Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Growers struggle with glut of legal pot in Washington state
AP via finance.yahoo.com ^ | Jan 16, 2015 | Gene Johnson

Posted on 01/16/2015 7:20:24 AM PST by posterchild

SEATTLE (AP) — Washington's legal marijuana market opened last summer to a dearth of weed. Some stores periodically closed because they didn't have pot to sell. Prices were through the roof.

Six months later, the equation has flipped, bringing serious growing pains to the new industry.

A big harvest of sun-grown marijuana from eastern Washington last fall flooded the market. Prices are starting to come down in the state's licensed pot shops, but due to the glut, growers are — surprisingly — struggling to sell their marijuana. Some are already worried about going belly-up, finding it tougher than expected to make a living in legal weed.

"It's an economic nightmare," says Andrew Seitz, general manager at Dutch Brothers Farms in Seattle.

(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: agriculture; cannabis; marijuana; pot; taxes; washington; wod
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280281-299 last
To: DiogenesLamp; reasonisfaith
people have differing levels of susceptibility and what is tolerable for them may be too much for someone else.

Peanuts are harmful to some people - should they be banned for everybody?

281 posted on 01/17/2015 3:08:48 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
so too should we regard the interdiction of drugs as an appropriate usage of the defense clause.

Congress has the explicit authority to interdict whatever it wants - ketchup, if it deems fit. However, much pot and synthetic drugs are domestic product.

282 posted on 01/17/2015 3:13:09 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Government cannot be neutral in the struggle between good and evil

Having seen the totality of what government has mandated as "good" (e.g., taking from the productive to give to serial bastard-makers and other leeches) and proscribed as "evil" (e.g., protecting unborn persons) for several generations now, I think neutrality sounds great.

283 posted on 01/17/2015 3:33:24 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom
No, evidence from China doesn't disprove a hypothesis about America.

You are an idiot, and not worth the trouble of arguing with. The only reason I ever bother to do so is because of your insistence on spreading garbage ideas which are detrimental to this nation and mankind in general.

I am not going to bother with your implied assertion that HUMANS in America are not susceptible to the same BIOCHEMICAL addictions as are HUMANS in Asia. It is the sort of thing I might expect out of a kindergarten child, but it is certainly not worth entertaining the idea for an adult.

Which doesn't contradict the fact that drug use and addiction are not solely about biochemistry.

Again, you are a F***ing idiot. You might as well say water doesn't cause "Wet." Do humanity a favor and Stop posting stupid crap.

284 posted on 01/17/2015 3:39:12 PM PST by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom
Peanuts are harmful to some people - should they be banned for everybody?

False comparison. (as usual with you pot nutters.) Peanuts are a useful food source for many people (It has actual real-world positive benefits as a food stuff, unlike pot) while those allergic are in the extreme minority.

Pick something that is utterly F***ing useless to consume, and which ruins about 15+ percent of the population that tries it, and then you might have an apt comparison.

Apart from that Subway stopped selling Peanut butter cookies for precisely the reason that it causes severe allergic reactions in some people. As a company which wants to avoid liability, I grasp their reasons for doing so.

285 posted on 01/17/2015 3:44:46 PM PST by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
your implied assertion that HUMANS in America are not susceptible to the same BIOCHEMICAL addictions as are HUMANS in Asia.

I made no such implication - that's your functional illiteracy talking.

Here's what the American Society of Addiction Medicine says:

“Genetic factors account for about half of the likelihood that an individual will develop addiction. Environmental factors interact with the person’s biology and affect the extent to which genetic factors exert their influence. Resiliencies the individual acquires (through parenting or later life experiences) can affect the extent to which genetic predispositions lead to the behavioral and other manifestations of addiction. Culture also plays a role in how addiction becomes actualized in persons with biological vulnerabilities to the development of addiction.”

286 posted on 01/17/2015 3:45:01 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom
Having seen the totality of what government has mandated as "good" (e.g., taking from the productive to give to serial bastard-makers and other leeches) and proscribed as "evil" (e.g., protecting unborn persons) for several generations now, I think neutrality sounds great.

Once again, you are a fool to think that you can get "Neutral." There is no such thing. Have you not the slightest idea what has been happening to the government for the last several decades? (Longer actually) Have you not noticed that it's growing increasingly evil? You simply have no grasp of the fact that the advancement of your pet issue is simply serving the interests of those forces of destruction within which our government is currently in thrall.

I doubt you can follow it, but if you want a scientific explanation for what's going on I would suggest you read this:

http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/home-page/

How about you try to learn something useful and stop pushing your weed?

