Democrats want to Legalize Marijuana

[Flash-hider]

Other than bribery, is there a better way to get politicians to be in favor of something?

It's not only politicians but the public too. I've listened to people say the taxes on MM and MJ will bring in extra money for this, that, and the other things. I ask how much revenue? The response is, I don't know but it will be a lot.

 

[BugI02]

The small amount of caffeine I get from my decalf [toy] coffee is the most "state-of-mind-altering" I care to get.

Fixy

 

[BugI02]

Well he's a democrat so that automatically disqualifies him. And maybe for him legalization is just pandering votes. Legalization is not a strong enough issue for me that I'd vote Satan Democrat over a saner but anti-legalization candidate. And that's why we have to put up with chamber-o-commerce, stogy, morality legislating Republicans. There isn't a saner choice to vote for.

My worry is that a ... uhh ... certain faction within the electorate can have their votes purchased by the promise of legalization, to the exclusion of so many other concerns that should be considered

If it works at the state level you will certainly see it in national elections, and the fact that after you elect them they don't actually have to deliver (See: Republicans on abortion legislation) will not be considered

 

[BugI02]

Other than bribery, is there a better way to get politicians to be in favor of something?

The fourth box? Tough to spend the wages of sin if you're doing the Nuremberg swing

 

[phylodog]

Hell the democrats have been buying votes for decades. That won't change regardless of this specific issue. Many Americans are easily bought.

 

[BugI02]

It's not only politicians but the public too. I've listened to people say the taxes on MM and MJ will bring in extra money for this, that, and the other things. I ask how much revenue? The response is, I don't know but it will be a lot.

California's state spending bill totals just over $262 billion, so the $1 billion in weed tax money was roughly 0.38% of budget a rounding error, and people are already pitching a ***** that the taxes are too high

 

[Butch627]

In the last few years I have been stunned to find out how many people I know in their 50's and 60's are using some form of edibles on a regular recreational basis. I thought they had stopped using it after their college days. I am further stunned as to how many people in their 20's and 30's seem to use it several times a day and seem to be able to function within society.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Been a bit too busy for INGO the last few days so forgive the late reply.

I used the term "stoner culture" because that was the part of Bug's point that I was addressing. We're specifically talking about MJ in this thread so I shouldn't need to address every vice that has some kind of culture. I suppose there's a midget stripper culture too. I don't think it's necessary to be all inclusive when I'm addressing a specific point that was made.

I didn't differentiate between alcohol and other intoxicating drugs. Again, MJ is the subject. I included a common but legal vice with mj use to make the point.

And Idunno. I guess maybe some people's sensibilities may have been tweaked a little because I called it "stoner culture" perhaps derogatively, and I said I don't like taking substances that alter my state of mind. That's not the same thing as saying "mind altering". I don't know if there is strong evidence to say that either mj or alcohol actually changes a person's brain physically. Some drugs do.

But the point is, when you're under the influence of alcohol or jm (or other recreational drugs) there is no doubt that your thinking, mood, outlook, etcetera--your state of mind--is absolutely altered compared to being sober. If there weren't such effects no one would do it. I'm saying personally I don't like doing that myself. The small amount of caffeine I get from my decalf coffee is the most "state-of-mind-altering" I care to get.

Nothing to forgive, I do it myself on a semi-regular basis.

No need to be all inclusive, just curious about how you view/what you consider stoner culture. And if you think that applies to most/all of those that use MJ recreationally. I mean who doesn't like to see a midget stripper now and again, doesn't mean I'm Skulldaddy. And have you seen the best bourbon under $50 thread?

And in the post I replied to it sounded to me like you were differentiating, in that you stated "drugs or alcohol". In this post I'll agree you didn't differentiate.

And I'll have to quibble a bit on the mind/state of mind. State of mind is I believe generally considered to be mood/emotions, where mind by itself is a bit more encompassing. Neither refer directly to the physical brain.

And I'll even agree that for recreational mind or state of mind if you prefer altering drugs, it's probably for the best for some/most/all people to refrain. I know for myself I should quit tobacco and alcohol use, but I do enjoy them on occasion. Well the alcohol anyway, tobacco is now just habit/addiction not really enjoyment. But if you come for my (caffeinated) coffee I'll turn into Francis from FMJ.

