The immediate effect of the new law will be to free up law enforcement personnel from pursuing very small, victimless possession to pursue larger players in the chain of drug distribution.  There will also be a huge savings in incarceration costs and in resources devoted to prosecuted minor drug offenses.  It is unlikely that this small step to legalization will have any effect on the larger drug war playing out in Mexico.  Therefore, this baby step of de-criminalization raises the question of whether Mexico should have gone farther and decriminalized drugs in general.  

The drug war in Mexico is costing billions of pesos for an economy in Mexico that shrank more than 10% over the last year during the Great Recession.  The oil revenues from Pemex that flow into the federal government’s coffers declined last year due to reduced output at the fields.  Of course, the drug war is not just a matter of cost; it is also a matter of the type of society the people’s representatives vote for the people of Mexico.  

The benefits to complete decriminalization would mean that legitimate businesses could go into the business of selling what were formerly illegal drugs, and the government could then tax those businesses for revenue.  Rather than guns and lives being lost, and towns and villages being taken over by armed thugs or by the army, the battle would play out in the economy with competition for delivering a product to the consumer.  There might be customs and tax violations, but no one would be losing their life to keep a product out of people’s hands.  Also, there would be many fewer individuals in jail because drug offenses would not be illegal.  This would be a huge saving in terms of cost and in lost lives of those branded felons who can no longer work in normal society.  

What about society.  Could someone go the local market and buy drugs?  Yes, just like alcohol and cigarettes today. Would the entire society be perpetually stoned and unable to function, and would one want his or her neighbor to be in possession of drugs.  As to the first point, there is a rate of addiction for every substance, be it alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, cocaine, or heroin.  Some people get “hooked” and some do not, and those who do will need treatment. The rate of addiction is not large, though.  Even the most addictive substances usually do not exceed a 3-4% addiction rate.  Thus, a society of addicts is a very unlikely outcome of de-criminalization.  Will the treatment costs for the additional addicts outweigh the benefits of saving lives and hundreds of millions, probably billions, of pesos in fighting the drug war year after year?  Most likely.  What about one’s neighbors being stoned?  If one’s neighbor is perpetually drunk because alcohol is legal, then there is a chance that one’s neighbor could become a drug addict.  One’s neighbor may need treatment, and may even steal to support his habit (although drugs will be very inexpensive due to the end of the drug war).  Some neighbors will become addicts, but given the base rate of addiction to most substances, and the normal regulation accompanying addictive substances (like alcohol not being sold to minors) that is most likely a much smaller price to pay than turning many parts of a country into an armed camp and having hundreds, maybe thousands, of people losing their lives each year to fight a war over drug importation and distribution.

Thus far, where military conflict and US involvement is concerned, all the action is and has been (since the early 90’s) confined to the Middle East.  Since Colombia’s seizure of anti-tank weapons (rocket launchers) from a rebel camp found on its soil—which it alleges, and the Swedes affirm, were originally purchased from Sweden in 1988—relationships between the two South American neighbors has grown more strained, as tensions continue to mount.

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday, 08/08/09, Hugo Chavez put his Venezuelan military on heightened alert, following news of U.S. plans to increase its military involvement in the region, by virtue of its ties with Columbia.  Ostensibly, the ten year Columbian/U.S. commitment is to be part of the ongoing war on drugs that would entail no more than 1400 troops and military contractors, as stipulated by U.S. law.  Chavez, however, insists that the move is a definite threat his country and thus to regional stability, and, has been quoted as urging his people, “…let’s go, get ready for combat”. 

Making matters worse and pushing tempers even higher, Chavez has accused Columbian President Uribe of sending troops, who crossed by boat over the Orinoco River into his country, only to have them withdraw before Venezuelan troops could arrive to interdict them.  In addition to his indignant expression of his intent to file a formal complaint against Columbia, Chavez issued a solemn warning of a definite counter-offensive, should Columbia attack his country.  “We cannot ignore the threat…”, he assures. 

Meanwhile, subsided fuel shipments from Venezuela to Columbia have been stopped, and diplomatic relations are still on ice, even though a Chavez ambassador called home a week ago has been sent back to Colombia.

Gatti was vacationing in Brazil with his wife and son, at the time of his death. He was a Canadian citizen, and is body was returned to Canada, and was buried on July 20, 2009. The Canadian foreign minister, Lawrence Cannon, is assisting Gatti’s family, and friends, to learn more about how Gatti died.  They will request the Brazilian Government to provide more information on the investigations.

Amanda Rodriques, wife of the victim, was originally charged with homicide, but was subsequently released. She reportedly claimed that at 6am she went downstairs to get milk for her son, and saw Gatti, on the floor. She said she assumed he was drunk, and passed out there. At 9am she said she again went down stairs, and it was at that point she realized he was dead, and notified the police.

Milena Savaira, a Recife police spokeswoman told the Associated Press (AP) that when the first investigators arrived on the scene they found Gatti’s body on the floor, with a bloodied strap near his body. The investigators assumed that he was strangled by his wife. The investigators said that 17 witnesses claimed that the couple was involved in a loud fight on the street, near the beach in Porto de Galinhas, with a security guard intervening, but was reportedly punched in the face by Gatti. Residents got angry and threw stones, and a bicycle, at Gatti. One of the stones hit Gatti in the head, resulting in a wound that the police at first thought was a wound from a small steak knife that the police found near his body. After the street fight the couple reportedly returned to the hotel in separate taxis.

Speaking to the Associated Press (AP) his wife after being released from jail, said that he killed himself, because he probably believed she would leave him after they fought, which was not the first time. She has reportedly filed a restraining order against him in the past.

