Decriminalized in Massachusetts. $100- ticket for under 1 ounce. No criminal record, no jail, no tying up the courts with the time and expense of prosecuting this minor infraction.
Speaking of Massachusetts, our new Senator Brown broke ranks with the Republican party and voted for the recent jobs bill. Hmmm. Have to say I'm listening closer to him now. Will he be someone who can bridge the ideological gap dividing Washington and judge bills on their merit?
Now THAT"'S what I'm talking about! Maybe my subject should have read DECRIMINALIZE MARIJUANA.
Thanks florence151
Exactly, and the only real benefit of this scenario would be for security or well-being/safety but the people who do these things do not care about this matter, as they wouldn't be in this area if they did.
That's what I wonder. Especailly in a legalized scenario there would be increased competition, which would mean lower profit margins, which would mean if you are a grower/seller and you can make some extra cash by not paying taxes on something you are selling in secret why wouldn't you.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Exactly, and the only real benefit of this scenario would be for security or well-being/safety but the people who do these things do not care about this matter, as they wouldn't be in this area if they did.
Not to mention right now people who are running huge operations are probably already laundering their money, so it is probably already being taxed at least once before it can be clean and used as legitimate money. So for those people legalizing and taxing wouldn't create an additional tax revenue.
I think they should totally legalize it, but add the same excise taxes as they do for liquor. Making it legal would, in a sense, transfer a huge portion of the profits from the dealers to the state/local taxing authorities (via the taxes).
The prices that dealers charge have a built-in added profit because of the risk involved, so, if legalized, the prices would probably go down, or at worst, stay the same.
I think they should totally legalize it, but add the same excise taxes as they do for liquor. Making it legal would, in a sense, transfer a huge portion of the profits from the dealers to the state/local taxing authorities (via the taxes).
Except as has been mentioned the dealers probably wouldn't pay the taxes. It is easy to tax liquor since it is generally produced by large or at least medium sized corporations at fixed sites and sold in legitimate places like liquor stores. Pot can be grown by some guy with some lights in his basement. How do you get him to pay his taxes? And if you are using law enforcement people to chase down tax cheats, it kind of cuts into the whole "save money by not having to enforce the law" concept.
The prices that dealers charge have a built-in added profit because of the risk involved, so, if legalized, the prices would probably go down, or at worst, stay the same.
Price would probably go down because supply would probably go up. But if prices are dropping then this is all the more reason why the people selling probably wouldn't pay tax on their sales.
I think they should totally legalize it, but add the same excise taxes as they do for liquor. Making it legal would, in a sense, transfer a huge portion of the profits from the dealers to the state/local taxing authorities (via the taxes).
The prices that dealers charge have a built-in added profit because of the risk involved, so, if legalized, the prices would probably go down, or at worst, stay the same.
if it's legalized for medical only then I think the price will jump quite a bit.
But why would people who currently sell or use drugs, and already disregard the law and in some terms their own well-being and safety, all of a sudden want to work through the government or some official industry? What is the benefit to them in this scenario?
Maybe I’m not being clear. I’m talking about letting everyone grow their own. You’d think that most users would either grow their own for free (or the cost of a grow license), or know someone well who was growing themselves….the market would eat itself. No benefit to the big dealers/commercial growers; they’re cut out in this scenario.
Exactly, and the only real benefit of this scenario would be for security or well-being/safety but the people who do these things do not care about this matter, as they wouldn't be in this area if they did.
Not to mention right now people who are running huge operations are probably already laundering their money, so it is probably already being taxed at least once before it can be clean and used as legitimate money. So for those people legalizing and taxing wouldn't create an additional tax revenue.
I would guess that very very little weed money (percentage-wise) is being laundered. It’s not necessary until you’re into multi-million dollar values, and the bulk of the people who operate at that level (outside of shady government and law enforcement), are members of organized crime…organized crime tends to use weed as international trade bait for harder drugs…in other words…if it’s bein laundered, it’s likely being done in tax-sheltered countries, or the hard drug source countries (Afghanistan, Columbia etc)…
Decriminalized in Massachusetts. $100- ticket for under 1 ounce. No criminal record, no jail, no tying up the courts with the time and expense of prosecuting this minor infraction.
