legalization of marijuana page 47

1164 posts

Flag Post

Janto,

I’m sure it’s been mentioned already, but tobacco is not analagous to marijauna when it comes to a sin tax. It doesn’t take that much effort to grow MJ in your basement. It’s a hardy weed so to speak. On the other hand, it’s pretty damn difficult to grow your own tobacco. If MJ were legalized across the board (so not just medicinal), you’d have nowhere near the same amount of revenue coming in from MJ, even assuming that there are as many MJ smokers as tobacco smokers, or that they smoke the same amount per annum (and they don’t). People would continue to get it from their own street dealers.

Booze is pretty easy to make still. Also if we assume that selling MJ without legal certification is still illegal then there is going to be a possible price gap to exploit. The rum-runner of MJ is putting his personal time and security on the line and will charge accordingly. A legitimate outfit could simply ship in product that costs virtually nothing to produce. Analogous to tobacco, if not cheaper, in product cost. You would also have a mass array of distribution markets.

So rather then calling a dealer, arranging a hook up, paying for criminal interest multiple fold. They could go to a corner store. Or alternatively, a licensed dealer. I think it is a viable model. If you gave me legal immunity and tobacco prices (much less then a buck a gram) I am positive I could turn that into a viable business model that would be knocking down illegal competitors. We’re also in the heart of the cottage industry, elsewhere I imagine it would only be easier. Do you sincerely think you couldn’t turn a decent dime on such a model?

 
Flag Post
Except that NYC doesn’t make that a selling point of their tourist campaign. People don’t come there for the rude cab drivers. People DO come to the Netherlands for the red-light frolics, and if I were Dutch, I think I’d be pretty embarassed about that. “Once we were an economic superpower rivalling the British Empire…now we’re the Euro-hotspot for hipsters and perverts.”

I remember back when I graduated from high school, everybody was going to take a year off before college and go to Europe. And what’s the unanimous first choice? London? Paris? Berlin? Those might be the places you tick off your list of ‘places to see’, but the first place you go is the drugs, booze and sex capital of Europe – Amsterdam.

I gave it a pass, myself

so? Dutch tourists in America go to New York and Las Vegas, for similar vices really. do you really think that represents America? are you really bothered by tourists thinking of America as a place of drag-queens and casinos?

we know many tourists come for that. all we are is annoyed by the tourists. as for reputation…actually our reputation is not so bad at all. France keeps complaining about our drug policy, and Americans portray us in hilarious ways, but few countries have a better reputation than us, and as for being liberal and progressive…other countries frequently follow our example, so i mean… more positive than negative i’d say.

anyway, i think we got way off track. i don’t know what we’re even still discussing. also when did you become such a conservatist all of a sudden?

Does it matter? Which city do you suppose attracts more tourists each year: The Hague, which i suppose appeals to IR politicos, or Amsterdam, which brings in the aforementioned hipsters, yuppies and perverts? How about Washington DC versus NYC? Ottawa versus Vancouver? I can tell you that virtually no foreigner knows (or cares) much about Ottawa, but Vancouver’s the culture and nightlife capital (in the West), so that’s where the crowds go. The difference is that few tourists go to NYC or Vancouver for the express purpose of doing all the things that are illegal in their own countries. Your country is known worldwide for Amsterdam (and for the reason I just gave). By comparison, The Hague is just an afterthought.

you mentioned capital, not me. why are you debating your own argument?

Yes, and that’s sort of the point. ‘The people’ obviously approved or you wouldn’t have that government in power. So, YOU might not like them, but a majority of your countrymen think otherwise, even if that majority is less than 50% of the total population.

well that’s why i told you that. i don’t know who authorised the cannabis plantation busts, but if it was political, it was probably the CDA, and pretty much the only people that vote CDA are habit voters, and they’ve been changing their habits. also the VVD is trying to change it’s image to a more police-state image.

anyway, i just don’t think there was any sudden change in paradigm, as you say “[the Netherlands] got tired of being known internationally as the sleazy red light MJ utopia of the world and decided to crack down of some of that”. i’m just not seeing that. Amsterdam dislikes the organised crime brewing behind it’s overgrown red-light district, but it likes the tourists. drugs is just political turmoil. centralist parties all of a sudden are trying to slowly roll it back, but i’m not seeing any popular support for it.

 
Flag Post

Just wanted to share this graphic on the Pros being presented for the MJ legalization in Colorado:

 
Flag Post

Update: Amendment 64 passed in Colorado.

 
Flag Post

That’s good to know, Twilight. Hopefully we can see some real progress on research using the substance, in that state.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

That’s good to know, Twilight. Hopefully we can see some real progress on research using the substance, in that state.

See, the thing I can’t figure out is how the state is going to work it out with the feds. It’s still a demonized drug and crime, in the eyes of the feds. Yet it’s now legal in Colorado. So what happens when a Coloradan legally obtains and uses MJ? Did they commit a crime or not? Are they considered a criminal only outside of Colorado when they leave or visit other places? Like, if they used MJ, then applied for a federal job that wanted to move them and were drug tested, would they be in trouble? It’s still kind of muddy.

 
Flag Post

Colorado is largely anti-Fed anyway, I believe. So they’ll likely fight tooth and nail if the country’s government tries to enforce its will over their’s. The first test cases will be interesting, but I see your point.

We may face the uncomfortable reality where patients on state-funded medicaid are given the substance for it’s wonderful properties relating to chronic pain management, and those same individuals then have their houses raided by the DEA. It’ll cause unnecessary terror and strife, and inflame tensions in an already-hostile state. However, that would be about par for the course for how our agencies typically handle things.

if they used MJ, then applied for a federal job that wanted to move them and were drug tested, would they be in trouble?

Probably, yes. However, the drug does not stay in your system indefinitely. The receptors it primes, stay primed, but they will not trigger positive on a drug test. So you would have to refrain from consuming it for a few days prior to the test. For all except medicinal users, that should be perfectly doable. Once you work in a federal capacity, even within the state, it is likely still illegal to consume it.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:

Update: Amendment 64 passed in Colorado.

I’m ready to get a Rocky Mountain High
 
Flag Post

Colorado is one of the most boring states I’ve ever driven through, those people need weed like New York needs power. I don’t think I could bring myself to live there even for that.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by TheBSG:

Colorado is one of the most boring states I’ve ever driven through, those people need weed like New York needs power. I don’t think I could bring myself to live there even for that.

Well, to each his own. I think CO’s gorgeous, and I’ve had quite a few good times here. It’s even kind of influential, being centrally located and showing up here and there in popular culture.

 
Flag Post

No, I’m being a bit facetious, I agree it’s quite a beautiful state.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:

Update: Amendment 64 passed in Colorado.

And Washington legalises it also; Oregon votes against it being legalised.
 
Flag Post

which brings me to another point: if state borders made more sense from a cultural/geological perspective, it wouldn’t be Washinton legalizing it both in the low parts and the mountain parts, and Oregon keeping it illegal both low and high; but instead you could have a seperate state for the low regions where it would be legalised which is where the people actually want it to be legal; while the conservative Mountain region would keep it illegal just as they want to.

but no, they don’t make any sense. so now people are stuck with a majority decision of an outside majority.

 
Flag Post

they should legalized it, not everyone is lazy when they are high either. so that rules out the whole “losing jobs” thing. weed is a plant just like tobacco…and not near as harmful as alcohol so I dont see the issue.