My Solution to Jolt the Economy

[Kidlicious]

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.

[Blaupanzer]

About 250,000 people a year find their criminal record altered by a trip to prison on charges related to m-j. This is an identifiable number that are not satisfied with the current situation. Note that number, actually a little more than that, occurs despite the major drug enforcement people saying that pot is not a priority.

The stuff is WAY less addictive than alcohol or 21-year-old pu**y. So it's time for it to come out of the closet. And substantial gains in quality are possible. According to the national drug czar, big gains have already been made. He said that in a speech that tweeked everyone's curiousity by saying "This is not your father's pot. This stuff is 4 times as potent." Of course he meant that to sound bad.

[Zkribbler]

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

[Blaupanzer]

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.

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.

[DirtyMartini]

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.

[Kidlicious]

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.

It would be nothing compared to the revenue created by the black market.

[Zkribbler]

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.

[Kidlicious]

The California bill proposes a $50/ounce tax.

That won't even work. I can get a lid for less than that right now.

[Kidlicious]

The black market is estimated to be $100 billion

[Dinner]

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.

[chequita guevara]

[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.

[Kidlicious]

[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.

But we're just talking about stimulating the economy, not collecting taxes or making the economy more productive. Making pot legal would cost jobs.

[Arrian]

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

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Making pot legal would cost jobs.

Yes, it would. It would also create jobs. Or, more accurately, take a bunch of jobs that are currently illegal and make them legal. The tradeoff seems like a win to me.

-Arrian

[Jon Miller]

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