287 posted on 01/17/2015 3:51:05 PM PST by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
those allergic are in the extreme minority.

Peanuts are just part of the picture; "As many as 15 million people have food allergies." (http://www.foodallergy.org/document.doc?id=194)

Pick something that is utterly F***ing useless to consume

So government gets to decide what's "useful"? Bootlicker.

Apart from that Subway stopped selling Peanut butter cookies for precisely the reason that it causes severe allergic reactions in some people.

I fully support every business' right to not sell whatever it chooses to not sell: pot, peanuts, you name it.

288 posted on 01/17/2015 3:52:53 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom
I made no such implication - that's your functional illiteracy talking.

There can be no other explanation for your assertions.

The problem with biochemical addiction is fundamental human biochemistry. If the chemicals didn't tamper with human biochemistry, they could not be addictive.

I'm not interested in reading your psychobabble arguing that there is any other component. Outliers are irrelevant to massive majorities.

289 posted on 01/17/2015 3:54:29 PM PST by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Having seen the totality of what government has mandated as "good" (e.g., taking from the productive to give to serial bastard-makers and other leeches) and proscribed as "evil" (e.g., protecting unborn persons) for several generations now, I think neutrality sounds great.

Have you not noticed that it's growing increasingly evil?

Did you not read what came before my comma? Its evil intent would be less of a problem if statists left and right hadn't allowed it so much power.

290 posted on 01/17/2015 3:55:41 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Here's what the American Society of Addiction Medicine says:

“Genetic factors account for about half of the likelihood that an individual will develop addiction. Environmental factors interact with the person’s biology and affect the extent to which genetic factors exert their influence. Resiliencies the individual acquires (through parenting or later life experiences) can affect the extent to which genetic predispositions lead to the behavioral and other manifestations of addiction. Culture also plays a role in how addiction becomes actualized in persons with biological vulnerabilities to the development of addiction.”

I'm not interested in reading your psychobabble arguing that there is any other component.

The American Society of Addiction Medicine versus some anonymous guy on the Internet - who's more credible?

291 posted on 01/17/2015 3:57:45 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom
So government gets to decide what's "useful"? Bootlicker.

Anyone with two functional brain cells can instantly figure out that you can't eat marijuana for food. One does not have to be a Fascists totalitarian bootlicker to point out that as food, the stuff is utterly f***ing useless.

The plants put that THC toxin in there to PREVENT predators from consuming them, but for some reason, you dopers keep trying to outsmart the plants. In this case, the plants have more intelligence than do you. They are trying to KILL YOU by tampering with your biochemistry, and you are going "Wow! This weed is really good!"

Yeah, their plan is working perfectly.

292 posted on 01/17/2015 4:00:31 PM PST by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

Done with you. Other than heaping mockery, I don’t see any real point in communicating with you.


293 posted on 01/17/2015 4:01:50 PM PST by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
as food, the stuff is utterly f***ing useless.

There are many other ways for a thing to be "useful."

The plants put that THC toxin in there to PREVENT predators from consuming them

THC is a pretty weak toxin, which is why nobody ever died from THC toxicity as the result of smoking pot. What THC does well is mimic the endocannabinoids naturally produced by the human body.

294 posted on 01/17/2015 4:05:10 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
The American Society of Addiction Medicine versus some anonymous guy on the Internet - who's more credible?

Done with you.

Flee.

295 posted on 01/17/2015 4:06:16 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: posterchild

I got tired of pot and went on to heroin instead.


296 posted on 01/17/2015 4:16:58 PM PST by right way right (America will reject the suck of Socialist Freedumb, one way or another.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

Peanuts are not psychoactive. Meaning they don’t change behavior.

I believe the hysterically defensive reaction against any criticism of marijuana is the result of the effect I mentioned earlier. They worship the stuff, like they think it’s an actual deity.


297 posted on 01/17/2015 6:42:03 PM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

Pure gasoline still costs considerably MORE than ten percent ethanol at the pump here.


298 posted on 01/17/2015 8:12:29 PM PST by RipSawyer (OPM is the religion of the sheeple.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
Peanuts are not psychoactive. Meaning they don’t change behavior.

So changed behavior justifies government bans but fatal allergic reactions don't?

Lack of sleep changes behavior - should government regulate our bedtimes?

the hysterically defensive reaction against any criticism of marijuana

That's entirely in your mind - I never disagreed with the point that SOME people can't handle pot. I simply noted that there are a great many other things that SOME people can't handle and yet we don't ban those things for ALL people.

299 posted on 01/19/2015 6:59:23 AM PST by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280281-299 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson