Morality vs. Survival: Morales Gets What DEA Doesn't
Bolivian President Evo Morales— himself a coca grower by trade— has instituted a new approach to reducing coca production (and with it, presumably, cocaine production). How can Morales succeed where the multi-billion-dollar effort of the U.S. government failed? The U.S. demanded that farmers stop growing coca before they received any aid in developing new crops. Morales, on the other hand, recognizes that coca growers need to eat. Morales's plan allows coca growers to keep 1/3 acre devoted to coca while developing alternative crops like rice. Will Morales be successful? That depends a lot on economics, something else the U.S. doesn't seem to understand. When cocaine supply drops and demand rises, the price of coca rises, too— making it more attractive to grow. That's economics at its most basic. Yet the U.S. government seems to think that with this commodity (unlike all others), it can control the market by eliminating supply: wishful thinking at best. The only way to reduce the drug trade is to eliminate demand— something the U.S. hasn't spent nearly as much effort on."The U.S. required growers to quit planting coca before they could access alternative development programs, without considering that their families needed to eat. Now the cato guarantees the farmers' income, giving them the chance to take risks with new crops." —Kathryn Ledebur, director of the Andean Information Network.
How could our government could spend hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money trying to defy the laws of economics? It causes a reasonable person to wonder.
Trackbacks
-
5/23/2009 11:31 PM
Remmrit Bookmarking wrote:
Remmrit.com user has just tagged your post as survival!
Comments