[Discussion] Economic effects of legalizing Medical Marijuana

[trentva]

more car accidents

[WRXChris]

I can't believe nobody has posted this here, but marijuana is now legal in the state of Colorado for recreational use for anyone 21+... 

[DanGWanG]

Washington too:)

[TheQsanity]

Not sure if any marijuana passing state law will actually be effective for long due from it still being illegal in federal law.

[WRXChris]

Well we're not going to make any progress if we continue to smoke weed and lie about it; saying one thing and doing the opposite is why Romney lost.  You can't deny that this is a big step forward!

[sth]

saying one thing and doing the opposite is why Romney lost

) nicely put.

[singaporean123]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/06/amendment-64-passes-in-co_n_2079899.html

[DanGWanG]

It's happening, right before our eyes.

[Malphas]

I think weed is ****e, to be honest. Do some real drugs, hippies.

[DanGWanG]

Thank you for contributing constructive criticism, ***** **** **** 8** 8** **** ** ** 8* 8** ****.

[YoungMichael88]

Consider Colorado and Washington the testing grounds for now. If all goes well (and I think it will) then you can expect to see other states follow suite in the years to come. Hopefully it happens in Canada now too (not as long as we have the Harper robot sitting in). I think you will see a more financially stable Colorado/Washington because of this and when it works it will be hard for other states to argue its benefits as they do now.  I believe the first $40 million in tax revenue will go to building schools too and I think that might be annually as well so that's a positive. Of course it's still illegal federally so who knows what will happen there.  This is a huge step in the right direction. Come on Canada!

[DanGWanG]

More progress...

http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2012/11/dare_curriculum_drops_marijuana.php

[ekw808]

Do some real drugs, hippies.

Why?

[Malphas]

A: Because they're much more fun.

B: Because I was being facetious.

[TheQsanity]

This will not work for long as it is a contradiction to our constitution and state law must abide under federal law. This will not work till it has been amended into our constitution. Amendments do not easily come  around. 

[funkymeeba]

I was unaware it was a contradiction to our constitution.

[fohat.digs]

Article I, Section 8 "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States"

Article VI says that "The Authority of the United States shall be the supreme Law of the Land"

and the 14th Amendment might be used, if applied in reverse, here:

"No State shall make of enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States"

- if it is a privilege or immunity to be protected from the evils of the Devil's weed.

[YoungMichael88]

Well it all depends on where Obamas justice department stands in this term. According to a report last summer in GQ, Obama has said he plans to "pivot" on the war against drugs in his second term and that since his days as a senator he has considered the drug war a failure. Now last time a ballot for recreational use of marijuana was considered (California 2010), attorney general Eric Holder issued a "stern letter" voicing his intent to "vigorously enforce" federal drug law. As you know that measure didn't pass anyway. This time around Holder never issued a letter or a statement like he did in 2010 even though he was under public pressure from former DEA administrators and directors of the Office of National Drug Control policy to do so. Many people look at these points as evidence that Obamas justice department MAY ease up on marijuana enforcement. Of course this is all just positive thinking. After all according to federal law there is no such thing as "medicinal marijuana" and we have all witnessed how far that has come. Yes many dispensaries have been shut down by the federal government but the initiative continues to spread at an encouraging rate. Only time will tell. Lots of time.  For now this is just food for thought.

[TheQsanity]

Obama or any president really does not have the power to do that. It's all just politics. The Supreme Court are the people with that power.

[tufty]

Legalise the lot. Everything. Then control and tax the supply line, in the same way tobacco and alcohol are handled (although probably with a 'scrip for 'hard' drugs). Good gear = less medical problems, controlled supply = an idea of the size of the problem, taxed supply = tax income and equitable commerce with (agricultural) suppliers in 3rd world countries, and a boost to local agriculture. Also less police time spent dealing with petty dealers and users, less users and small time dealers spending time in the big house learning to be hardened crims, and so on.

You don't solve anything by putting the control into the hands of criminals. You lot should have learned that during the prohibition era...

[DanGWanG]

Obama or any president really does not have the power to do that. It's all just politics. The Supreme Court are the people with that power.

You have a good point about the Supreme Court.  And actually, with Obama re-elected in a critical time, there is a possibility of putting some democrats on the Supreme Court.  It's been speculated that there will be 1-3 Justice's that will be either dead or retiring during Obama's term, and he will have the option to appoint new ones.  For the first time in 50ish years, we could have a left leaning supreme court.

