http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c … 16651R.DTL
A small step in the right direction.
now, legalize it and tax it O.
getrdone.
A small step in the right direction.
now, legalize it and tax it O.
getrdone.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Change I like (U.S. to yield marijuana jurisdiction to states)
I can't see how this can be bad.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again. No one has tried to refute it yet.
If it is legalized and taxed, people will still buy the illegally grown stuff if it's cheaper, which it will be. The amount of illegally grown Marijuana will greatly increase, because police will stop wasting time trying to shut down marijuana growers. The type of government he is trying to push will be weakened by the legalization of marijuana. Some money would be made from taxes, but not enough to make up for the cost of medical care and the jobless potheads this would create.
If it is legalized and taxed, people will still buy the illegally grown stuff if it's cheaper, which it will be. The amount of illegally grown Marijuana will greatly increase, because police will stop wasting time trying to shut down marijuana growers. The type of government he is trying to push will be weakened by the legalization of marijuana. Some money would be made from taxes, but not enough to make up for the cost of medical care and the jobless potheads this would create.
Ding ding ding.Deadmonkiefart wrote:
I've said this before, and I'll say it again. No one has tried to refute it yet.
If it is legalized and taxed, people will still buy the illegally grown stuff if it's cheaper, which it will be. The amount of illegally grown Marijuana will greatly increase, because police will stop wasting time trying to shut down marijuana growers. The type of government he is trying to push will be weakened by the legalization of marijuana. Some money would be made from taxes, but not enough to make up for the cost of medical care and the jobless potheads this would create.
This is just more incentive for the illegal trade to grow. It's kinda like having a ban on blue cars, and then painting all cars blue and taxing them. What would you rather want? The cheap, untraceable, illegally made car, or the expensive, taxed legal car? Would you be at all afraid of selling the former?
Last edited by mikkel (2009-02-27 09:57:21)
YES! The states would not know what to do with all the revenue from this. Plus, personally I would pay double what the going rate is for it to be legal and always be Top notch quality.ATG wrote:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/02/27/MN2016651R.DTL
A small step in the right direction.
now, legalize it and tax it O.
getrdone.
Small minds. I hope California legalizes the shit and Oregon creates law in which cars and property can be seized from people busted with Pot. This and huge fines would generate huge Oregon revenue and send the pot heads to Kalifornia the bankrupt social state of stupid policies.
I could just picture all the cars and property seized at the Oregon/Kali border. Huge revenue for the state Long live the pot head.
I could just picture all the cars and property seized at the Oregon/Kali border. Huge revenue for the state Long live the pot head.
Last edited by Lotta_Drool (2009-02-27 10:26:01)
Dispensaries are generally cheaper from what Ive heard, along with the added benefit of carrying a medi card means you wont get in trouble with the cops, though there are still limitations on the amounts you can carry. Heard that NJ now allows you to have 6 plants and 8 ounces on you at all times, can also smoke at any designated cigarette smoking spot as well.
So you just cruise around with pot plants and a personal stash of 8 ounces? I don't think NJ is that liberal.Commie Killer wrote:
Dispensaries are generally cheaper from what Ive heard, along with the added benefit of carrying a medi card means you wont get in trouble with the cops, though there are still limitations on the amounts you can carry. Heard that NJ now allows you to have 6 plants and 8 ounces on you at all times, can also smoke at any designated cigarette smoking spot as well.
Plants are supposed to be at your house. Im just talking second hand though, I havent heard anything about this except from my friend(whose dad lives in NJ).SGT_Dicklewicz wrote:
So you just cruise around with pot plants and a personal stash of 8 ounces? I don't think NJ is that liberal.Commie Killer wrote:
Dispensaries are generally cheaper from what Ive heard, along with the added benefit of carrying a medi card means you wont get in trouble with the cops, though there are still limitations on the amounts you can carry. Heard that NJ now allows you to have 6 plants and 8 ounces on you at all times, can also smoke at any designated cigarette smoking spot as well.
Hippies are a section of society who have got away with paying no taxes for years.
Seeing as proper stonners spend most of their time sitting on their asses claiming benefits, this is a way of clawing back money from them. Tax it.
Seeing as proper stonners spend most of their time sitting on their asses claiming benefits, this is a way of clawing back money from them. Tax it.
ill believe it when i see it
What are you even talking about? Since when are "hippies" tax exempt? Are they their own religion now?JahManRed wrote:
Hippies are a section of society who have got away with paying no taxes for years.
This^SGT_Dicklewicz wrote:
YES! The states would not know what to do with all the revenue from this. Plus, personally I would pay double what the going rate is for it to be legal and always be Top notch quality.ATG wrote:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/02/27/MN2016651R.DTL
A small step in the right direction.
now, legalize it and tax it O.
getrdone.
He means no taxes on the thousands per year the spend on dope.DrPeePeeFace wrote:
What are you even talking about? Since when are "hippies" tax exempt? Are they their own religion now?JahManRed wrote:
Hippies are a section of society who have got away with paying no taxes for years.
Except the ( in effect ) tax we pay to the cartels.
O right, I agree w/ ATG and Dickwicz though. Pay a little more for a sure thing that's also legal, sounds good to me.ATG wrote:
He means no taxes on the thousands per year the spend on dope.DrPeePeeFace wrote:
What are you even talking about? Since when are "hippies" tax exempt? Are they their own religion now?JahManRed wrote:
Hippies are a section of society who have got away with paying no taxes for years.
Except the ( in effect ) tax we pay to the cartels.