Decrim bills are hugely hypocritical…they decrease possession penalties while usually increasing manufacture/distribution penalties. How does that make sense? How do you get your 1 ounce without dealing with someone who’s breaking the law? So you have 28 grams, he has 29…it’s fair for him to go to jail, but not you? This scenario DOES create more competition on the black market.
Maybe I’m not being clear. I’m talking about letting everyone grow their own. You’d think that most users would either grow their own for free (or the cost of a grow license), or know someone well who was growing themselves….the market would eat itself. No benefit to the big dealers/commercial growers; they’re cut out in this scenario.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
What people need to figure out is that these drugs will never be legal... if anything we need to adjust the justice system to properly correct the penalties and long term criminalization/treatment programs of those who get caught. And yes, as goose points out, it turns into a socio-economic project to sweep the poor minorities to jail.
A defeatist attitude only empowers those employing bad policy.
I dont think there should be ANY penalities for drug use.
Tax and regulate weed via growing permits only...while I feel that concerns about driving and working impaired are grossly exaggerated, I strongly feel that they need to develop more practical testing for mj impairment. If these are major concerns, a test that detects use in the past several weeks (essentially testing for ANY use, not impairment) is not fair to anyone.
I support legalization of everything else too...
Tax and regulate every other drug similarly to alcohol, with ALL proceeds (and budget savings realized by ending the war on drugs) going directly to education/harm reduction, and healthcare programs.
Except like I mentioned in a previous post, how do you get the sellers to pay their taxes? I mean if someone today has a grow op set up with the lights and all the equipment and they are making money dealing. If marijuana was legalized tomorrow how exactly would you enforce the law so that that the dealers pay their taxes? I mean this is something that is already pretty much done in secret and its not like dealers would be writing out receipts. It would be like me selling my couch to a friend and then the government thinking I would claim the money I made as income.
There is no way to fully collect taxes on the dealers' revenue, but if legalized, more legit vendors will pop-up, and hopefully, users will buy from the legit vendors. To help ensure proper tax collection, the govt would have to pass a law and make the penalty for being an "unlicensed vendor" very high. Same principal as the liquor industry.
0
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
*LEGALIZE IT* then TAX IT.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
This does not happen in any other industry..so why would we assume it would be so with this?
But what is a comparable industry? What other self-perpetuating product can be manufactured, in a closet, in large enough quantities to supply yourself, and your family and friends?
I realize my scenario is a pipe dream ….the only way the average non-smoker, after decades of anti-drug programming, would go for legalization is to be enticed by dollar signs (taxes)…
JOEJOEJOE is right that we’d have to hugely crack down on illegit suppliers…This does nothing to address one of my main problems with prohibition: strict regulation and control of a PLANT….
Still, if it’s going to be legalized and taxed, we better allow growing for personal use (similar to non-commercial home-brewing/distilling in the alcohol industry) – if that’s the case, sign me up. But if you’re just going to allow the government to dictate the market 100%?...no thanks.
Not just for medical use, although that would be a start for the 36 states that don't. Anyone over the age of 21 can buy gallons of booze. Pot is FAR less harmful to the body and the brain than alcohol. I know that fun is often poked at "stoners". And while moderation is always the key, having been around both, I prefer the company of stoners to that of drunks.
. . .I'm just saying
i hear you ... and screw moderation too... i've spent my teen years and thereafter, stoned on hash, and not to "escape" from shit either ... rather I've always felt, and delved deep into everythin more due to it... and ultimately for the better...
Not just for medical use, although that would be a start for the 36 states that don't. Anyone over the age of 21 can buy gallons of booze. Pot is FAR less harmful to the body and the brain than alcohol. I know that fun is often poked at "stoners". And while moderation is always the key, having been around both, I prefer the company of stoners to that of drunks.
. . .I'm just saying
i hear you ... and screw moderation too... i've spent my teen years and thereafter, stoned on hash, and not to "escape" from shit either ... rather I've always felt, and delved deep into everythin more due to it... and ultimately for the better...
Not just for medical use, although that would be a start for the 36 states that don't. Anyone over the age of 21 can buy gallons of booze. Pot is FAR less harmful to the body and the brain than alcohol. I know that fun is often poked at "stoners". And while moderation is always the key, having been around both, I prefer the company of stoners to that of drunks.
