NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm convinced that the economy of Mexico is largely supported by drug cartels and drug trafficking money. It follows, then, that if we (the USA) were to severely cripple or even destroy the drug trade in the US, the economy of Mexico would collapse. Iif this were to happen, it would severely, negatively impact the US and Canada on a number of levels. So, I think that the US, in spite of it's stated anti-drug policy, has a shadow policy of looking the other way at the drug trade, feeling that maintaining the economy of Mexico is more important than controlling drugs and drug-related crime in the US.

Thoughts?

Input?

I'm convinced that the economy of Mexico is largely supported by drug cartels and drug trafficking money.

It's interesting how reality has no connection to your convictions.

I'm not sure if the trickle down theory works with drug dealers either.

It's interesting how reality has no connection to your convictions.

Note to self: when stipulating a topic for debate, leave out words that might cause Fass angst. Of course it's difficult to know, with Fass, which word(s) will do that.

Fass, despite my words, the statement is rhetorical, and not necessarily indicative of my actual conviction. This is for debate only.

Note to self: when stipulating a topic for debate, leave out words that might cause Fass angst. Of course it's difficult to know, with Fass, which word(s) will do that.

Angst? Either you don't know the meaning of the word, or you really like to imagine your impact to be much, much, much grander than it is.

Fass, despite my words, the statement is rhetorical, and not necessarily indicative of my actual conviction.

Then don't claim it's your conviction when it's just a postulate - we can only read your little words, not your little mind.

In any case, it's interesting how reality has no connection to your postulates.

Angst? Either you don't know the meaning of the word, or you really like to imagine your impact to be much, much, much grander than it is.

You wouldn't say that you're worrying about something trivial?

If only it were so.

The fact is, the Drug Dealers who actually get rich (those highest on the food chain) not only get masses of money, they also don't pay taxes on it. Taxation is the one tried and true method of redistribution of wealth; trickle down effects are notoriously fickle, aiding only tiny slices of the populace rather than the general polity.

The Drug Dealers aren't responsible for Mexico's wealth; they are responsible for it's poverty. By promoting an atmosphere of lawlessness and hopelessness, they destroy opportunities for others to build a functional economy and drive away legitimate investment.

You wouldn't say that you're worrying about something trivial?

I'm worrying? I'm always the last to know... but, still, "angst" doesn't mean "worry about something trivial". "Angst" to those of us who speak English is a feeling of "anxiety", anxiety of course being "painful or apprehensive uneasiness" or "fearful concern or interest" or "an abnormal and overwhelming sense of apprehension and fear often marked by physiological signs". I assure you, I hold no angst nor worry. I am quite placid and halcyon, actually, nibbling on a kumquat as I am.

Surely all those who nibble kumquats are equally placid.

They are deliciously dainty little fruits, what else would they elicit?

The worrying definition is a definition of angst. Sometimes words have multiple meanings in English too.

None of the meanings being attenuate enough to merit the usage of the word in this case, I must restate.

I'm worrying? I'm always the last to know... but, still, "angst" doesn't mean "worry about something trivial". "Angst" to those of us who speak English is a feeling of "anxiety", anxiety of course being "painful or apprehensive uneasiness" or "fearful concern or interest" or "an abnormal and overwhelming sense of apprehension and fear often marked by physiological signs". I assure you, I hold no angst nor worry. I am quite placid and halcyon, actually, nibbling on a kumquat as I am.

Surely all those who nibble kumquats are equally placid.
The worrying definition is a definition of angst. Sometimes words have multiple meanings in English too.

Surely all those who nibble kumquats are equally placid.
The worrying definition is a definition of angst. Sometimes words have multiple meanings in English too.

The Oxford English Dictionary agrees with Fass, I'm afraid.

It's interesting how reality has no connection to your convictions.

what are you talking about? we can, like, totally re-shape the world with our convictions!!

now seriously, Anti-Social Darwinism, i'm afraid i have to agree with Fassitude here. 'sides we all know the US has other reasons to look the other way when it comes to drug traffickin'...

Given that the amount of cash generated from the Mexican-US drug trade is estimated at between $8-23billion, and the GDP for Mexico is over $1.1trillion, I'm sure they would manage on the whole. Local economies in Mexico might suffer though.

None of the meanings being attenuate enough to merit the usage of the word in this case, I must restate.

I guess it depends on ASD's perception of how angsty you are about it. ;)

Anyway. /threadjack

No it doesn't: angst - a feeling of persistent worry about something trivial.
Admittedly this is an informal definition, but a definition nonetheless. And no one can claim that NSG aspires to the heights of formality.

From where are you drawing this definition? It is NOT from the OED, which I just checked.

And on our regular topic, the OP is a bit silly. Mexico is not simply a drug cartel.

The Oxford English Dictionary agrees with Fass, I'm afraid.

No it doesn't: angst - a feeling of persistent worry about something trivial.
Admittedly this is an informal definition, but a definition nonetheless. And no one can claim that NSG aspires to the heights of formality.

No it doesn't: angst - a feeling of persistent worry about something trivial.

I only have the "Concise Oxford Dictionary" in print, and it only lists: "angst: 1. anxiety. 2. feeling of guilt or remorse." The online version of the compact OED only lists: "angst • noun a profound feeling of generalized anxiety or dread." Thus, nothing of the sort you claim. Which version do you have?