[TexasFlood]

Here are some numbers on Colorado revenue on "medical" sales.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/us/cities-turn-to-a-crop-for-cash-medical-marijuana.html

We'll have to see what happens now that non-medical use has been legalized there, at least at the state level

[Malphas]

Legalise the lot. Everything. Then control and tax the supply line, in the same way tobacco and alcohol are handled (although probably with a 'scrip for 'hard' drugs). Good gear = less medical problems, controlled supply = an idea of the size of the problem, taxed supply = tax income and equitable commerce with (agricultural) suppliers in 3rd world countries, and a boost to local agriculture. Also less police time spent dealing with petty dealers and users, less users and small time dealers spending time in the big house learning to be hardened crims, and so on.

You don't solve anything by putting the control into the hands of criminals. You lot should have learned that during the prohibition era...

Yeah, it's a no-brainer but it'll never happen of course. If you ever wanted concrete evidence of this, they should criminalise coffee for a few decades and then sit back and watch how the effects are 90% as harmful as heroin, once dealers are cutting smuggled Nescafe with dimethocaine and selling it for $100 a cup.

[keyboardlover]

I have changed my mind a bit on this topic. I tried to explain my thoughts about this on reddit but got downvoted into oblivion - before eventually getting upvoted once people started to understand the point I was making:

Legalization makes sense. Legalization of ALL substances, to me, makes sense. I don't see any reason why any substance should be illegal. Laws currently don't stop people from attaining any substance that I'm aware of, regardless of age. Hell, I first tried pot and alcohol at 13 and I'm sure many other people have too.

Regulation, on the other hand, does NOT make sense to me. Taxation is theft and therefore, taxation of marijuana is ALSO theft. Also, it means that the government is going to have a lot of control over the substance you are ingesting, which is arguably just as dangerous as not knowing the source you are getting it from in the first place.

Regulation/Taxation in general are dangerous because they allow the government to create arbitrary laws which expand control. That's how things like war and poverty get created.

So, I am ALL for legalization of marijuana and ALL other substances, but I am 100% AGAINST regulation. I think that the government at this point is sort of tricking marijuana users into thinking they are doing a good thing for them, yet all they are really doing is expanding control.

[DanGWanG]

Regulation, on the other hand, does NOT make sense to me. Taxation is theft and therefore, taxation of marijuana is ALSO theft. Also, it means that the government is going to have a lot of control over the substance you are ingesting, which is arguably just as dangerous as not knowing the source you are getting it from in the first place.

I think there's always going to be 2 opinions to every topic.  Regulation to the producer is definitely something the current pot growers are not exactly too happy about.  Like a lot of American farmers who grow soy beans, it's regulated and are provided seeds from the government to grow, which they have to return/destroy once it has fully flourished and harvested.  It's complete bull****.

A lot of people are just going to prefer industrial manufactured, government tampered/sourced marijuana just like cigarettes because of the cheaper price.  But the good news is, there will ALWAYS be a large market of organic smokers and hobby smokers who will continue to grow their OG stuff.  As a consumer, it's all great news honestly.  Legalization, cheaper prices overall, recreational use, etc.  I can see where you're coming from, but it has to be taxed because we live in a capitalist society and that's the sacrifice growers will have to endure for legalization.  For large companies (probably Marlboro), it's a win-win for them no matter how you look at it though.  They will be taxed, but who cares, they will own the market.

[keyboardlover]

There is such a thing as capitalism without taxation, though. Which is much preferred to me. Regulation is essentially equivalent to market manipulation. That's why if you enter into the stock market as a first-time investor, you're f***ed. Or the housing market these days, most likely. It's also why it's very difficult for private institutions to keep tuition costs low. You can't compete with free!

And you can't compete with competition that doesn't even have to balance a budget to stay in business.

[DanGWanG]

A lot of that is assumption and honestly we don't really know what's going to happen or how it will be carried out.  A lot of consumers and growers are actually FOR taxation to help remedy the US/state deficit as a reason (read sales pitch) to even be considered for legalization.  The government will just say, well the people wanted to tax marijuana to help boost the economy so...yeah.

[keyboardlover]

Lol. If taxation was a cure for debt, it would work!

But it isn't, so it doesn't. And it never will, so long as it exists.

[DanGWanG]

It's working at the county level for California currently, and those are only medicinal sales.

[keyboardlover]

Oh, California has a balanced budget? I was not aware of that.

[alaricljs]

I think he means that having more money doesn't fix debt problems.  It's true.  Having more money show up will typically exacerbate the debt issue in the long run.

You don't learn how to appropriately use your budget by growing available money to fit what you've been spending.

[DanGWanG]

I mean that's a very vague concept of what a balanced budget is.  California has a deficit higher than most other states and are using taxation as a means of generating revenue to balance that budget.  No need for sarcasm in this thread, I'm just sharing my opinion, listening to yours and throwing out additional information.

Regardless if it works or not, it's seems to be one of the only ways to convince higher ups (and mass majority) that it should be legalized.

[keyboardlover]

Well yea, of course propaganda can be and is used to convince people that all KINDS of things make sense. Like bombing innocent people in foreign countries, one of many evils our taxes pay for. So, I don't think that's a good thing.

