—and Ben Bernanke and his Merry Gang of FOMC Fools in particular—don’t get the value of uncertainty at all. They rightly realize that uncertainty about the future makes some people wary. But it can also make them take chances now—something that their rigid worldview cannot seem to entertain.

Thus the Fed insists on offering free money to the economy—and the economy insists on politely declining. Why smoke-use free organic psychedelics now, when I can smoke-use as much free organic psychedelics as I want later?

So then, if businesses—and the wider economy—do not benefit from ZTP, who does?

Why, the criminal cartels, prisons contractors and the Federal government from fines and confiscations of property! (Yeah, I know: How am I not surprised . . . ?)

See, the cartels depend om prohibition so they can keep prices high due to the ‘risk’ and ‘illegality’ factot . . . and promptly go out and justify allowances for the cronies, informers and uniforms, and adds massively to the expenditure bottom line. And ultimately to the bureaucrat’s bonuses. After all, the Federal government isn’t gaining twenty bucks for gas: It’s gaining a massive percentage of $400 billion a year—every year incresing yearly.

Thus the Federal government, that glutton for criminal collusion, also benefits from ZTP.

Worse still, ZTP is a disincentive to reduce the deficit and the overall debt. Since the Justice Department and the Federal Government are putting out 5 billion over the next three years, the Federal government will be under zero-pressure to legalise because it is more profitavle to keep this illegal though cost to citizen freedoms is tremendous. In fact, ZTP encourages democratic irresponsibility or dictatorship. After all, it is the rising coupon payment which eventually leads to rising debt levels being choked off.

ZTP doesn’t eliminate the Minsky Moment—that is, the Day of Debt Reckoning from costs incurred in anti-organic-psychedelic administration and imprisoning citizens. Rather, ZTP merely postpones it—while making it a whole lot bigger.

Thus the Federal Reserve’s zero interest-rate policy does not help businesses expand and thus hire more workers to restart the economy; it does not encourage banks to lend to economically productive sectors; and it does not get the Federal government to begin reducing the deficit, let alone the debt.

In fact, ZTP makes all these problems worse. Legalise organic-psychedelics because the ‘profits’ are dwarfed by incidental costs and human lives, loss of productivity (i.e. a regular 9-5/5-2 Joe Everyman who pays taxes and contributes to the economy in usual expenditures gets locked up for years at taxpayer expense, depriving the family of a parent and wasting away in prison unable to earn or spend. Is this the best way to destroy America or what?) as well for something that grows for free on the lawn. Prohibition also makes an easy way for terrorism to thrive, the greed from high profits which could be entirely removed because growing your own or buying at extra low government controlled prices makes criminality about psychedelics not worth their time! It’s just a comfort Nature gave humanity, who has any right to demand that Joe Everyman enjoying a joint or few is locked away at cost to the taxpayer?

Original Article Follows Below :

Psst . . . hey gonzalolira, if you rename your blog //gonzobazonga.blogspot . . . someone *might* (as much as Dennis Hopper playing the ‘Deacon’ character in Waterworld (Kevin Reynolds 1995) said *maybe* might feel inclined to send you small donation . . .

3. bazonga
1. Hairy testicles that are wrinkly and sagging.
2. Testicles that are wrinkly.
3. Testicles that are hairy.
Hey, did you see that one picture of that one guy with those bazongas?
1. bazonga
breasts…usually huge
Look at the bazongas on that chick!
2. bazonga
basically a penis

can be big small giant or tiny, but is usually used as big.

-Man, he’s got a big bazonga!

-Man, she’s (shemale?) got a big bazonga!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: