Stronger Pot Causes Governmental Policy Shift

[Sikander]

Originally posted by debeest


Previously I had not thought you a fool, Albert, but really....

Growing pot is not so different from growing tobacco. How much does corporate tobacco cost, even with taxes representing a large fraction of the price? Why would corporate pot have to be priced much higher than that?

Yea one could produce copious quantities of marijuana very cheaply. But growing good marijuana is much more labor intensive than growing tobacco. And growing it in fields like corn is not an answer, as you don't want it to pollinate. I'm sure that kind bud grown legally would cost a fraction of the price it commands while illegal, but it requires more labor per unit than almost any legal agricultural product I can think of.

[chequita guevara]

I'll bet in very short order, scientists would figure out how to produce sterile females for planting.

[Berzerker]

considering how the tobacco industry has been over the decades, i'm surprised yall are so willing to trust them with producing what is a more hazardous product.

More hazardous? The graveyards aren't full of pot smokers... About 400,000 a year lost to tobacco, a handfull if that lost to pot...

[Al B. Sure!]

yes but if weed was so mass produced as yall claim then we'd have pack a day weed smokers... and we already established weed is more dangerous for your lungs than tobacco.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Albert Speer
yes but if weed was so mass produced as yall claim then we'd have pack a day weed smokers... and we already established weed is more dangerous for your lungs than tobacco.

this has not been proven.

Although doctors suspect this should be the case, they have yet to find a case of lung cancer attributed to pot smoking. Not a single case!

And there has not been a single death in this country attributed to pot smoking! with the possible exception of driving under the influence.

[Al B. Sure!]

and thats with a joint a day smokers? bring in a pack a day smokers which supposedly will be common once weed is mass produced...

[Dis]

why would this be commonplace?

[debeest]

Originally posted by Sikander
I'm sure that kind bud grown legally would cost a fraction of the price it commands while illegal....

That's my point. The rest may be true, but doesn't matter much.

You seem to know a little bit more about pot farming than I would have expected, Sikander.

[Al B. Sure!]

diss:

because weed will now, supposedly, be mass produced and cheap...

[debeest]

Salt is cheap, too. But I know when I've had enough Fritos for one day. Do you think if joints were fifty cents apiece, lots of people would be firing up 20 or 40 a day?

[Al B. Sure!]

debeest...

during rome's empire, salt (and pepper) were quite expensive and was the occasional seasoning for the wealthy. now, it's on every meal...

[monolith94]

"average levels of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, rose steadily from 3.5 percent in 1988 to more than 7 percent in 2003"

W00T!

[Ramo]

yes but if weed was so mass produced as yall claim then we'd have pack a day weed smokers...

Why? Weed isn't physically addictive.

[Al B. Sure!]

what the hell? you really think if weed was as cheap as yall claim we wouldnt have pack a day smokers?

there is much truth in how increasing the supply and decreasing the price will increase the demand. companies do it all the time.

[Ramo]

That's inane logic.

Air is free; that doesn't mean that there are hordes of people who pump air into their bodies to the point of impairing their health.