. . .I'm just saying
i hear you ... and screw moderation too... i've spent my teen years and thereafter, stoned on hash, and not to "escape" from shit either ... rather I've always felt, and delved deep into everythin more due to it... and ultimately for the better...
ALL THINGS IN MODERATION.....INCLUDING MODERATION
well that's a nice twisted statement which i interpret to mean screw moderaion:) i guess livin life in the extreme just makes more sense to me... else you end up not really feeling or experiencin fuck all... whether love, sorrow, joy, pain, madness, and everythin else... hell, that;s just me
Also, albeit marijuana may not currently have some terrible record of effects like other drugs or vices, but I'm sure if we legalized it in some fashion it would be abused by our society to the point it would have serious repercussions.
I realize my scenario is a pipe dream ….the only way the average non-smoker, after decades of anti-drug programming, would go for legalization is to be enticed by dollar signs (taxes)…
JOEJOEJOE is right that we’d have to hugely crack down on illegit suppliers…This does nothing to address one of my main problems with prohibition: strict regulation and control of a PLANT….
Still, if it’s going to be legalized and taxed, we better allow growing for personal use (similar to non-commercial home-brewing/distilling in the alcohol industry) – if that’s the case, sign me up. But if you’re just going to allow the government to dictate the market 100%?...no thanks.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Also, albeit marijuana may not currently have some terrible record of effects like other drugs or vices, but I'm sure if we legalized it in some fashion it would be abused by our society to the point it would have serious repercussions.
I realize my scenario is a pipe dream ….the only way the average non-smoker, after decades of anti-drug programming, would go for legalization is to be enticed by dollar signs (taxes)…
JOEJOEJOE is right that we’d have to hugely crack down on illegit suppliers…This does nothing to address one of my main problems with prohibition: strict regulation and control of a PLANT….
Still, if it’s going to be legalized and taxed, we better allow growing for personal use (similar to non-commercial home-brewing/distilling in the alcohol industry) – if that’s the case, sign me up. But if you’re just going to allow the government to dictate the market 100%?...no thanks.
you don't think it is already abused in our society?
when it comes to drug use there are two classifications 'abuse' or 'dependence'
and a report just came out this week that more older adults are abusing pot more now then ever
I meant more in terms of negative effects and results. Other drugs have more crime, proven health issues, od's, drunk driving and all the other results... marijuana doesn't have these kind of effects or atleast anywhere near the same level or degree. Of course "abuse" or "dependence" are negative, but you could probably say the same of prescription meds as well.
you don't think it is already abused in our society?
when it comes to drug use there are two classifications 'abuse' or 'dependence'
and a report just came out this week that more older adults are abusing pot more now then ever
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I meant more in terms of negative effects and results. Other drugs have more crime, proven health issues, od's, drunk driving and all the other results... marijuana doesn't have these kind of effects or atleast anywhere near the same level or degree. Of course "abuse" or "dependence" are negative, but you could probably say the same of prescription meds as well.
There is no way to fully collect taxes on the dealers' revenue, but if legalized, more legit vendors will pop-up, and hopefully, users will buy from the legit vendors. To help ensure proper tax collection, the govt would have to pass a law and make the penalty for being an "unlicensed vendor" very high. Same principal as the liquor industry.
Execpt any new legit growers would have start up costs that the illegal growers would have already paid for. So if someone was buying from a legit source they would have to pay extra both to cover the taxes and to cover the overhead and start up costs. The idea of having penalties for unlicensed vendors would just mean all those law enforcement people would stop with the "war on drugs" and start the "war on drug sellers who cheat on their taxes".
Yes I do think that, but comparatively, the serious repercussions of marijuana are not anywhere near those of other drugs or even alcohol. And just to be clear, I do not think we should legalize any drugs, but if we did, what would the effects be? Possible long term health issues, probably somewhere along the lines of minor ones smoking cigarettes cause right? Or perhaps it becomes widespread and accepted for use, and we have a generation of lazy, infertile, stoners? But other than that, what would the real effects be compared to those of hard drugs or even cigarettes and alcohol? That's the point I was trying to convey. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough.
