Need help with a debate

Interesting theory.
I don't understand how a hemp industry taking over corn in this country has anything to do with the export of corn? Am I misunderstanding the question?
When did they legalize marijuana in Amsterdam? (It's not legal, they just look the other way)

 

refute by telling him that we should make pepsi illegal b/c it takes away from coke's profits. His argument is just a red herring.

 

Hemp would possibly take profit away from the corn industry. From the oils that could be replaced with hemp oil. I don't see how that could affect the corn export. Hemp could take away from the paper and cotton industry, I'm sure other industries also, but it would be replaced with the hemp industry. Still grown by American farmers.

 

Ask him what he's smoking, because marijuana isn't legal in Amsterdam. It's a misdemeanor in The Netherlands to be in possession of marijuana, the coffee shops are also illegal. Their current policy, however, is non-enforcement. Also ask him how the GDP of Amsterdam (a city) dropping, has anything to do with nationwide legalization and the effects of a national economy.

 

I was unaware that the CITY OF Amsterdam exported any crops at all. Once again, IT IS NOT LEGAL THERE, they just do not enforce their marijuana laws.

 

I've never heard that before. I'm pretty sure you can't eat marijuana like corn or wheat. The only thing hemp would affect is the fiber industry, which definitely isn't a big export of the U.S. And Amsterdam is a city, I'm pretty sure there isn't a huge crop industry in the middle of downtown Amsterdam.

 

Well, fiberwise hemp would compete with cotton, linen[raimie], wool and synthetics. It when used as rope is better for some applications than synthetic fibers though it does degrade after prolonged exposure to salt water. It would be expensive to retool to use it, we really do not have a heavy linen/raimie industry in the US so it would stay niche market.

Practically speaking, hemp preparation for spinning is just like linen/raimie - smelly, nasty hard work. It has to be retted, pounded to break the stems then soaked in water until the nonfiberous materials rot away and can be stripped away from the fibers, then the fibers need to be washed, dried, [bleached if wanted white] then spun. It is a *lot* of work. [I did it once to give it a try.Never again, it is easier to raise sheep.]

Hemp oil from the seeds, and hemp flour [a byproduct of making the oil] is very useful. It isn't actually replacing any other products - people seek out specific plant products for specific uses and hemp oil is fairly unique.

Hemp products really have their own niches - it really isn't competing with anything except big pharm and alcohol producing industries. Well, and a bunch of people who can't understand that you shouldn't force your 'morality' on others.

 

Honestly, the bulk fibers are not really being produced in the US for linen and raimie - more and more it is being sourced from India, Southeast Asia and Eastern Europe with the finished fiber being shipped to weaving mills in the US - though as a caveat most of the ramie and linen being made is for the decorators trade. It is still much cheaper to make finished goods [clothing] overseas. My family got out of the mill industry in 1965 [we sold the business and the new owners immediately moved it to North Carolina, and then offshore from what I heard.]

Sort of sums it up.

I think one of the reasons it is being offshored to where it is, is that the fast way to rett the linen fibers is chemical - many second and third world countries are a bit looser on the industrial controls so they can use processes that the US tends to restrict because of the difficulty of waste chemical disposal.

 

You're friend is operating under the assumption we have maximized our use of arable farm land and therefore we would sacrifice corn in order to produce marijuana. This is asinine. He is assuming that corn farmers will stop farming corn. Considering that most marijuana would probably be grown indoors, there would be no need to sacrifice land already being used to cultivate corn. Interestingly enough, around 40% of the corn produced in the US is converted into ethanol for use in gasoline. However, producing ethanol for use as renewable energy has recently come under intense scrutiny due to it's relation to increased food prices and environmental pollution. So most likely, our country will cut back its production of corn ethanol which would mean that surplus corn could be exported. Corn farmers will still grow corn. Tell your friend that legalizing maryjane will not be the downfall of our country.

"The other thing is you think you would save money with legal fees and such but if you look at it you would spend atleast 10 times as much implementing the new laws a security" - Ask him what the fuck that even means. Go ahead, ask him. I really want to know how he can possibly justify that statement. New laws and security? Exactly what kind of security does he think we require? We're growing pot motherfucker, not building nuclear weapons. How does he figure that the tax money saved from not prosecuting the hundreds of thousands of non-violent offenders incarcerated every year for marjiuana related crimes in addition to the money saved from freeing up our prison systems could somehow NOT benefit our economy? Marijuana is a HUGE untapped market that's exploited by criminals and they're the only ones benefitting from its prohibition.