Welcome, one and all, to NSG, where a thread dealing with drugs and Mexico becomes a dictionary debate over the word "angst." (one of my favorite words, by the way)

Anyway, I'm not sure it's Mexico's economy that's being driven by drugs (I think it's tourism - all those college kids going down for a good time), but if you had said, say, Colombia, then I'd heartily agree with you.

From where are you drawing this definition?
Which version do you have?

As it turns out, I'm using the New Oxford American. So I suppose that, no, the OED doesn't have that definition.

Welcome, one and all, to NSG, where a thread dealing with drugs and Mexico becomes a dictionary debate over the word "angst." (one of my favorite words, by the way)

And they saw what the topic had become, and it was good.

I'm convinced that the economy of Mexico is largely supported by drug cartels and drug trafficking money. It follows, then, that if we (the USA) were to severely cripple or even destroy the drug trade in the US, the economy of Mexico would collapse. If this were to happen, it would severely, negatively impact the US and Canada on a number of levels.

The postulates have been shot down sufficiently.

So, I think that the US, in spite of it's stated anti-drug policy, has a shadow policy of looking the other way at the drug trade, feeling that maintaining the economy of Mexico is more important than controlling drugs and drug-related crime in the US.

Thoughts?

Input?

Let us now shoot down the conclusion as well.

Here's the trend over the last two decades.

DEA Special Agents
1990.....3,191
1994.....3,418

DEA Budget
1990.....$769.2 million
1994.....$1,050 million

DEA Special Agents
1994.....3,418
1998.....4,261

DEA Budget
1994.....$1,050 million
1998.....$1,349.4million

DEA Special Agents
1999..... 4,535
2003..... 4,841

DEA Budget
1999..... $1,477.0 million
2003..... $1,897.3
http://www.dea.gov/pubs/history/1990-1994.html
http://www.dea.gov/pubs/history/1994-1998.html
http://www.dea.gov/pubs/history/1999-2003.html

If your conclusion above were to be true, we should expect a decline in funding for the DEA. Instead, we see a steady increase.

Welcome, one and all, to NSG, where a thread dealing with drugs and Mexico becomes a dictionary debate over the word "angst." (one of my favorite words, by the way)

Welcome to the circus, kid. :)

As it turns out, I'm using the New Oxford American. So I suppose that, no, the OED doesn't have that definition.

I'm going to have to go with Fass and Cat on this one. OED trumps NOAD.

And they saw what the topic had become, and it was good.

And on the 8th day, Max rested.

I'm going to have to go with Fass and Cat on this one. OED trumps NOAD.

Well we'll just have to check back in 2037. ;)

I'm going to have to go with Fass and Cat on this one. OED trumps NOAD.
except in America, surely. If, where the poster lives, 'angst' has a different meaning which is so widely accepted it makes their dictionary then we should accept s/he used it correctly.

So far, I like how this thread is turning out. :)

except in America, surely. If, where the poster lives, 'angst' has a different meaning which is so widely accepted it makes their dictionary then we should accept s/he used it correctly.


The Oxford English Dictionary is the accepted authority on the evolution of the English language over the last millennium. It is an unsurpassed guide to the meaning, history, and pronunciation of over half a million words, both present and past. It traces the usage of words through 2.5 million quotations from a wide range of international English language sources, from classic literature and specialist periodicals to film scripts and cookery books.

The OED covers words from across the English-speaking world, from North America to South Africa, from Australia and New Zealand to the Caribbean.
http://oed.com/about/

OED covers NAEnglish.

So far, I like how this thread is turning out. :)

:::Hands LG a taco pie.:::

So far, I like how this thread is turning out. :)
just need to add a bit of mud and you'd be happy as Larry, right?

except in America, surely. If, where the poster lives, 'angst' has a different meaning which is so widely accepted it makes their dictionary then we should accept s/he used it correctly.

The NOAD's definitions are those common in North America*, and here, 'angst' is one of those words that has garnered additional (less meaningful) definitions through probable overuse in the past. Soon, 'society' will join it.

*The Oxford Canadian Dictionary is essentially the Concise OED, with the addition of an entry on Tim Hortons

just need to add a bit of mud and you'd be happy as Larry, right?

Mud and chaos. I love em.

And a taco pie.
http://www.recipetips.com/images/recipe/casseroles/tacopie.jpg

Yum. :)

Oh, as for the original topic, um....

I think that if US based chemical companies can handle the loss of sales from the drug dealers that buy the chemicals to process drugs, then Mexico can probably handle the loss of distribution.

They'll just do what tobacco companies do: Focus their markets in Eastern Asia. :)

Angst certainly never seemed to me to be worry about something trivial. Angst always carried, as far as I have ever heard it used, the connotation of deep despair/emotional pain coupled with anxiety.

I think exaggeration should be the word of the day.

I'm not sure if the trickle down theory works with drug dealers either.

why wouldn't it? They would have to spend money in their communities.

I think exaggeration should be the word of the day.
how about 'hyperbole' instead?

how about 'hyperbole' instead?

As in "the New York Giants won this years hyperbole"?

That might be true for Italy (where organized crime is somehow the largest sector), but not for Mexico.

Lacking evidence I must conclude that there is not some kind of huge international conspiracy to promote the illegal trade of drugs in order to benefit, of all countries, Mexico.

*The OP*

Thoughts?
Since the Mexican government won't get any taxes from the kind of people who run the largest drug cartels, I would disagree with you on this one.
Input?
Couldn't you guys start putting money into Mexico to try and create some Proper Industry there, instead of flying around the border a bit which isn't really helping anything?