I meant more in terms of negative effects and results. Other drugs have more crime, proven health issues, od's, drunk driving and all the other results... marijuana doesn't have these kind of effects or atleast anywhere near the same level or degree. Of course "abuse" or "dependence" are negative, but you could probably say the same of prescription meds as well.
but I'm sure if we legalized it in some fashion it would be abused by our society to the point it would have serious repercussions.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
There is no way to fully collect taxes on the dealers' revenue, but if legalized, more legit vendors will pop-up, and hopefully, users will buy from the legit vendors. To help ensure proper tax collection, the govt would have to pass a law and make the penalty for being an "unlicensed vendor" very high. Same principal as the liquor industry.
Execpt any new legit growers would have start up costs that the illegal growers would have already paid for. So if someone was buying from a legit source they would have to pay extra both to cover the taxes and to cover the overhead and start up costs. The idea of having penalties for unlicensed vendors would just mean all those law enforcement people would stop with the "war on drugs" and start the "war on drug sellers who cheat on their taxes".
Kel, I don't think you get it. If you could buy your weed at the corner store or pharmacy would you continue to buy from your shady dealer? There would just need to be fines or criminality in growing your own for taxation to work.
It would be easy to tax. And if the government ran the industry there would be some crazy good weed. I don't even smoke weed anymore and I find the whole idea kind of exciting.
There is no way to fully collect taxes on the dealers' revenue, but if legalized, more legit vendors will pop-up, and hopefully, users will buy from the legit vendors. To help ensure proper tax collection, the govt would have to pass a law and make the penalty for being an "unlicensed vendor" very high. Same principal as the liquor industry.
Execpt any new legit growers would have start up costs that the illegal growers would have already paid for. So if someone was buying from a legit source they would have to pay extra both to cover the taxes and to cover the overhead and start up costs. The idea of having penalties for unlicensed vendors would just mean all those law enforcement people would stop with the "war on drugs" and start the "war on drug sellers who cheat on their taxes".
Kel, I don't think you get it. If you could buy your weed at the corner store or pharmacy would you continue to buy from your shady dealer? There would just need to be fines or criminality in growing your own for taxation to work.
But if the shady dealer can sell for way cheaper because of no taxes and minimal overhead and already has an operation and connections set up, what motivation is there for his customers to go to a corner store? In Ontario tax free illegal cigarettes are a huge market because they are easy to get and way cheaper from getting them from a store. And the whole illegal cigarettes black market has way less of a built in infrastructure compared to what grow ops and pot dealers have now.
I see your point but at the same time, the cost of marijuana will decrease if it went through legality.. the cost of cigarettes has risen mostly because of tax.. not because it is hard to get. So even at worst case scenario, the legalized marijuana would be at the same cost through legal channels compared to the scenario your describing.
But if the shady dealer can sell for way cheaper because of no taxes and minimal overhead and already has an operation and connections set up, what motivation is there for his customers to go to a corner store? In Ontario tax free illegal cigarettes are a huge market because they are easy to get and way cheaper from getting them from a store. And the whole illegal cigarettes black market has way less of a built in infrastructure compared to what grow ops and pot dealers have now.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
you don't think it is already abused in our society?
when it comes to drug use there are two classifications 'abuse' or 'dependence'
and a report just came out this week that more older adults are abusing pot more now then ever
Does it matter?
Whether a user is abusing a drug, especially in the sense you mention it - as half of a black and white definition of drug use, is a subjective opinion. "Dependency" has some science to it at least...but guess what? No physical dependency issues with weed (and before you say it: mental dependency can apply to anything).....
So unless you're willing to apply this to all intoxicating substances, and back it up by supporting prohibition of them...and until we can become this utopian society where anti-intoxication morality has won the evolutionary battle, this approach to the debate is pretty much irrelevant.
And just to be clear, I do not think we should legalize any drugs,
So do you support the prohibition of alcohol? Because if you're worried about repercussions, you should be worried about same with alcohol use, right?
If you don't support legalization after making your admissions, what IS your stance?
do we need stricter enforcement of the war on drugs?
how can you objectively say you don't think we should legalize any drugs, the follow it with this question:
Possible long term health issues, probably somewhere along the lines of minor ones smoking cigarettes cause right? Or perhaps it becomes widespread and accepted for use,
Perhaps it becomes widespread and accepted...perhaps it loses it's rebellious appeal and with all the funding going to education and treatment ( :roll: ) , use goes down....either way, is enforcing your stance with criminalization and imprisonment on such a large portion of the population your idea of justice?
and we have a generation of lazy, infertile, stoners? But other than that, what would the real effects be compared to those of hard drugs or even cigarettes and alcohol? That's the point I was trying to convey. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough.
