>Returning to the issue of the counterproductive effects of
>the drug wars, I think there is a good deal to be said for
>Carrol Cox's view that many of these effects are in fact
>consistent with the interests of the ruling class and that
>this consistency of effects with ruling class interests
>is the driving force behind the perpetuation of public policies
>that are otherwise evident failures from the standpoint of their
>stated purposes and goals. However, a consideration of such
>issues is more likely to be productively pursued by using
>Marxist analysis rather than neoclassical economics.
One form for economic analysis might be to consider the facts. There are large amounts of money going to the Columbian economy (from the US government.) There is (anecdotally) a large export of drugs from Columbia (to the US.) That's called trade.
Assuming that there are probably at least 4 levels of a distribution path, a markup of 100% at each level and an additional reconstitution of concentrate at the last two levels at an additional 100% each.
Take the "anti narco aid funding" value as a base, and the distribution volume info above you should be able to estimate the economic value of the drug trade with Columbia. This assumes that the money transfer to Bogata is laundered through the channel of anti-drug funding. I come up with a 64:1 ratio. That would make the value 32 billion if the base was 500M
This type of analysis, while completely without proof, would serve as an indication that economic scholarship was using the same experience as the rest of humanity in it's assumptions.
Martin
.