another question,is it legal to grow coca plants.
Here are some faqs you should know before trying to grow it:
1)You NEED a high elevation. Dont expect to grow anything great if you dont have that
2)The germination rate is very low on non fresh seeds. You will be extremely lucky to get a 10/14 germination rate. Normal rate if probably around 6/14
3)Seeds are EXTREMELY expensive. The best deal i saw was $120 for 14 seeds
4)Seeds, cuttings, plant matter, etc are illegal to own in the US
5)The process of extracting the cocaine alkaloid is rather long and boring process. You have a high risk of harming your lungs in the conversion of the paste to the hydrochloride. hell in the entire process of making the paste to having the final product you risk hurting your lungs. Your going to need a hell of a filtration system if you plan on doing it indoors. Most coca farmers (i.e the cartels) have huge plantations in jungles. You will be using things like gasoline and sulfuric acid alot so be careful.
If you are planning on growing coca and making cocaine, i suggest you check out DELETED. They are a trust worthy site that sends out to the states pretty fast. You can also buy Iboga and Khat seeds there.
Deleted the link i gave you. For shift is right. You have problems if you want to grow this and make it your without proper instruction and just because you tried it. You will go bankrupt growing coca and using it. Growing, processing, and extracting is not cheap.
Also, keep in mind:
1000 kilos of leaves = 100 kilos of coke
100 kilos of leaves = 10 kilos of coke
10 kilos of leaves = 1 kilo of coke
1 kilo of leaves = 1 pound of coke
1 pound of leaves = 1 ounce of coke
1 ounce of leaves = 10 grams of coke
10 grams of leaves = 1 gram of coke
So in order to get anything worth while you will need an ounce of leaves and that 10 grams of coke wont even cover 1/4 of the materials it takes to grow and process coke.
if i wanted 2 grow sume where would i get them and how would i make coke i need some :spew::hump:
What Keeps Cocaine from Being “Made in the USA”?
The answer has more to do with the new international division of labor than the War on Drugs.
Recent years have seen a thorough, and public, reexamination of the assumptions behind a variety of existing laws, including (most relevant for this article) those regulating drugs and international trade. This reexamination has given new life to debates around prison sentences and potential decriminalization for the former, and the balance between domestic production and imports — specifically as these pertain to jobs — for the latter. This panorama merits the question that, if bringing cocaine production to the United States could result in job creation and higher incomes for American farmers and workers, why hasn’t it happened?
The natural answer would be that cocaine is illegal; however, being illegal is not as much of a deterrent as it might seem (we will return to this point later). Cocaine’s notoriously bloody and ecologically damaging supply and distribution chains are also not terribly different from those of most other products that the average American consumes. Even the perception of coca (the leafy plant that is processed into cocaine) as a tropical plant not easily adaptable to the United States does not hold up for several reasons. There are different species of the plant, including at least one that grows in similar conditions as another crop native to the Andean highlands, the potato, which has taken to North America famously well; this aside from modern advances in genetic modification for plants and climate change’s effects on what we suppose precipitation and temperatures in North America to be.
Aside from being geographically related, the potato can also be a useful example to point out some of the dynamics behind the international trade of natural products and their derivatives. We will use Colombia as the counterpart for comparison to the United States throughout this article, as a producer of both potatoes and cocaine.
According to the latest statistics, a farmer in Idaho (the principal potato-growing state in the USA) receives 10.5 cents per pound of potatoes while the retail price is 72 cents per pound — a 686% markup. A farmer in Cundinamarca (the principal potato-growing department in Colombia) receives 9.5 cents per pound of potatoes while still selling in the USA for the same 72 cents — now a 758% markup without changing the final sales price (the markups do not contemplate the logistical costs of getting the potatoes from the farmer to the store, and the latter does not represent the added distance or trade barriers, but they do illustrate the profits involved). While the difference in raw material prices may not seem massive, the United States still places restrictions on these kinds of imports to protect domestic cultivation and processing — often in response to concerns from interest groups — and in the case of potatoes, imports only amount to around 10 percent of the total product consumed in the country.