Your post asks all of these questions in an admission of ignorance... yet this whole post plays devil's advocate in support of your admittedly ignorant opinions.....while using inflammatory language (again) and promoting stereotypes...
Kel, I don't think you get it. If you could buy your weed at the corner store or pharmacy would you continue to buy from your shady dealer? There would just need to be fines or criminality in growing your own for taxation to work.
But if the shady dealer can sell for way cheaper because of no taxes and minimal overhead and already has an operation and connections set up, what motivation is there for his customers to go to a corner store? In Ontario tax free illegal cigarettes are a huge market because they are easy to get and way cheaper from getting them from a store. And the whole illegal cigarettes black market has way less of a built in infrastructure compared to what grow ops and pot dealers have now.
If weed was legalized in a regulated and commercialized sense, with extra harsh enforcement targeting illegal grows, the current expert pot growers would likely be working for Budweiser or Pfizer or Phillip Morris or whichever fuckin corporate industry was the one that successfully lobbied for the laws to change, within six months. The fact that they have a couple lights and stolen hydro would give them zero advantage once it became a legit industry....pot would be mass-produced and probably filled with toxic chemicals much like tobacco is, in no time.
So again...I could only get behind the legal/tax scenario with a huge amount of personal discretion applied...
I think taking the drug debate from a 'war', to a healthcare issue, only to turn it all over to the corporate interests that supported the war, would be like one step forward, two back...
Sorry if you don't like my comments, but I responded to the issue at hand with the actual notion of if we have society as it is now... but merely added the legalization of marijuana. Perhaps in fantasy land you can dissect my comments in some other manner.. but here, in the US, we have legal markets and industries which encompass the tobacco and alcohol. My comments are based on what we actually do and how we monitor and react as a result. I never said I was for the legalization of drugs, but did ask and comment many ways in which if it did occur, what it may result or look like. Good day sir.
clearly trolling...? :roll:[/quote]
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Sorry if you don't like my comments, but I responded to the issue at hand with the actual notion of if we have society as it is now... but merely added the legalization of marijuana.
The issues you raise are based on the premise that pot use would increase dramatically if it were legalized. While there is conflicting data on this assumption, none of it shows any kind of significant increase....
You could have easily made your points without the 'lazy, infertile stoners' comment. Trolling, plain and simple.
Perhaps in fantasy land you can dissect my comments in some other manner.. but here, in the US, we have legal markets and industries which encompass the tobacco and alcohol. My comments are based on what we actually do and how we monitor and react as a result. I never said I was for the legalization of drugs, but did ask and comment many ways in which if it did occur, what it may result or look like. Good day sir.
huh? I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say in the bolded part.
ok, maybe I overwhelmed you with all the questions...can you answer just the two then:
If you don't support legalization after making your admissions, what IS your stance?
do we need stricter enforcement of the war on drugs?
and feel free to dissect me all you want if I start making contradictory, nonsensical comments.
Please do provide legitimate research data proving this fact.. I'm curious to see it and what it is actually based upon.
Also, your response is merely attacking my comments as if you think I'm against the legalization of this drug. I honestly do not care, but if I had a preference, I would not legalize marijuana or any other current illegal drugs. I think at best we can adjust the criminal aspects of these things though - something I mentioned previously. Not sure why you're saying I'm trolling or similar.
The issues you raise are based on the premise that pot use would increase dramatically if it were legalized. While there is conflicting data on this assumption, none of it shows any kind of significant increase....
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Please do provide legitimate research data proving this fact.. I'm curious to see it and what it is actually based upon.....
I'm talking about studies I've read based on what's been done in the Netherlands. It's too late for me to start looking for them now, but I know that for years, the pro-legalization movement cited the 'Dutch experiment' as proof that use does not increase due to reforms. But...I also read that they clamped down on the coffee shops in Amsterdam in the past few years, partially because new studies had conflicted with that. I honestly don't know who funded which study, nor the local political influences behind any of the findings, but from what I remember, it was not a very significant increase, even if it was legit. I can look for them tomorrow if you are too lazy
Also, your response is merely attacking my comments as if you think I'm against the legalization of this drug. I honestly do not care, but if I had a preference, I would not legalize marijuana or any other current illegal drugs. I think at best we can adjust the criminal aspects of these things though - something I mentioned previously..
holy...re-read what you just typed....do you see what I mean about contradictory statements?
Can you clarify what you mean by adjusting the criminal aspects? You did pay lip service to the notion earlier in the thread, but didn't give any detail other than admitting a need for it.
What adjustments? You either maintain the status quo, with harsher or less severe penalties...or you decrim or legalize. Do you have another option? I 'attack' your opinion because I disagree with it, and feel confident in my reasons for said disagreements. You haven't said anything to change my mind, yet...
Comments
Now THAT"'S what I'm talking about! Maybe my subject should have read DECRIMINALIZE MARIJUANA.
Thanks florence151
"what a long, strange trip it's been"
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Not to mention right now people who are running huge operations are probably already laundering their money, so it is probably already being taxed at least once before it can be clean and used as legitimate money. So for those people legalizing and taxing wouldn't create an additional tax revenue.
The prices that dealers charge have a built-in added profit because of the risk involved, so, if legalized, the prices would probably go down, or at worst, stay the same.
Except as has been mentioned the dealers probably wouldn't pay the taxes. It is easy to tax liquor since it is generally produced by large or at least medium sized corporations at fixed sites and sold in legitimate places like liquor stores. Pot can be grown by some guy with some lights in his basement. How do you get him to pay his taxes? And if you are using law enforcement people to chase down tax cheats, it kind of cuts into the whole "save money by not having to enforce the law" concept.
Price would probably go down because supply would probably go up. But if prices are dropping then this is all the more reason why the people selling probably wouldn't pay tax on their sales.
if it's legalized for medical only then I think the price will jump quite a bit.
Godfather.
I would guess that very very little weed money (percentage-wise) is being laundered. It’s not necessary until you’re into multi-million dollar values, and the bulk of the people who operate at that level (outside of shady government and law enforcement), are members of organized crime…organized crime tends to use weed as international trade bait for harder drugs…in other words…if it’s bein laundered, it’s likely being done in tax-sheltered countries, or the hard drug source countries (Afghanistan, Columbia etc)… Decrim bills are hugely hypocritical…they decrease possession penalties while usually increasing manufacture/distribution penalties. How does that make sense? How do you get your 1 ounce without dealing with someone who’s breaking the law? So you have 28 grams, he has 29…it’s fair for him to go to jail, but not you? This scenario DOES create more competition on the black market.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
There is no way to fully collect taxes on the dealers' revenue, but if legalized, more legit vendors will pop-up, and hopefully, users will buy from the legit vendors. To help ensure proper tax collection, the govt would have to pass a law and make the penalty for being an "unlicensed vendor" very high. Same principal as the liquor industry.
*LEGALIZE IT* then TAX IT.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
I realize my scenario is a pipe dream
JOEJOEJOE is right that we’d have to hugely crack down on illegit suppliers…This does nothing to address one of my main problems with prohibition: strict regulation and control of a PLANT….
Still, if it’s going to be legalized and taxed, we better allow growing for personal use (similar to non-commercial home-brewing/distilling in the alcohol industry) – if that’s the case, sign me up. But if you’re just going to allow the government to dictate the market 100%?...no thanks.
i hear you ... and screw moderation too... i've spent my teen years and thereafter, stoned on hash, and not to "escape" from shit either ... rather I've always felt, and delved deep into everythin more due to it... and ultimately for the better...
ALL THINGS IN MODERATION.....INCLUDING MODERATION
well that's a nice twisted statement which i interpret to mean screw moderaion:) i guess livin life in the extreme just makes more sense to me... else you end up not really feeling or experiencin fuck all... whether love, sorrow, joy, pain, madness, and everythin else... hell, that;s just me
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
you don't think it is already abused in our society?
when it comes to drug use there are two classifications 'abuse' or 'dependence'
and a report just came out this week that more older adults are abusing pot more now then ever
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
you are confusing because this and you say this
Execpt any new legit growers would have start up costs that the illegal growers would have already paid for. So if someone was buying from a legit source they would have to pay extra both to cover the taxes and to cover the overhead and start up costs. The idea of having penalties for unlicensed vendors would just mean all those law enforcement people would stop with the "war on drugs" and start the "war on drug sellers who cheat on their taxes".
