|
Weed
May 22, 2012 16:27:31 GMT -6
Post by USApegger on May 22, 2012 16:27:31 GMT -6
Weed should be legalized, and there should be tighter restrictions placed on alcohol. Its off topic here, but am curious as to what type of tighter restrictions on alcohol that you would like to see?
|
|
|
Weed
May 22, 2012 17:14:22 GMT -6
Post by Dcmac on May 22, 2012 17:14:22 GMT -6
I don't personally smoke it, but if alcohol is legal it makes sense for weed to be.
|
|
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 11:36:05 GMT -6
Post by Lions67 on May 23, 2012 11:36:05 GMT -6
as promised, here are some numbers. The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition June 2005 Jeffrey A. Miron Visiting Professor of Economics Department of Economics Harvard University Cambridge, MA 02138 781-856-0086 miron@fas.harvard.edu The Marijuana Policy Project provided funding for the research discussed in this report. Daniel Egan provided excellent research assistance. Executive Summary • Government prohibition of marijuana is the subject of ongoing debate. • One issue in this debate is the effect of marijuana prohibition on government budgets. Prohibition entails direct enforcement costs and prevents taxation of marijuana production and sale. • This report examines the budgetary implications of legalizing marijuana – taxing and regulating it like other goods – in all fifty states and at the federal level. • The report estimates that legalizing marijuana would save $7.7 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. $5.3 billion of this savingswould accrue to state and local governments, while $2.4 billion would accrue to the federal government.• The report also estimates that marijuana legalization would yield tax revenue of $2.4 billion annually if marijuana were taxed like all other goods and $6.2 billion annually if marijuana were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. • Whether marijuana legalization is a desirable policy depends on many factors other than the budgetary impacts discussed here. But these impacts should be included in a rational debate about marijuana policy there is much more to this paper, so i will just give the link for the rest. but as you can CLEARLY see, pot is a CASH COW. now, put that in your pipe and smoke it. www.prohibitioncosts.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/MironReport.pdf
|
|
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 11:51:24 GMT -6
Post by selanne405 on May 23, 2012 11:51:24 GMT -6
I havent touched the stuff since high school (lame pun I know but it wasnt on purpose) but it should definitely be legal here's a few reasons
1) Alcohol and cigarettes are both more far more harmfull/addicting
2) The "gate way" theory stating that weed use will lead to more dangerous drug use is actually 100% true but it happens because the prohibition of weed causes it. Think of it this way, if you wanna get drunk you go to the LC. If you want to get high you go talk to a career criminal (drug dealer) which gives you an opporunity to be exposed to more severe drugs. If you take out the drug dealer you reduce the exposure people have to criminals and more harmfull drugs.
3) Not an economist by any means of the imagination but my guess is weed sales would generate wack loads of tax revenue.
I mean you can chalk it up to this, as I said cigarettes and alcohol are both way more harmfull than pot. When confronted with that fact you might argue with the gateway theory that weed should be illegal since it can lead to more harmfull drugs. But what exactly is it about weed (other than the fact that its prohibited) that leads to more drug use?
|
|
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 11:57:17 GMT -6
Post by jetsorbust on May 23, 2012 11:57:17 GMT -6
as promised, here are some numbers. The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition June 2005 Jeffrey A. Miron Visiting Professor of Economics Department of Economics Harvard University Cambridge, MA 02138 781-856-0086 miron@fas.harvard.edu The Marijuana Policy Project provided funding for the research discussed in this report. Daniel Egan provided excellent research assistance. Executive Summary • Government prohibition of marijuana is the subject of ongoing debate. • One issue in this debate is the effect of marijuana prohibition on government budgets. Prohibition entails direct enforcement costs and prevents taxation of marijuana production and sale. • This report examines the budgetary implications of legalizing marijuana – taxing and regulating it like other goods – in all fifty states and at the federal level. • The report estimates that legalizing marijuana would save $7.7 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. $5.3 billion of this savingswould accrue to state and local governments, while $2.4 billion would accrue to the federal government.• The report also estimates that marijuana legalization would yield tax revenue of $2.4 billion annually if marijuana were taxed like all other goods and $6.2 billion annually if marijuana were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. • Whether marijuana legalization is a desirable policy depends on many factors other than the budgetary impacts discussed here. But these impacts should be included in a rational debate about marijuana policy there is much more to this paper, so i will just give the link for the rest. but as you can CLEARLY see, pot is a CASH COW. now, put that in your pipe and smoke it. www.prohibitioncosts.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/MironReport.pdfYou said it would fix our roads AND healthcare with money left over. But these numbers are for the US and it still equates to just a few billion dollars a year. This would be a drop in the bucket towards our infrastructure and health care spending, and that's for US figures. With 1/10 the population we could only expect that it would be worth far less to us. Sorry man, but you proved my point!
