There was a really good show on CNBC (I think that's who did it) not to long ago about prisons in the USA and $. ..and there was an article in Time Magazine recently about it too. These privately run prisons really need to go - and yeah the legalize pot vs prison system is just another thread in a web of crap. CNBC jumps on it...Time mag jumps on it ..politicians don't say a word about it. What a freakn joke. If you have not seen the show or read the article I strongly suggest you do. It is a real eye-opener. Talk about a system that is setup ripe for corruption..geeze.

>So, we legalize pot and start taxing it. That would save us millions in prison costs. But wait, that would hurt the 'prison for profit' groups, wouldn't it?
>
>>Aren't there a lot of Marijuana fields in the National Parks?
>>
>>>CCC - woud certainly be good for the National Parks. Of course now government requiring actual work in return for entitlements would be either some kind of "blaming the victim" or there would be shouts of "chain gang".
>>>
>>>Or the unions would want a piece.
>>>
>>>>Perhaps we should bring back the Works Projects. Get the infrastructure fixed, get people working. Worked in the 30's.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Mr. Laffer plays very nice in this article. I'm not so kind.
>>>>>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444873204577537244225685010.html
>>>>>
>>>>>We already knew all of this. We pointed it out ad nauseum. We have empirical historical evidence behind us, yet there are still those who "believe" government "stimulus" spending actually stimulates. It doesn't. Once again the results are clear.
>>>>>
>>>>>The Krugman's, Reich's and Geithner's of the world cannot be forgiven because they are informed and educated enough to know this yet they repeatedly insist on ever-more spending. Knowingly advocating a plan guaranteed to destroy the capital output of a nation while stifling economic growth and burdening future generations with paying the bill is maliciously evil.
>>>>>
>>>>>Those who may not be so well informed, I do not consider evil, just ignorant. However, ignorance is not an excuse. They have minds and it's high time they step away from the "stimulating" rhetoric and embrace reality. They've now seen the result first hand, not merely as boring economic history. If first hand observation doesn't move their position then they are too trapped in their idology to be taken seriously and are part of the problem.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Policy makers in Washington and other capitals around the world are debating whether to implement another round of stimulus spending to combat high unemployment and sputtering growth rates. But before they leap, they should take a good hard look at how that worked the first time around.
>>>>>
>>>>>It worked miserably, as indicated by the table nearby, which shows increases in government spending from 2007 to 2009 and subsequent changes in GDP growth rates. Of the 34 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development nations, those with the largest spending spurts from 2007 to 2009 saw the least growth in GDP rates before and after the stimulus.
>>>>>
>>>>>The four nations—Estonia, Ireland, the Slovak Republic and Finland—with the biggest stimulus programs had the steepest declines in growth. The United States was no different, with greater spending (up 7.3%) followed by far lower growth rates (down 8.4%).
>>>>>...
>>>>>Sorry, Keynesians. There was no discernible two or three dollar multiplier effect from every dollar the government spent and borrowed. In reality, every dollar of public-sector spending on stimulus simply wiped out a dollar of private investment and output, resulting in an overall decline in GDP. This is an even more astonishing result because government spending is counted in official GDP numbers. In other words, the spending was more like a valium for lethargic economies than a stimulant.
>>>>>
>>>>>In many countries, an economic downturn, no matter how it's caused or the degree of change in the rate of growth, will trigger increases in public spending and therefore the appearance of a negative relationship between stimulus spending and economic growth. That is why the table focuses on changes in the rate of GDP growth, which helps isolate the effects of additional spending.
>>>>>