Hey there, I've been a long time supporter of legalizing cannabis, and I hope my curiosity and questioning can reflect the fact I want to actively and accurately present this issue, rather than tear it apart. Firstly, if marijuana were suddenly deemed legal, in the context that alcohol and tobacco are, what would come of those in prison, charged prior to this change? Would they be guilty of committing the crime when it was illegal, or released in light of new laws? Secondly, is it financially a better option to keep marijuana illegal? I know it's a bad thing to say, but money has deep roots in politics. Would they make more money from businesses popping up and taxation, or more by fining offenders and policing it as is? Lastly, if it was decided and a spokesperson was required to reveal the decision to legalize cannabis to the public, how would that be done? The obvious solution would be to say "In light of recent evidence", but it's not recent. Marijuana use has been going on for thousands of years, and most 'evidence' is crudely disguised opinions from both sides. Is admitting they were wrong the right thing to do, or political suicide? Just my thoughts, thanks for reading.
What about: How is the quality going to be affected when every Joe Schmoe is growing and driving prices to rock bottom. The NORML in my area thinks weed should only be sold for 15/oz since that is all it costs, minus labor (since its a hobby and you shouldn't get paid for labor). I stopped going to meetings after I was like WTF! I certainly won't grow for 15/oz unless I have my farm and can grow acres of weed. Until then I vote "No"... Sorry...
First off, I can tell you're passionate about what you do and I respect that a lot. Ideally, legalization would still work in your favor. Your desire to produce quality would deliver a better product and demand a higher price. People would buy it, you'd make money and potentially end up running a large business. Of course that's all speculative, as nobody really knows what the pot laws will look like when they're passed. (I saw 'when' and not 'if', because it will happen sooner or later). I would imagine that since it would be a new market, there would be a great opportunity for people like yourself to pounce. So while you might not agree with what NORML plans, I think it's important to boil down what we're trying to achieve and find common allies, rather than risk derailing our intentions with a fractured message. Get it all out in the open, on to politicians "to do" list and work out the details when it passes.
this is the main reason stopping the movement. personal greed. people want to make money, and not just some, a lot. the reason why marijuana is illegal is due to personal greed (anslinger, hearst). money causes corruption. always has, always will.
[quote name='"AgMan"'] What about: How is the quality going to be affected when every Joe Schmoe is growing and driving prices to rock bottom. The NORML in my area thinks weed should only be sold for 15/oz since that is all it costs, minus labor (since its a hobby and you shouldn't get paid for labor). I stopped going to meetings after I was like WTF! I certainly won't grow for 15/oz unless I have my farm and can grow acres of weed. Until then I vote "No"... Sorry...[/quote] So you're going to selfishly vote no because it would force you to get a real fucking job? Niqqa please...
People would stay in jail, they broke the law. Taxation of weed would make the government a great profit, especially if you look into the industrialisation of hemp that will occur in fututure years. The only way to pitch it to the public in a good way would be to change the attitude of the mainstream media (never gonna happen).
They currently make very little from fining offenders, I dont know the exact figure but youd be surprised at the cost of imprisoning someone for a year, its in the region of $30-40,000 (thats what happens when you privatise the prison system), I would find it very difficult to believe that any amount of fines for possession would mitigate this amount. That being said, America in particular is run by big business and those who operate the prison system will always lobby against legalisation as they are funded by the state. So, the prison industry would take a huge hit (in that sense it would be bad for business - but only at the top) but small enterprise would prosper and taxation from said businesses would be considerable. After decriminalisation, Holland closed 8 of its 26 prisons (first article i could find here).
I think i could bring a diffrent prespective since i kind of know a bit from another resources, but to be honest with u guys it would be great for them to legalize it for all the medical reaeons and to stop drug cartels from becoming ritch, but in essence america is double dipping or even triple dipping! They have connections with cartels wich gives them a cut to bring all kinds of drugs to americ, then america gets extra money to fight the war on drugs, plus every one gets a hand at stoping the crime that drugs bring to Ure community, then they prohibit this plant because all the drug companies that payed for our presidents campain. And dont forget they also make money from encarceraiting close to a million people.
Some level of compromise and empathy is in order on your part. Just because you want to grow acres of weed and make lots of money doesn't mean people should be sitting in jail for the same reasons. That's the definition of irony if you think about it. You are looking to cash in with artificially inflated prices on the back of prohibition just as the government is. Not good.
Not calling anybody out but decriminalization has got to be the dumbest crock of shit aborted stoner idea on the planet. Legalization should be what we are after
Outdoor would survive at 15/oz, every indoor grower would be forced to quit. I'll vote yes after I buy my property, but that won't happen in time for this year's election. If Ron Paul's proposal to have no national stance on marijuana and leave it to states makes it on the ballot I would vote yes to that, but that is up to congress. I don't agree with Oregon's Cannabis Tax Act and their proposed method of control.
I read Washington's I-502 proposal and that is what legal marijuana should look like, not Measure 80. I would vote in favor of I-502, it would be a supply and demand based market, not a centralized government based market. I-502 would make it like the craft beer market, you can buy shitty Bud for cheap (no pun intended), or you could buy craft Bud at a premium price (pun intended). Measure 80 would make it a only profitable for the government. Since they are the only ones allowed to buy and sell they will easily drive the market to shit.
Where there's demand there'll be supply. If there's a need for indoor then there will be indoor - growers will demand more efficient lights (maybe led?), equipment price will be driven down and maybe electricity will come from solar panels. Supply and demand should set the price, if growers can't grow at 15/oz then it'll be forced higher.
Not if a centralized government agencies is the only one allowed to buy/sell. There will be price setting in this system. This is not a supply and demand model. Solar panels? Come on... At 8-10 watts per square foot, I would need 600 square feet. At ~$100 per square foot installed, that $600,000. Pass...
NORML using the figure of $15/oz is generally what they consider an easy price to produce it at. It exemplifies how prohibition artificially inflates the prices and why people fight over it. That is more their point than trying to set the price of cannabis in a true free market economy. No?