|
|
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 12:13:02 GMT -6
Post by trigger204 on May 23, 2012 12:13:02 GMT -6
I havent touched the stuff since high school (lame pun I know but it wasnt on purpose) but it should definitely be legal here's a few reasons 1) Alcohol and cigarettes are both more far more harmfull/addicting 2) The "gate way" theory stating that weed use will lead to more dangerous drug use is actually 100% true but it happens because the prohibition of weed causes it. Think of it this way, if you wanna get drunk you go to the LC. If you want to get high you go talk to a career criminal (drug dealer) which gives you an opporunity to be exposed to more severe drugs. If you take out the drug dealer you reduce the exposure people have to criminals and more harmfull drugs. 3) Not an economist by any means of the imagination but my guess is weed sales would generate wack loads of tax revenue. I mean you can chalk it up to this, as I said cigarettes and alcohol are both way more harmfull than pot. When confronted with that fact you might argue with the gateway theory that weed should be illegal since it can lead to more harmfull drugs. But what exactly is it about weed (other than the fact that its prohibited) that leads to more drug use? agreed, weed is not directly a gateway drug, only really in the sense you mentioned. (For the most part though, dealers either stick to one or the other. Not many dealers who deal weed f@ck with coke, meth ect. It's a totally different beast, but obviously some do) In my opinion alcohol is way more of a gateway than weed. People make stupid decisions all the time when they've been drinking, especially when they drink too much. If you smoke too much you become introvert and your "need" to indulge diminishes. There is a reason why most Heroin, Meth or Coke addicts don't drink but smoke weed instead. again though, I'm still more for decriminalization than legalization.
|
|
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 12:24:16 GMT -6
Post by Lions67 on May 23, 2012 12:24:16 GMT -6
as promised, here are some numbers. The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition June 2005 Jeffrey A. Miron Visiting Professor of Economics Department of Economics Harvard University Cambridge, MA 02138 781-856-0086 miron@fas.harvard.edu The Marijuana Policy Project provided funding for the research discussed in this report. Daniel Egan provided excellent research assistance. Executive Summary • Government prohibition of marijuana is the subject of ongoing debate. • One issue in this debate is the effect of marijuana prohibition on government budgets. Prohibition entails direct enforcement costs and prevents taxation of marijuana production and sale. • This report examines the budgetary implications of legalizing marijuana – taxing and regulating it like other goods – in all fifty states and at the federal level. • The report estimates that legalizing marijuana would save $7.7 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. $5.3 billion of this savingswould accrue to state and local governments, while $2.4 billion would accrue to the federal government.• The report also estimates that marijuana legalization would yield tax revenue of $2.4 billion annually if marijuana were taxed like all other goods and $6.2 billion annually if marijuana were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. • Whether marijuana legalization is a desirable policy depends on many factors other than the budgetary impacts discussed here. But these impacts should be included in a rational debate about marijuana policy there is much more to this paper, so i will just give the link for the rest. but as you can CLEARLY see, pot is a CASH COW. now, put that in your pipe and smoke it. www.prohibitioncosts.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/MironReport.pdfYou said it would fix our roads AND healthcare with money left over. But these numbers are for the US and it still equates to just a few billion dollars a year. This would be a drop in the bucket towards our infrastructure and health care spending, and that's for US figures. With 1/10 the population we could only expect that it would be worth far less to us. Sorry man, but you proved my point! sure, those numbers are for the US. but we wouldnt be very far off those totals ourselves. as for the taxes generated in this report, those are for 1 YEAR! now tell me that wouldnt fix the roads and health care in a ten year span. the money keeps coming in. look at it this way, that is money coming in that right now isnt. and i will even go one further here. JOB CREATION yes. there are a lot of very talented pot growers who take great care in their CRAFT. have the dept. of agriculture hire these people and let them grow it for the government. now THEY will ALSO pay taxes. as it is at the moment, they collect all the money without paying any tax at all. then some of them get caught and get thrown in jail. then guess what happens. WE pay more to house them. its a complete no brainer.
|
|
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 12:28:24 GMT -6
Post by Lions67 on May 23, 2012 12:28:24 GMT -6
a CANADIAN paper for your reading pleasure jetsorbust:
By Nathan Grills on 16 June 2011 - 12:00am We pay taxes on practically everything that we buy, from furniture, to electronics, and especially on that bottle of merlot. But as Canadians we tolerate these taxes (some do so grudgingly) because they provide the government with funds that are needed in order to advance our nation. Taxes support things like healthcare, education, geothermal energy and light rail (wait…sorry I was dreaming. We have a Conservative government).
