[agtech_andy]

Only someone with a PhD could come up with a take this bad.

The article essentially boils down to a plea to let people grow hard drugs instead of the food they need to eat. "Money" is better than actual usable things they can grow.

[sfn42]

Well, it is. If opium is more valuable than food crops, farmers should grow opium. Then they can buy the equivalent amount of food and still have money to spare.

That's how the economy works. It's called opportunity cost. You should always create the most valuable thing you can, assuming of course that you can sell all of it.

[rawTruthHurts]

Absolutely. Self-dependence is overrated anyway. If they find no buyer they'll be able make some nice infusions.

[sfn42]

Self-dependence is more of a state-level concern. If the state values self-dependence they can subsidize and otherwise incentivise types of agriculture they prefer.

Outright prohibiting a crop obviously also serves that goal but it also weakens the states economy and could cause tensions if farmers lose profits.

And there are uses for opium besides street drugs. Opiates are used a lot in medicine.