It'd free up the jails if it were legalized, that's for sure.
If it goes up to the states deciding it'll just end up in the Supreme Court and they'll decide.
Utter nonsense.mikkel wrote:
Ding ding ding.Deadmonkiefart wrote:
I've said this before, and I'll say it again. No one has tried to refute it yet.
If it is legalized and taxed, people will still buy the illegally grown stuff if it's cheaper, which it will be. The amount of illegally grown Marijuana will greatly increase, because police will stop wasting time trying to shut down marijuana growers. The type of government he is trying to push will be weakened by the legalization of marijuana. Some money would be made from taxes, but not enough to make up for the cost of medical care and the jobless potheads this would create.
This is just more incentive for the illegal trade to grow. It's kinda like having a ban on blue cars, and then painting all cars blue and taxing them. What would you rather want? The cheap, untraceable, illegally made car, or the expensive, taxed legal car? Would you be at all afraid of selling the former?
First off there is no precedent for that. Whereas there is a precedent for for the illegal trade totally disappearing in countries where it has been (essentially) legalised. Whenever a substance traded on the black market is legalised, the black market for that substance dries up substantially. What you are arguing is the opposite of what history shows us to be the case.
Is this an extra special case that will be different to all the other black market traded substances? No. It isn't.
Convenience, quality and availability are what matters to stoners. Price is secondary. If you can walk to a shop at the end of your road and buy some weed - then that is a going to be a very, very big plus point. Legal weed delivery services could make massive amounts of profit - taxable profit.
I'd like to see some numbers on how many people are in prison because of pot alone.Poseidon wrote:
It'd free up the jails if it were legalized, that's for sure.
I'm guessing the number is fairly low, since possession of "personal" amounts is at most a misdemeanor in most states.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
It's mostly dealers who are taking up the space in jails IIRC. Users rarely get jail time, and a low amount if any because as you said, it's a misdemeanor. Dunno if it's class A or class B though.FEOS wrote:
I'd like to see some numbers on how many people are in prison because of pot alone.Poseidon wrote:
It'd free up the jails if it were legalized, that's for sure.
I'm guessing the number is fairly low, since possession of "personal" amounts is at most a misdemeanor in most states.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fir … Background
Last edited by DoctaStrangelove (2009-02-27 18:30:40)
Dealers generally have more sending them to prison than just large amounts of mary jane.Poseidon wrote:
It's mostly dealers who are taking up the space in jails IIRC. Users rarely get jail time, and a low amount if any because as you said, it's a misdemeanor. Dunno if it's class A or class B though.FEOS wrote:
I'd like to see some numbers on how many people are in prison because of pot alone.Poseidon wrote:
It'd free up the jails if it were legalized, that's for sure.
I'm guessing the number is fairly low, since possession of "personal" amounts is at most a misdemeanor in most states.
Last edited by FEOS (2009-02-27 18:32:03)
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
I agree here. Since when does anyone run a still or an illegal brewery...? Sure folks brew their own but the black market for booze ?Bertster7 wrote:
(...)
Whereas there is a precedent for for the illegal trade totally disappearing in countries where it has been (essentially) legalised. Whenever a substance traded on the black market is legalised, the black market for that substance dries up substantially. What you are arguing is the opposite of what history shows us to be the case.
.
Kinda disappeared with prohibition
IF it were legalized It would be cheaper imo. It's such an easy crop to produce, the sanctioned, legal producers would soak up the market fast. If they put out a quality product, who will go to any 'backdoor' seller to get an alternative ? A small tax on the many thousands spent on it wont deter people.
Part of the excessive cost of the 'premium' stuff right now is the huge risk the grow operation has. If I want a plant, yea I could grow one ..for personal use, pretty easily. But the people that set up a high quality/quantity grow in their basement or whatever are spending money to get it started and then risking a manufacturing illegal substances charge - it depends I think on what state you are in, but that is usually a much more serious legal problem than just dealing.
Like others said though, I'll believe it when I see it.
It can't be done state by state, its either national or not.
Look at the situation with Mexico, they don't have the resources or will to control it there, and it floods the whole US.
There are always going to be a small number of dipsticks who are going to use it, but there is no merit in letting the rest of the population think its safe and healthy.
If it were less harmful I'd say legalise it.
Let people grow their own in limited quantities and keep trade illegal.
If you're really too dumb or lazy to grow the easiest grown plant on earth then you probably shouldn't be taking decisions on self-medication.
Look at the situation with Mexico, they don't have the resources or will to control it there, and it floods the whole US.
There are always going to be a small number of dipsticks who are going to use it, but there is no merit in letting the rest of the population think its safe and healthy.
If it were less harmful I'd say legalise it.
Let people grow their own in limited quantities and keep trade illegal.
If you're really too dumb or lazy to grow the easiest grown plant on earth then you probably shouldn't be taking decisions on self-medication.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Easiest grown plant on earth lol. You dont know much about marijuana do you?Dilbert_X wrote:
It can't be done state by state, its either national or not.
Look at the situation with Mexico, they don't have the resources or will to control it there, and it floods the whole US.
There are always going to be a small number of dipsticks who are going to use it, but there is no merit in letting the rest of the population think its safe and healthy.
If it were less harmful I'd say legalise it.
Let people grow their own in limited quantities and keep trade illegal.
If you're really too dumb or lazy to grow the easiest grown plant on earth then you probably shouldn't be taking decisions on self-medication.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Change I like (U.S. to yield marijuana jurisdiction to states)