JNugent <JNugent@AC30.Freeofspamserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:betll7$q6v$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
> "David J Rainey" <myfirstnamehere@davidrainey.com> wrote:
>
> || JNugent@AC30.Freeofspamserve.co.uk says...
>
> ||| Is that why crack was such a (relatively) popular recreational drug
> ||| among the well-heeled "yuppies" of the 1980s?
>
> || Are you sure? I thought crack was the Thunderbird / Buckfast of the
> || drugs world?
>
> No, perhaps I'm not sure.
>
> Certainly cocaine of some sort though. The soirt that got "snorted"
through
> a rolled-up tenner?

That's cocaine. Crack is much more addictive AFAIK.

> || Cocaine (from which crack is derived, in some way) was popular in the
> || City. Probably still is among those who still have jobs! I used to
> || work with a woman who was incredibly full of energy, made loads of
> || sales calls, and took customers out all night and was still in the
> || office at 7:30am. I heard, years later, that she did it all thanks
> || to a steady supply of the columbian white stuff. It's certainly not
> || a poor mans drug.
>
> Well, exactly (subject to whether or not I have the exact type of drug
> identified correctly).
>
> The PP had claimed that drug-use was a "poverty thing".

I'd say that things like heroine, crack etc. generally are.