The family and friends are not convinced that Gatti took his own life. The Associated Press (AP) quoted Ellen Haley, a spokesperson for Main Events, which promoted Gatti’s bouts, as saying “we do not believe that he took his own life” She further stated that the “Gatti’s family, along with his boxing manager Pat Lynch, will carry out their own investigations”. They are disputing the results of the first autopsy, and are hoping that a second autopsy conducted by a Canadian coroner, will be produce a different finding, and at the very least, conclusive.

The Villages at Loreto Bay is currently the largest sustainable resort community under development in North America. This $3 billion community in Baja California Sur, Mexico will create a series of seaside villages of approximately 6,000 homes on 8,000 acres along the Sea of Cortés. Loreto Bay serves as a model of sustainable construction management, marine conservation, wind energy, and estuary restoration.

“Sustainable development is a reality at Loreto Bay,” said Jim Grogan, president and CEO of the Loreto Bay Company. “We’ll produce more energy from renewable sources than we consume; we’ll harvest more potable water than we use; and there will be more biodiversity, biomass and habitat than existed when we started. We’re proud to set this standard and hope that future developers in Baja California Sur will follow suit.”

Grogan’s goal is to become an international model for how development can enrich an existing community while remaining economically viable. His vision of stewardship includes conservation, protection, enhancement, and regeneration that support the social, economic and environmental needs of the community.

“Our vision is driven by our belief in the future.”

Sustainable development at Loreto Bay not only includes a sustainable environmental and a sustainable economy, it includes the creation of a 5,000 acre natural preserve. The Loreto Bay preserve represents more than sixty percent of the total planned community. The preserve contains the Primer Aqua River and most of its watershed. The preserve will be open to organic farming, organic orchards, an organic nursery, trails for hiking, cycling and horseback riding and miles and miles of kayaking from the homes at Loreto Bay.

Yes, Cuba! At least that is what the Cuban government wants its citizens and the rest of the world to believe.

The Cuban government has come up with a new slick packaging for their country. They must have taken some marketing tips from advertising companies here in the United States.

Cuba has a new leader. Granted he is the brother of the dictator Fidel Castro, but he has a different face and that must be innovative enough for the Cuban government.

In addition, the Cuban government has improved the look of transportation in its polished new-fangled buses. But the bus routes no doubt are unchanged.

The Cuban government ever devoted to its people, has magnanimously lifted the ban on cell phones too. Is Cuba trying to appear like it is becoming a democracy? Or is this another ploy of the Cuban government to spy on its average Cubans?

Please pardon my suspicions but I am thinking of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Can we ever trust a Castro?

Inside this new package of Cuba is also a coupon to Cuban farmers for an increase in pay and the ability to acquire more land to farm. But before anyone gets too excited about this dabble in free enterprise, I have a question. If Cuban farmers make more money won’t the government just make additional capital?

The fact is that Cuba needs to grow its own food. The last half century under Fidel, separated the country from the rest of the world. This contributed to food shortages and dependency of importing foreign food.

The packaging of Cuba may be different, but the ingredients are the same. The major ingredients are Socialism and government control. They still prevail.

Raul Castro had to make a few subtle changes to the improved outside design of Cuba. But these luminous suggestions of change are just a façade.

The strategy of Raul Castro’s government was to create a fresh glossy Cuba and pacify its citizens. But the sleek wrapper is still filled with the same old Socialist lies.

Raul Castro had to do something to appease the masses. He might have had a revolution on his hands, if change wasn’t at least part of the propaganda slogan.

But a Castro is a Castro. The faces may be different but the name is the same.

According to Economics & Regions the provinces will receive only the 30,4% of the resources: far away from the guarantee arranged by the co-participation law and 2,5 points less than last year. How many pesos are going to be lost at the end of 2008? It is going to be lost nothing less than 8200 million pesos.

Why is it that the provinces are less participating in the resources cake? The answer is: although the collection increases, the taxes that grow more are those of noncoparticipable character, among them the exports retentions. Because of this, around 40,000 million pesos are thought to be collected in 2008, after the new scheme of variable retentions imposed by the Government.

Which are the provinces with more complicated fiscal situations? Those provinces where an extreme hostility was felt during the agricultural protest.

The province of Buenos Aires deficit is the one that affects the average of the fiscal financial deficit of the rest of the provinces reducing it; approximately a 700 million pesos this year. Cordoba also crosses a complicated situation: a deficit of 340 million pesos projected for the year of 2008. Cordoba is the second province to give a contribution to the retentions of the agricultural sector, with 8109 million annual pesos, which is an equivalent of almost two co-participations received by the Government.

Mendoza and Santa Fe do not have a comfortable fiscal situation and they will see their surplus reduced dramatically if they persist with the salary bid. What happens is that most part of the provinces assigns an average of the 47 percent of their income to the public employee’s salary.

This accelerated reduction of the provincial savings was observed in almost all the regions of the provinces the past year: in the NOA (Catamarca, Tucuman, Jujuy, La Rioja, Salta and Santiago del Estero), the financial surplus was reduced a 26%. In Cuyo (Mendoza, San Juan and San Luis), the reduction reached a 33% and in Patagonia (La Pampa, Tierra Del Fuego, Santa Cruz, Chubut, Rio Negro and Neuquén) near the 88%.

A great part of the provinces can try to reach the fiscal balance, if the Government respects the co-participation law and modifies the model of income distribution.

The current model of distribution allows the “Kirchnerism” discipline the governors, intendants and legislators, and they were questioned by different sectors of the society when they tried to gain elections. However, the Congress, the only authorized to review taxes and their distribution, is being carried out by the pro-government majority that, by order of the Pink House, avoids all serious discussion about this situation.