So, we dutifully pay our GST and PST, knowing that it is for the good of society as a whole. Those of us who choose to indulge in things that we know are bad for us, like alcohol and tobacco, pay additional taxes on them (as we should). However, Canadians are treated with respect. It is recognizing that each individual has the right to their own body, and thus the right to decide whether they drink or smoke. So why do we treat marijuana any differently?
Besides being the morally acceptable thing to do, legalizing marijuana would significantly benefit our economy. According to the Canadian Centre on Substance abuse, Canadians spend up to $1.3 billion policing and persecuting the marijuana industry.
If we dedicating half of these resources towards fighting crime that is, well… actually crime, we would have enough left to pay the tuition ($21,567.17) of 30,138 medicine students at McMaster Universtiy.
Currently much of the resources dedicated to “the war on drugs” are used inefficiently, according to NDP MP Libby Davies, “About 73% of federal dollars on drug policy in Canada go toward enforcement. Only 2.6% goes to prevention, only 2.6% goes to harm reduction and about 14% to treatment. That is a very uneven balance.”
People from all paths of life would be benefited by legalizing marijuana. According to the CBC, marijuana is estimated to be a $19 - $21 billion industry. Since marijuana would be taxed at a high rate, we would be provided with a substantial fiscal benefit. The tax revenue could be used for things like preventative healthcare (such as paying employers to allow workers to take a break to exercise during the work day) or to help developing countries fight poverty and develop in a sustainable fashion. I for one would much prefer to see drug money going into government programs than into gangs.
Legalizing marijuana would be very beneficial to the wellbeing of people who use marijuana. By legalizing and regulating it, people buying marijuana would not have to worry about it being laced with a more harmful and more addictive drug.
Many people who have a knee- jerk reaction against legalizing marijuana likely do so at least in part because of the stereotype often associated with marijuana use. However, according to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 44% of Canadians have used marijuana at some point in their lifetime. I certainly do not consider 44% of Canadians to be criminals.
Perhaps because of its widespread use, support for legalizing marijuana is very high in Canada, 53% according to an Angus Reid poll conducted in April 2010. With such support, I find it odd that there is not a debate going on in parliament about legalizing marijuana. In fact, the conversation is about the moving in the opposite direction.
Before Stephen Harper prorogued parliament for the second time, Bill C-15 had passed the third reading, with the support of both the Conservatives and the Liberals. The bill would have toughened laws regarding marijuana, increasing mandatory minimum sentences. Minimum sentences deprive judges of the ability to use their discretion depending on the individual circumstances of each case.
The Liberal party received much criticism for backing Bill C-15 and have pledged to vote against its reincarnation known as Bill S-10. Although now that the Conservatives have gained there long sought after “majority” (they actually received only 39.6% of votes) how the opposition parties vote will be inconsequential. While I am happy that the opposition is standing up to the Conservatives “tough on crime” agenda (a.k.a. impulsive and impractical on crime agenda), I wish that they would introduce the debate around legalizing marijuana to Parliament. Wish as we may, I doubt we will see change anytime soon. At least not until action is taken to reform are voting system to one which is representative of Canadian’s priorities, or until the left leaning parties are willing to work together within our current system.
Considering the results of the latest election, it looks as if we have a while to wait before we will any action taken against the prohibition of marijuana in Canada.
|
|
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 12:42:33 GMT -6
Post by trigger204 on May 23, 2012 12:42:33 GMT -6
as promised, here are some numbers. The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition June 2005 Jeffrey A. Miron Visiting Professor of Economics Department of Economics Harvard University Cambridge, MA 02138 781-856-0086 miron@fas.harvard.edu The Marijuana Policy Project provided funding for the research discussed in this report. Daniel Egan provided excellent research assistance. Executive Summary • Government prohibition of marijuana is the subject of ongoing debate. • One issue in this debate is the effect of marijuana prohibition on government budgets. Prohibition entails direct enforcement costs and prevents taxation of marijuana production and sale. • This report examines the budgetary implications of legalizing marijuana – taxing and regulating it like other goods – in all fifty states and at the federal level. • The report estimates that legalizing marijuana would save $7.7 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. $5.3 billion of this savingswould accrue to state and local governments, while $2.4 billion would accrue to the federal government.• The report also estimates that marijuana legalization would yield tax revenue of $2.4 billion annually if marijuana were taxed like all other goods and $6.2 billion annually if marijuana were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. • Whether marijuana legalization is a desirable policy depends on many factors other than the budgetary impacts discussed here. But these impacts should be included in a rational debate about marijuana policy there is much more to this paper, so i will just give the link for the rest. but as you can CLEARLY see, pot is a CASH COW. now, put that in your pipe and smoke it. www.prohibitioncosts.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/MironReport.pdfYou said it would fix our roads AND healthcare with money left over. But these numbers are for the US and it still equates to just a few billion dollars a year. This would be a drop in the bucket towards our infrastructure and health care spending, and that's for US figures. With 1/10 the population we could only expect that it would be worth far less to us. Sorry man, but you proved my point! CANADIANS consume more than twice as much per capita than Americans. This is not saying that 1 pot smoking Canadian smokes more than 1 pot smoking American, but that more Canadians smoke than Americans do. This industry is so much bigger than anybody realizes. There are bong and pipe manufacturers (Chills Inc, now debunked by the U.S government) that have made the top 50 of the Forbes list. Trust me, nobody is aware of how big this "industry" is.
