How do cartels get drugs into the US?

 

"Rear Admiral Christopher Tomney is director of Joint Interagency Task Force South for the US Coast Guard."

 

"In the early days of this task force - and we've been around for 26 years - we saw much higher movement using non-commercial aircraft to fly the drugs northwards."

 

"[Now] well over 95% of the drugs are moving on the water via container ships, non-commercial vessels, pleasure boats, sail boats, fishing boats. They also have fast boats which try to outrun our law enforcement assets."

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34934574

 

 

$200 Million in Cocaine, Delivered By Submarine

 

"In 2014, 80% of illegal drugs entering the U.S. came by water... and 30% of that came onboard an improvised "narco submarine."

 

"DEA analysts estimate that at best, only one out of 10 drug runs using this new method ends in failure, as this one did."

 

http://www.wealthdaily.com/articles/200-million-in-cocaine-delivered-by-submarine/8153

Edited April 30, 20179 yr by iReason

9 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

                            The Feds can encourage people, particularly youngsters, to train/get skilled for the future.  Hospital/health care will be a big one, because the population is aging.   

 

                  When Trump puts such a push on coal and fossil fuels, he's also turning his back on emerging alt-energy technologies.  Europe, India, China and other countries (not so much Thailand) are realizing the exciting potential of solar and alternative energies for the future.   Unfortunately, the US is saddled with the oldest prez it's ever had and he thinks like JP Morgan:  Everything to make a buck for himself the old-fashioned way, and very little vision or encouragement for a bright future.

 

                 He put Kushner in charge of something to do with Innovation.  Kushner is already in charge of 20 agencies, and has as much innovative energy/ideas as a parked steam locomotive going rusty.  Has anyone heard Kushner say anything in the past months?  No, you haven't, because he doesn't talk.  His lips are too busy being pressed against his father-in-law's ample butt.

The Feds can encourage people, particularly youngsters, to train/get skilled for the future.  Hospital/health care will be a big one, because the population is aging.   

 

LOL. The US government already spend more than most countries on education, for very little reward, given the US education system appears to be quite broken. Do you want them to waste even more money on "training".

Nurses have to work hard, so don't expect the little princes and princesses to want to do it. They'd much rather do "media studies" or a degree in "hip hop" than something useful.

11 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Time for an arithmetic lesson. Without knowing what percentage of total income the 20 percent earn, it's impossible to evaluate your claim. That said, the USA definitely does not have the most progressive income tax system in the world.

Don't bring a knife to a gun fight

 

https://www.google.co.th/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/252917/

 

 

 

5 hours ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

Don't bring a knife to a gun fight

 

https://www.google.co.th/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/252917/

 

 

 

Okay. I'll concede that I was wrong and that the US income tax system is more progressive.  But that only means that within its own system there is more of a gradient. US income taxes are comparatively low in relaton to most other fully developed nations , But what's also true is that if you take taxes as a whole in the United States, then the USA is definitely not progressive at all. http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxday2011.pdf

In addition, not only do most other fully developed OECD nations charge higher tax rates on income, but middle class citizens in those nations get back much more in return.  Free or very low cost medical care, low cost, free, or in some cases even cash subsidies to receive higher education. This is an important reason why the GINI index in all OECD nations., both less and fully developed with the exception of Chile and Mexico, shows a much more equitable income distribution than in the USA

http://www.oecd.org/social/OECD2016-Income-Inequality-Update.pdf

Of all the fully developed industrialized nations, the US has the smallest percentage of its population being middle class:

http://www.oecd.org/social/OECD2016-Income-Inequality-Update.pdf

Anyway, thanks for the correction.