Although I realize it is nothing more than a detail, I found it quite amusing when the drug dealer attempts to reassert his masculinity at the end by saying "I don't like small talk. I don't like having to ask them how their day was."
If I were ever dumb enough to do coke, I would be very concerned if I discovered that my dealer has a little black book with my name and address in it.
Possession and dealing are the things you will be prosecuted for. "Is in a notebook owned by the drug dealer" is probably not the number one enforcement priority.
But once they've busted your dealer and taken a look in his little black notebook, they're more likely to come after you, and that's when you get done for possession.
Given the number of Economist articles that involve this particular stimulant, I'm starting to wonder what their writing pool is up to on Friday nights.
Colombian cartels are in the toughest industry in the world. They have to deal with the police, the military, all sorts of government regulations, picky customers that don't stick to a single brand name, and there's no government there to bail you out if you aren't innovative enough! :P
I think you meant to respond to my downvoted comment.
Note that the editors are, in fact, fiscal conservatives for the most part. I had meant to illuminate the coincidence of the downvoted comment's parent mentioning banking.
And sure, "those who read the Economist" can be divided yet again into "those who ONLY read the Economist for current events" and "other." It's the new flag lapel pin for the under 40 crowd. Excuse my while I cough politely.
Not really surprising. If you read the Economist for a while you will discover that it is a magazine that is exclusively dedicated to the protection of the interests of large banks and hedge funds. So it is not surprising that the journalists are friends with a bunch of bankers. And everyone knows bankers love coke.
Well, it's a Tory magazine for the under-40 crowd. I don't know if that makes it banking-only, but given that banking is the big traditional industry in the UK, sure, I'll bite.
(Incidentally, I don't seem to mind as much when they have a pot-directed story.)
I was not really referring to the intended audience but to the editorial direction. If you pay attention, their editorials (and even their articles) are almost exclusively in favor of the big international banks and various large investment interests.
I am not calling them corrupt maybe it is just their philosophy but, that is a fact.
