Posted on 11/04/2009 6:53:21 AM PST by YoungGunConservativeRadio
California is bankrupt. Ten weeks after a nasty budget fight concluding in a compromise everyone hates, the state is broke. They’ve legalized gambling and the state is still broke. They’ve raised the alcohol tax and the state is still broke. They’ve raised the tobacco tax and the state is still broke.
So the new push: Legalize pot, tax it and we’ll all be saved.
Don’t get me wrong: if you want to legalize Mary Jane, go ahead. I don’t have a problem with the drug or people who smoke it. But if you think this will be the magical fix-all, give me a break.You want to legalize pot and tax it so the state can make money? Why would I do that when I can grow it in my basement for almost free? Most potheads are doing this already. Making it legal will only make it legal.
You also have to factor in that the minute you make it legal, the price of marijuana is going to DROP. The only reason it’s expensive now is because it’s a controlled substance. Most of the cost on the street comes from the rarity of the product and attempts to keep the cops out of the deals. Once pot is available at every 7-11 it’ll be a lot cheaper.
(Excerpt) Read more at younggunconservative.com ...
This is hysterical. My mom and I were discussing this last night.
More and more smokers of cigarettes are getting ostricized, and getting thrown around, but they are going to legalize smoking pot. Are the voters crazy, or what sometimes.
Legalized pot ==> More potheads
More potheads ==> Less productive workers
Less productive workers ==> Less income earned
Less income earned ==> Less tax revenue
So, if they legalize pot, the state will go further into debt, but nobody will care.
Has California ever thought of cutting spending? Pass a State Constitution Amendment prohibiting govermental debt?
Breckenridge CO just legalized weed for everyone over 21.
Weed is so easy to grow that most serious smokers will just grow their own.
Marijauna is pretty easy to grow.
errrr, so I’ve heard
;)
That’s what I’ve always said.
Why do they think it’s called “weed”?
Sure they care.
They’ll get even more addle minded democrap voters.
That’s all that matters to them.
Riiiiight.
Because, nobody can get pot now, since it’s illegal.
And the flipside is also true. People gripe about the gubmint getting "tough on tobacco" yet they support the gubmint getting tough on marijuana. But hey, this is a country that managed to BAN alcohol by constitutional amendment only a few generations ago.
Your oversimplification reminds me a lot of how the pro-abortion lobby equates anti-abortion laws to the deaths of women to bleed to death for using a coat hanger to self-abort. You forgot to add how much the states will save $ & prison space by not enforcing anti-marijuana laws, & will strengthen their ability to fight REAL crime.
Are you sure about that? Wouldn't supply and demand suggest that if there is a decrease in the supply of productive workers, wages for productive workers will increase? If there are less of them, they can demand more money, right?
Also, does a loss of productivity lead to less income earned? I'm not so sure that's true. It seems to me they'd be earning the same thing for producing less, which is actually an INCREASE in earnings.
Would overall business productivity go down? Maybe not. Perhaps it would create incentive for more automation, robotics, etc, which would lead to greater overal productivity, lower prices, etc.
Anyway, if you believe in a free market, why not let the market sort it out?
Yo. Cap. Ever heard of moonshine? Revenuers? Quite a tussle over home production of a taxed resource.
Go ahead and grow it. The JBTs will find you, break your door down and shoot your dog. Just like they do today.
If "most potheads" already do this, then why is there so much commercial trade in marijuana?
This article seems to be based on unfounded conjecture and ignorance.
If the price would drop upon legalization, the idea is to use taxation to keep the prices relatively stable (compared to what they are now.) Except the profit would go to the gov't and not to criminals.
I don't know if it would work or not, but it makes more sense than putting people into jail for their choice of intoxicant.
Legalized pot ==> More potheads
More potheads ==> Less productive workers
Less productive workers ==> Less income earned
Less income earned ==> Less tax revenue
===>MORE lowlives on the dole, voting for DEMOCRATS
“I strongly disagree w/ tobacco smokers being ostracized, but as a pot smoker (& a former tobacco addict for 20 yrs) it angers me having to face the fear of losing my job, being arrested, or a whole host of other things for simply possessing marijuana or having its by-products in your urine weeks after the the high is gone. I wish the gov’t would leave the smokers of BOTH products alone as long as we act responsibly while using them.”
-Respectfully I have to say that by using a mind-altering substance, “acting responsibly” fades away. I mean, isn’t THAT the whole point of getting high???
This is one of the few issues I have determined that the Republicans could easily take from the democrats without compromising their principles.
So everyone who drinks alcohol should lose his job and go to jail?
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.