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Kel, I don't think you get it. If you could buy your weed at the corner store or pharmacy would you continue to buy from your shady dealer? There would just need to be fines or criminality in growing your own for taxation to work.
It would be easy to tax. And if the government ran the industry there would be some crazy good weed. I don't even smoke weed anymore and I find the whole idea kind of exciting.
But if the shady dealer can sell for way cheaper because of no taxes and minimal overhead and already has an operation and connections set up, what motivation is there for his customers to go to a corner store? In Ontario tax free illegal cigarettes are a huge market because they are easy to get and way cheaper from getting them from a store. And the whole illegal cigarettes black market has way less of a built in infrastructure compared to what grow ops and pot dealers have now.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Does it matter?
Whether a user is abusing a drug, especially in the sense you mention it - as half of a black and white definition of drug use, is a subjective opinion. "Dependency" has some science to it at least...but guess what? No physical dependency issues with weed (and before you say it: mental dependency can apply to anything).....
So unless you're willing to apply this to all intoxicating substances, and back it up by supporting prohibition of them...and until we can become this utopian society where anti-intoxication morality has won the evolutionary battle, this approach to the debate is pretty much irrelevant.
First, you say this:
You then follow with this: So do you support the prohibition of alcohol? Because if you're worried about repercussions, you should be worried about same with alcohol use, right?
If you don't support legalization after making your admissions, what IS your stance?
do we need stricter enforcement of the war on drugs?
how can you objectively say you don't think we should legalize any drugs, the follow it with this question:
Is this where your argument changes from my health to your morality?
Perhaps it becomes widespread and accepted...perhaps it loses it's rebellious appeal and with all the funding going to education and treatment ( :roll: ) , use goes down....either way, is enforcing your stance with criminalization and imprisonment on such a large portion of the population your idea of justice?
Your post asks all of these questions in an admission of ignorance... yet this whole post plays devil's advocate in support of your admittedly ignorant opinions.....while using inflammatory language (again) and promoting stereotypes...
clearly trolling...? :roll:
So again...I could only get behind the legal/tax scenario with a huge amount of personal discretion applied...
I think taking the drug debate from a 'war', to a healthcare issue, only to turn it all over to the corporate interests that supported the war, would be like one step forward, two back...
clearly trolling...? :roll:[/quote]
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
You could have easily made your points without the 'lazy, infertile stoners' comment. Trolling, plain and simple.
huh? I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say in the bolded part.
ok, maybe I overwhelmed you with all the questions...can you answer just the two then:
If you don't support legalization after making your admissions, what IS your stance?
do we need stricter enforcement of the war on drugs?
and feel free to dissect me all you want if I start making contradictory, nonsensical comments.
Also, your response is merely attacking my comments as if you think I'm against the legalization of this drug. I honestly do not care, but if I had a preference, I would not legalize marijuana or any other current illegal drugs. I think at best we can adjust the criminal aspects of these things though - something I mentioned previously. Not sure why you're saying I'm trolling or similar.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I'm talking about studies I've read based on what's been done in the Netherlands. It's too late for me to start looking for them now, but I know that for years, the pro-legalization movement cited the 'Dutch experiment' as proof that use does not increase due to reforms. But...I also read that they clamped down on the coffee shops in Amsterdam in the past few years, partially because new studies had conflicted with that. I honestly don't know who funded which study, nor the local political influences behind any of the findings, but from what I remember, it was not a very significant increase, even if it was legit. I can look for them tomorrow if you are too lazy
holy...re-read what you just typed....do you see what I mean about contradictory statements?
Can you clarify what you mean by adjusting the criminal aspects? You did pay lip service to the notion earlier in the thread, but didn't give any detail other than admitting a need for it.
What adjustments? You either maintain the status quo, with harsher or less severe penalties...or you decrim or legalize. Do you have another option? I 'attack' your opinion because I disagree with it, and feel confident in my reasons for said disagreements. You haven't said anything to change my mind, yet...