What Does Drug Dealing Tell Us About Small Businesses?

July 29, 2008 RSS Feed Print

Scott Shane just blogged about a fascinating study by Rob Fairlie, an economist at the University of California-Santa Cruz. Fairlie was interested in entrepreneurship in the black market and how it relates to legitimate entrepreneurship. So he looked at data regarding drug dealers, and he found that they were 10 to 11 percent more likely to become self-employed in legitimate businesses than people who weren't drug dealers.

Now you might say that this should be expected—people with criminal backgrounds might have fewer chances to be hired by someone else, so they have no choice but to work for themselves. But Fairlie crunched the numbers and discovered that structural factors like education and incarceration can't explain the difference. This led him to an explanation that might make some people uncomfortable: The same personality traits and skills that draw people to becoming "businessmen" in the drug trade also lead them to be regular small-business people.

Interestingly, Shane blogged on this subject at the same time that U . S . News published a debate on whether it is time to end the "war on drugs."

Shane says:

Increasing the number of productive entrepreneurs may depend a lot on creating better incentives for those with entrepreneurial preferences and talent to become productive entrepreneurs instead of turning to a life of crime.

This makes me wonder how many gang leaders, drug dealers, and mafia kingpins in prison could have been entrepreneurs doing the next new, new thing if they had been exposed to the right incentives.

So I'll go ahead and ask what Shane seems to be hinting at: Does drug prohibition change the incentives such that potential entrepreneurs pursue lives of crime rather than legitimate businesses?

On one hand, those who call for the legalization or decriminalization of drugs have long argued that the drug war directly fuels the crime around the drug trade that it seeks to fight by creating a massive black market. The high profits in this black market attract people who might otherwise become legitimate entrepreneurs to deal drugs. Fairlie's study shows that there's some empirical support to this argument—these drug dealers wouldn't just all be unemployed vagrants or petty criminals if not for the drug trade. They really do possess a lot of the same qualities that the family that runs your local mom and pop store possesses.

On the other hand, supporters of the drug war can use this research as evidence that legalization or decriminalization of drugs would not do very much good. They might say that it proves that the lack of good jobs in poor areas is a bigger cause of crime than drug prohibition, and so we need policies that directly expand economic opportunity.

So what's the more entrepreneur-friendly policy—ending drug prohibition or continuing it?

Tags:
small business,
drugs,
entrepreneurship

Reader Comments Read all comments (6)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

There are some European countries whom have treated drug addiction as a medical issue. And it is a known fact that these countries have a hugely lower rate of drug abusers, especialy that of marijuana.

I would just like to say, look at the legal drugs. You have alcohol and tobacco. These are all american products that support american values. Let's face it. Ciggerettes and Beer are all american narcotics that the goverment accepts legalized because of that fact. Marijuana, however, is linked to the counter culture and so it is illegal. If you don't beleive me, maybe this will have you think. There is NO one single death recorded from marijuana. But of course you have the hundreads of thousans if nto millions linked to alcohol and ciggerettes. It's simple, the goverment isn't there to protect you, the drug policies are in place to protect american values. You can kill someone and get 6 years in prison. You can have 0.05 grams of drugs on you and get life. I rest my case....

Drugs will never all be legalized as long as our polititions are on the payroll.

Andrew of PA 12:21AM August 22, 2008

Back during the prohibition of alcohol you had massive profiteering and the rise of famous gangsters. Joe Kennedy, Al Capone, Meyer Lansky, Carlo Gambino,etc. It provided the huge opportunity for poorer classes to rise up. Meyer ran Havana for Batista and built Las Vegas with the Teamsters pension fund money-a great investment. That cash flowed to "legitimate" businesses and hey Joe Kennedy got himself appointed first SEC commisioner.

What I see as a fundamental change is the takeover by the police and old money republicans of the business. Police make huge money "busting" dealers, users, and taking payoffs. Trillions tax free buys anyone, sorry and it needs to be legalized and addiction treated as a medical problem. What you have now is total corruption up to the White House. Everyone has their price and everyone takes. Ask John D.Rockefeller how he ruthlessly seized 95% of all the oil business. Gangsters are us.

Tony Soprano of MN 11:12AM August 16, 2008

It's not about what's better for entrepreneurs, it's the essential fact that prohibition of these substances is unconstitutional. As long as profits are being made on all ends, nothing will change. Watch American Drug War -

http://www.AmericanDrugWar.com

Jack Tripper of CA 5:39PM August 04, 2008

Risky Business

Risky Business

Matt Bandyk, a reporter for U.S. News, explores capitalism from where it all begins, with the entrepreneur, whose risk taking and experimentation provide the roots from which the rest of the economy grows. As much courage as it takes to create one's own business, even the entrepreneur needs some help, and this blog will look at news, trends, and practical advice for starting and running a small business.

advertisement

advertisement