By the way, cities do not have GDPs, countries do. Your friend's assertion that Amsterdam's allowance of marijuana is somehow the cause of the whole country's contraction in economic growth is naive at best. Especially considering this:
"The country has been one of the leading European nations for attracting foreign direct investment and is one of the four largest investors in the US. After 26 years of uninterrupted economic growth, the Netherlands' economy - which is highly open and dependent on foreign trade and financial services - was hard-hit by global economic crisis. Dutch GDP contracted 3.9% in 2009, while exports declined nearly 25% due to a sharp contraction in world demand. The Dutch financial sector has also suffered, due in part to the high exposure of some Dutch banks to U.S. mortgage-backed securities. In response to turmoil in financial markets, the government nationalized two banks and injected billions of dollars into a third, to prevent further systemic risk. The government also sought to boost the domestic economy by accelerating infrastructure programs, offering corporate tax breaks for employers to retain workers, and expanding export credit facilities. The stimulus programs and bank bailouts, however, resulted in a government budget deficit of nearly 4.6% of GDP in 2009 and 5.6% in 2010 that contrasts sharply with a surplus of 0.7% of GDP in 2008"

^ This right here proves your friend has no idea what he's talking about. Here's my source
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/nl.html

The reason you've never heard this dude's argument before is because no one else is dumb enough to try and use it. Now tell him to shut the fuck up.

 

Actually, fiber grade weed is literally that, a weed and it would be able to be grown in more marginal areas that cannot support a regular corn crop, and could also be added to the normal rota of crops in an areas crop rotation sequence. It is only medical grade weed that takes the kid glove treatment, and would probably still tend to be a very specialized hands on grow by people currently growing illegally. The net benefit would actually come to those areas with large commercial illegal grows that make land use by absentee owners and certain national and state parks possible without threat of injury from traps or armed guards. To whit, if the now legal grows can proceed without the paranoia, then the agricultural areas are accessible to hikers and campers. One would assume that the whole ownership issue would have to proceed through a series of hearings to determine if the old 'squatters rights' laws still hold.

On the gripping hand, it could revitalize a lot of farmland in fly over states that are currently suffering because of the current [non nature based] depression. The farms currently bankrupt and in foreclosure could be sold to these weed farmers who want to do outside grows of medical grade weed, and fiber grade weed and restore income cropping to depressed areas. The amount of additional labor needed to crop would provide jobs, and the renewed income in the area would increase the need for service support workers [grocery, ag stores, clothing, restaurants and so forth.]

Really, there could be a lot of benefit to legalizing weed as a commercial crop MMJ nonwithstanding. Just need to see of one could increase the interest in fibre processing and fabric mills specializing in hemp goods.

 

"What do you mean there wouldn't be a shift? Where do you expect to get all this farm land to grow all the marijuana... it will have to come from farm land that is already producing somthing else. That's why it effects our exports. When we h...ave less crops to export to places like China and Japan then the trade deficit gets worse and worse creating more and more debt.

All of those articles your talking about don't take into effect of the pork.barrel spending, to legalize marijuana you'd need a whole new area of the FDA to regulate such large industry, which would take a ton of money in a.time where were cutting spending."


Alright, let's go over this one more time. Marijuana does not require large amounts of farmland the way corn does. It can easily be grown inside of a an abandoned warehouse retrofitted with a hydroponics setup. WE DO NOT NEED LARGE AMOUNTS OF LAND TO GROW WEED. Not only that, as Sonnenchein said fiber grade weed can be grown in marginal areas that could not support a corn crop. And even if it did, corn is such a vital part of our economy and is in such high demand that I seriously doubt many farmers are going to give up growing this staple crop in favor of a new industry which they have little to no knowledge of. Our government realizes the importance of corn to our economy which is why farmers are offered incentives to grow it. I highly doubt the federal government will offer incentives for growing marijuana until it proves itself to be at least as profitable as corn. Your friend is just not thinking realistically.

Also, the definition of pork barrel really does not apply here. Pork barrel spending occurs when a politician earmarks X amount of money in a generally non-related bill to benefit their own local district. For example, in my home state one of our senators earmarked 5 million dollars from a defense bill that was meant to provide supplies to our troops overseas. This money was used to finance the building of the National WWII Museum in New Orleans. That is an example of pork barrel spending. In fact, the Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) have seven criteria to define pork barrel spending. Here they are:

• Requested by only one chamber of Congress;
• Not specifically authorized;
• Not competitively awarded;
• Not requested by the President;
• Greatly exceeds the President's budget request or the previous year's funding;
• Not the subject of congressional hearings; or
• Serves only a local or special interest.

So as you can see, pork barrel spending is, simply put, tax payer money that is basically stolen for use in pet projects by politicians. No one is going to be stealing our tax money to legalize marijuana and create a new branch of the FDA, it will all be appropriated by the government. The amount of jobs it will create and the money generated will be astronomical. By the way, he's criticizing all of these studies and their reasons to legalize the herb, but where is his evidence that what he's saying is accurate? Has he offered you any proof that what he's saying will come to fruition? Let's face it, your friend is coming up with a bullshit hypothesis to support his own bias against marijuana. Simple as that.

Once again, he has no idea what he's talking about.