|
|
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 12:51:05 GMT -6
Post by Lions67 on May 23, 2012 12:51:05 GMT -6
just in case this point got lost.
JOB CREATION yes. there are a lot of very talented pot growers who take great care in their CRAFT. have the dept. of agriculture hire these people and let them grow it for the government. now THEY will ALSO pay taxes. as it is at the moment, they collect all the money without paying any tax at all. then some of them get caught and get thrown in jail. then guess what happens. WE pay more to house them. its a complete no brainer.
|
|
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 13:06:00 GMT -6
Post by jetsorbust on May 23, 2012 13:06:00 GMT -6
You said it would fix our roads AND healthcare with money left over. But these numbers are for the US and it still equates to just a few billion dollars a year. This would be a drop in the bucket towards our infrastructure and health care spending, and that's for US figures. With 1/10 the population we could only expect that it would be worth far less to us. Sorry man, but you proved my point! sure, those numbers are for the US. but we wouldnt be very far off those totals ourselves. as for the taxes generated in this report, those are for 1 YEAR! now tell me that wouldnt fix the roads and health care in a ten year span. the money keeps coming in. look at it this way, that is money coming in that right now isnt. and i will even go one further here. JOB CREATION yes. there are a lot of very talented pot growers who take great care in their CRAFT. have the dept. of agriculture hire these people and let them grow it for the government. now THEY will ALSO pay taxes. as it is at the moment, they collect all the money without paying any tax at all. then some of them get caught and get thrown in jail. then guess what happens. WE pay more to house them. its a complete no brainer. Sorry my friend, but you have spent too much time getting high and not enough time getting drunk and reading about the federal budget! www.cihi.ca/CIHI-ext-portal/internet/en/Document/spending+and+health+workforce/spending/RELEASE_28OCT10"Total spending on health care in Canada is expected to reach $191.6billion this year" Perhaps a couple of billion dollars in incremental tax revenues is nothing to scoff at, but only a pot head would believe that this would make a dent in the health care budget
|
|
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 13:43:22 GMT -6
Post by kidsonthebus on May 23, 2012 13:43:22 GMT -6
Hey people who say no, ^. Do you believe in god? Weed is fine, it in grows in the ground. I bet you think gay is "right" also, How about you and the others of that speices go try and have kids so that they can be gay also, see how far that gets you.
|
|
ediger
2nd Line Winger
rtabaracci
Posts: 359
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 13:49:58 GMT -6
Post by ediger on May 23, 2012 13:49:58 GMT -6
no doot aboot it, there's a ton of money to be made/saved by selling weed like liquor.
If you're against the legalization of pot, you should also be POed that booze and cigarettes are legal, too. They really are all in the same ballpark.
|
|
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 13:55:42 GMT -6
Post by kidsonthebus on May 23, 2012 13:55:42 GMT -6
and coffee! coffee is the main gateway drug
|
|
ediger
2nd Line Winger
rtabaracci
Posts: 359
|
Weed
May 23, 2012 13:56:06 GMT -6
Post by ediger on May 23, 2012 13:56:06 GMT -6
Kidding aside, I'm against it. But I think they should start punishing the every day user with much more severe punishment, or legalize it. Throwing the dealer in jail when you turn a blind eye to the user is never going to make a difference, the government just needs to decide if they really want it to be illegal or not because right now it's a grey area in practice. So, despite the fact that I hold down a decent job, pay my taxes, hold doors for the elderly, help motorists in snowstorms, let people into traffic (if they aren't being stupid), tip well and hold my cigarette butts until I find an ashtray amongst other things, I should have to do time because I also like to smoke some weed? I do realize that you give two options, but why does the first option even exist?
|
|