"We have a system in place where the government subsidizes poverty in urban areas"
I don't know how the government subsidizes poverty
I believe you...you don't know.
Your logical fallacy of the day is
Personal Incredulity
- Because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it works, you made out like it's probably not true.
However..in this case it IS true.
The author explains it clearly
"imposes economic blight in those same areas through heavy taxes and regulations"
Taxes are not based on area/region, they're based on income and what state you live in. (well yeah...a state is an area or a region) So actually our progressive tax system aims to help poorer regions. (actually it doesn't. It destroys them)
"renders the residents permanently unemployable via the "criminal justice system""
I will admit, landing in jail can seriously destroy your job prospects, and that's something that I believe should change, but criminals are criminals.(nope...if everything is illegal..everyone is a criminal. It's been estimated that the average middle class american commits three felonies a day. There are over ten million laws and regulations...how would you know?) No one is getting a free pass on punishment based on whether they are poor or not. Next time you get robbed, I hope you'll be able to forgive the thief just because "they're poor".(Next time I get robbed? The last time someone tried to rob me they went to the hospital..the next time I won't be so charitable. If it's an ARMED robbery...someone is gonna die...me or him.) There are millions of welfare systems put in place that are much better alternatives which are less risky, more efficient, and safer than stealing. The criminal justice system don't target poor people,(yes it does...we have the best legal system that money can buy...if you don't have any money you can't buy it) these people are just more prone to criminal acts than others, which again, is inexcusable considering were a welfare state.(it is a welfare state...in the inner cities)
creates a lucrative black market in drugs by restricting supply (not to mention increasing demand as people are desperate to escape their circumstances by getting high),
The government did not "create" a lucrative black market of drugs. (yes it does. If drugs weren't illegal there WOULD be no black market. It's kind of the definition) They exist because people disregard the law just to get high. (well yeah...prohibition didn't work either) And you mentioned it yourself, people are more likely to get high because of their unfortunate circumstances. So wouldn't legalizing these drugs encourage that kind of behavior?(being "high" doesn't cause any problems...robbing and stealing to get the money to GET high does. Make drugs legal...the price comes down...the crime goes away...simple) Once again, being poor is not an excuse to illegally buy and use drugs. Poverty ≠ Law Evasion under any circumstance. Considering lots what you call "elites" are prone to do drugs (ones which are way more illegal than weed)(how can anything be MORE illegal? It is or it's not) , legalizing weed would IMO ending hurting the poorer people (ones who can't afford to get addicted to drugs and can lead to further criminal activities)(no...if drugs are legal why would they need to engage in criminal activities?), and would benefit the elites (The ones who have the success to not have to worry about a potentially life-ruining addiction).
Certain mobsters and polliticians (but I repeat myself) setup the current system. They profit from it IMMENSELY. It's a welfare state in more ways that one..