[gennickO]

How much of an impact do feel that the creation of such an industry would have on the economy? While you may see alcohol consumption drop the rewards would be more than made up for in the snack food industries.

There's already an industry

[zbckFNlW]

Bah!

The industry is nowhere near the scale it could be.

[occallExtet]

No, no. He wants to tax the industry to make money from it instead of spending money trying to stop it.

[trubreTab]

No, no. He wants to tax the industry to make money from it instead of spending money trying to stop it.

It doesn't matter. The amount of money circulating in the economy would be pretty much the same.

[Pharmaciest2007]

It doesn't matter. The amount of money circulating in the economy would be pretty much the same. I totally disagree. The velocity of money within an industry is totally stiffled by laws banning that industry. Also, how much more money will be able to be invested into the industry if it was legal. Creation of money comes from the lending of it, which can't happen where weed is concerned.

[Varbaiskkic]

They already have very good product. They even have weed that smells like blueberries. But it could be much better.

doubt it. People like to roll their own or load up a bong. Well, we won't know about that until we give them the option.

Yea, but people are going to eat less healthy food. Oh no!

[SeLvesTr]

But it could be much better.

People are very satisfied with the **** that's out there. There are no gains to be made trying to improve quality.

[TeLMgNva]

The amount circulating to the Government matters if we really do want to lower the deficit. Price per unit would probably go down when any competition can't be murdered or turned in. The number of users would probably go up (many would occasionally if it wasn't illegal and prohibited if employed). Overall demand would rise and domestic production could take advantage of decent land. Sounds Win-Win-Win-Win to me (users, farmers, government, police).

The amount going to the government would be as minimal as that collected from tobacco sales. Yes, the price would be lower, and that means farmers wouldn't get much. But then tobacco farmers don't get that much from tobacco unless they have huge operations. Just like other agricultural products the big guys and the middle men will get paid hansomely, not the small guys.

[soprofaxelbis]

California's ahead of you. Earlier this week, a bill was introduced to legalize marijuana.

[gregmcal]

Sounds Win-Win-Win-Win to me (users, farmers, government, police).

Not so good for the police -- they can no longer smoke the evidence room dope or extort the poor hippie sellers for their look-the-other-way money.

[intifatry]

Actually, cigarettes are a huge bonanza for state governments. All but about 75 cents a pack goes to government at some level. Here, a pack cost just under $5. So I'd say serious money is on the table in Japher's proposal.

The California bill proposes a $50/ounce tax.

[EtellaObtaite]

The black market is estimated to be $100 billion

[Grenader]

[Q=Kidicious;5540718]That's not true with black markets. There are a lot of people who depend on pot being illegal to make money. They make a lot more money selling drugs than they otherwise would.[/q]

But their incomes don't get taxed.

Also the law enforcement is good for the economy. That's a lot of paychecks that people wouldn't otherwise get.

But it's not money productively spent. Law enforcement doesn't produce anything, it just eats money . . . except the prison industry, which has slaves to produce all sorts of things, but the only people who get to spend money, the guards, don't get paid all that much.

[hrotedk]

You jest, Japher, but it's a good plan. This, and proper healthcare reform would do a lot of good...

-Arrian

[LINETFAD]

It's the #1 cash crop in most states. Of course the problem with the $50 per ounce tax is that it is so high no one would pay it and they'd just keep buying it illegally.

I think you would be surprised about the number of people who will do something legal versus illegal.

Yeah, there will people the people who are already connected who it won't effect much, but a lot of the users who don't use as much would still get it for 50$ tax probably.

However, I agree, the tax should be more like 10$ per ounce or something.

JM

[Qynvtlur]

Currently an ounce of decent stuff will be well over $100 (most likely closer to $200)
So $50 bucks per ounce would be less than the cigarette tax.

I can get a QP for that.

[Q0KmoR8K]

I haven't bought any in years, but if I understand what a friend was paying last year... I think $80 for a quarter OUNCE was the price for good stuff.

-Arrian

[connandoilee]

No. I doubt it.

I don't. Back when I was a customer, I could get hydro for $150/oz., or street for $35/oz. I doubt the ratio has changed much. Unless you've got a grower buddy, it's probably the same.

[zawhmqswly]

It's good to see we are all in agreement here. I am forwarding my idea on to the president.

Thanks!

[Galsteinbok]

Also the law enforcement is good for the economy. That's a lot of paychecks that people wouldn't otherwise get.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable..._broken_window

Paying people money to go around breaking windows (i.e., putting pot smokers in jail) does not help the economy.