There are also some key differences between potatoes and cocaine. First of all, aside from its traditional use by Andean tribespeople, the coca leaf is not a final-consumer product, but rather a raw material used to create cocaine through a chemical process (as opposed to potatoes, which are widely consumed both in their original form and processed into things like potato chips or French fries). As such there are added steps and players in the process that are not necessarily present in the case of potatoes. Secondly, cocaine’s nearly universal prohibition has a variable effect on supply (in the case of seizures) and a constant effect on perceived availability and risk to traffickers; all of these inflate the price, often to exaggerated levels, at every stage of production. Third, because cocaine is illegal, it is not subject to any trade restrictions or government regulations for quality or agricultural practices, nor is it subsidized in any way.
A farmer in Colombia receives 32 cents per pound of coca leaves while the retail price for a pound of cocaine is $27,000 (a conservative estimate that could be doubled by diluting the product) — an 8,437,500% markup, to put the difference in perspective. It is interesting to note here that even at the very bottom of the supply chain, illicit crops offer a better chance at a decent standard of living for farmers than traditional ones (a farmer that opts to grow coca over potatoes would earn more than three times as much money per pound produced). There would naturally be a decrease in profitability similar to what we saw with potatoes (again, recognizing that this is a wobbly analogy at best) for growing the coca in the United States instead of Colombia; in addition to paying more for raw materials, prices would also increase for supplies, equipment, and working hours to process the coca leaves into cocaine. And this is where production costs begin to experience significant changes.
While the price of raw materials does not tend to vary wildly from place to place, the price of human capital does. While the minimum wage for a worker in the United States is $7.25 per hour, the minimum wage for a worker in Colombia is $1.66 per hour (assuming 40 hours of work per week multiplied by four weeks, as the minimum wage in Colombia is measured by monthly salary; however, a typical work week in Colombia is six days, which pushes the hourly rate even further down). The minimum wage is mostly just an indicator, for two reasons: 1) given that drug producers and traffickers work outside the law, they are not bound by minimum wage requirements, and 2) the drug trade presumably gets most, if not all, of its workforce from the ranks of the unemployed, which changes the logic of the payment one would be willing to work for under any circumstances. In any case, not even drug dealers work in a vacuum, and the minimum wage indicator does clearly show the savings to be had in producing abroad. One of the major drivers of this wage gap, in turn, is the immense pressure on poor and middle-income countries to remain “competitive”, primarily in the eyes of rich countries.
That being said, couldn’t American traffickers make up the difference with lower transport costs by growing a high-mountain coca species locally? This has been the case in many instances with another famous illicit crop, marijuana (the cultivation of which, as alluded to at the beginning of this article, has not been deterred by being illegal); however, marijuana’s larger bulk, lower profitability, and widening decriminalization are other, unique factors in the decision to grow local. In addition, marijuana can be consumed by the final customer in its original, unprocessed form — not unlike potatoes.
It’s true that drug traffickers don’t pay import taxes or tariffs, nor are they burdened by bureaucracy at the border; on the other hand, smuggling brings with it, its own set of costs and challenges. Nevertheless, the guaranteed-higher incomes that come from cocaine’s unquestioned illegal status and relative ease of transport, have kept low-cost overseas production and later smuggling into the United States a worthwhile endeavor, be it by boat, airplane, or tunnel. Experiments in the cultivation of poppy, the base of opium and heroin and a closer comparison to coca in this regard, have been largely isolated failures due to the same reality, wherein it remains a better business decision to grow overseas — not because of some kind of domestic legal crackdown, but for profitability. This reality has even pushed methamphetamine and other synthetic drugs that used to be made locally into increased outsourcing to other countries.
Recent years have seen a thorough, and public, reexamination of the assumptions behind a variety of existing laws, including (most relevant for this article) those regulating drugs and international…