[DanGWanG]

I also agree, it's not a good thing by any means.  But one thing I'm confident it will help control is criminal activity revolving around Marijuana and it's sales.  Even if it is propaganda, I really do HOPE it works out. I would really like to see a redirection of our justice system be used against more serious crime and violent people.

[keyboardlover]

Well, no right cuz it's going to legitimize the criminal activity. The DEA raids, drones, illegal wiretapping/search and seizure, etc...

A redirection of our justice system is the same as the argument against taxation - if it worked it would work. We have a monopoly over the legitimate use force as well as over arbitration. So expecting that to change in a positive way isn't really possible.

[DanGWanG]

Propaganda negatively affects criminals too though =)  I'm staying optimistic and it's the only way I can cope with all the negatives I've been hearing lately.

[keyboardlover]

I get that - just want to let people know that it ain't all roses though.

And I get a bit annoyed when I see stoners herp derping over it cuz like most things, they have no idea what they're giving away in exchange for that "free stuff" they voted for.

[DanGWanG]

Lots of those stoners though are between the ages of 14-19.  I, in no way, advocate usage before a fully developed adult brain...which I guess is 21 in the US, lol.

Those stoners are just dumb, totally agreed.

[keyboardlover]

It's like "Let's all move to Colorado mah broskies! Don't forget the bongos and Phish albums!"

Cool, rock on brother. Let me know how your first house raid goes.

[DanGWanG]

I won't lie, for recreational consumption, I wanted to move there solely for that reason.  Really I think the only people going to get raided are industrial level growers, but again, just trying to stay optimistic.  There's already parts of the US (I experienced this with JwaZ just the other day in SF), where recreationally consuming marijuana in the public is 99% OK, as long you're not taunting a police officer or something.

[keyboardlover]

At the end of the day, 99% ok still means that there is a gun to someone's head. And anyone who moves is legitimizing tyranny; like "if I don't like the rules then I can just move". Well the native americans didn't really have that choice. Nor do the Syrians or really anyone else in the middle east who is suffering under tyranny right now. Why should I move? They're the ones who suck.

[DanGWanG]

I want to eat a brownie made by Paula Deen with Marijuana in it

Becareful what you wish for!

[DanGWanG]

On-topic:  http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22162414/hickenlooper-signs-proclamation-making-pot-legalization-official

Hickenlooper, a Democrat, signed the proclamation that officially places Amendment 64 into the constitution. And he announced the creation of a task force to attempt to work out the many legal and logistical details that must accompany the amendment, which makes the use, possession and limited home-growing of marijuana legal for anyone 21 and older

[Input Nirvana]

After my failed experience with investing in iGrow, I think it should be decriminalized in one fashion or another, but the penalties of driving or other 'incidents' should be horrifically prohibitive. My idea is mostly to remove most of the hard crime element, operating in the shadows, opportunist money-makers, petty jail and fines, and overall hassles. It will take the high profit out of it, which for medical and crime reasons would be beneficial.

[keyboardlover]

After my failed experience with investing in iGrow, I think it should be decriminalized in one fashion or another, but the penalties of driving or other 'incidents' should be horrifically prohibitive. My idea is mostly to remove most of the hard crime element, operating in the shadows, opportunist money-makers, petty jail and fines, and overall hassles. It will take the high profit out of it, which for medical and crime reasons would be beneficial.

I disagree with that too. I don't think DUI or DWI laws that we have NOW are even effective. I should know. One of my friends got three of them and knew enough about law to make a complete joke of the legal system. In the end he didn't get charged with any of them. If people are going to do dumb ****, they're going to do it regardless of the law.

And what people gotta realize is that legalization is fine but regulation causes big problems. The big profits will become that of the government and they will use the regulation to expand control. They are already doing it now with raids, wiretapping, illegal search/seizure, etc. So the criminal aspect of it will be legitimized because it's always OK with the government does it!

[keyboardlover]

I hate being right so often:

http://www.naturalnews.com/038297_marijuana_decriminalization_Colorado_federal_government.html

[alaricljs]

I'm a bit lost, that's just an opinion piece... I see no proof of action on the part of the federal government.

[keyboardlover]

I guess the whole idea is that the structure is in place for it to happen...but fair enough.

[noisyturtle]

I am really highly anticipating stores to open next year in WA. This way I don't have to overcome my crippling social anxiety and trying to get a hook up from random strangers, but instead just weirding them out. People seem bothered when I vomit on them out of fear then curl into a ball on the street apologizing. Now I can just go into a store with minimal human interaction and buy some green, hooray .

[keyboardlover]

I would much prefer to go to a grower I actually know and get it straight them them, bypassing the whole regulation B.S.