My worry is that a ... uhh ... certain faction within the electorate can have their votes purchased by the promise of legalization, to the exclusion of so many other concerns that should be considered

If it works at the state level you will certainly see it in national elections, and the fact that after you elect them they don't actually have to deliver (See: Republicans on abortion legislation) will not be considered

How many of the electorate that are members of this forum do you think can have their votes purchased with promises of pro gun legislation?

I'd say republicans on pro gun legislation are about the same as the abortion. Or several other issues.

 

[phylodog]

In the last few years I have been stunned to find out how many people I know in their 50's and 60's are using some form of edibles on a regular recreational basis. I thought they had stopped using it after their college days. I am further stunned as to how many people in their 20's and 30's seem to use it several times a day and seem to be able to function within society.

Why would you be stunned? Either you've experienced cannabis and based on how it affected you, it is surprising that older people are using it and younger people can still function to high levels while using it.

-or-

You've been lied to about cannabis and the resulting preconceived notions are what has left you surprised by these revelations.

My Son (whom I'm very proud of) earned himself an electronic and computer engineering degree from Purdue University. On his graduation day, after he walked the stage and the ceremony was over he informed his mother and myself that he had smoked cannabis every single day of the four years he was in attendance. That was my matrix moment and when I began researching what the realities of cannabis use actually were. I had absolutely been mislead all of my life.

Some people will have problems with it, just as with alcohol though I don't think the extreme addicts to cannabis are doing near as much damage to themselves as severe alcoholics (really dirty and worn silver lining but a silver lining nonetheless). But the vast majority are capable of using socially like people do now with alcohol, some will enjoy great medicinal benefit and others will find that they can perform better (typically artistic types).

It isn't an end all - be all cure like some believe but it is most certainly capable of bringing positives to a lot of people for a variety of reasons.

 

[indyjs]

People already let their vote be purchased by electing Mears as he would not prosecute MJ. Selfish people are short sighted

 

[BehindBlueI's]

In the last few years I have been stunned to find out how many people I know in their 50's and 60's are using some form of edibles on a regular recreational basis. I thought they had stopped using it after their college days. I am further stunned as to how many people in their 20's and 30's seem to use it several times a day and seem to be able to function within society.

Did you tell them it was illegal? Seems like they probably don't know.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I've kind of lost interest in the thread but I'll just throw this out:

None of the arguments here matter in the slightest. Tax dollars or not. Jail capacity or not. Cultural changes or not. You can justify your position all you like but here's the cold hard truth:

We do not live in a totalitarian regime, as much as some folks like to pretend otherwise. Any law or policy has a tipping point where so many citizens do not comply and so many more do not care that *regardless* of the merits of the law or policy it is untenable. That's what's happened with marijuana. It is too widely accepted socially across multiple demographics to be controlled via misdemeanor arrests. You can continue to bail against the tide as long as you like, but you're never make a difference as long as that level of cultural acceptance is present and we are not a police state.

 

[bwframe]

One of the legs of the three-legged stool the proponents point too is the tax revenue the local and state governments will benefit from legalization of MM or MJ. While it isn't the reason, it's one of the reason's that's presented.

What about the tax boons that we are supposed to be yielding already? Lottery, casinos, other gambling? What has become of all of that money? Better question yet; How much accountability/transparency is built into specific tax revenue increases?

I have a buddy in Madison who recounted that their little "Podunk" police department was flush with "spend it or lose it" funds for a few years after the riverboat casino was launched. Overnight, they had jet skis, speedboats and all the storage, maintenance, personnel to support them.

.....................................

Wonder if we can wrangle a tax cut as part of the legalization deal? Maybe give us back the 17% sales tax increase that Mitch arranged for us?



.

 

[SumtnFancy]

One of the legs of the three-legged stool the proponents point too is the tax revenue the local and state governments will benefit from legalization of MM or MJ. While it isn't the reason, it's one of the reason's that's presented.

It is. And it is a valid reason. For someone in here to say that tax revenue was ONLY $500M per year and growing is laughable. A lot of good CAN be done with that money, depending on state leadership. A state with a surplus will likely do way more good than a state already living on stolen dollars. California should not be used as an example of how to run a state.

Well he's a democrat so that automatically disqualifies him. And maybe for him legalization is just pandering votes. Legalization is not a strong enough issue for me that I'd vote Satan Democrat over a saner but anti-legalization candidate. And that's why we have to put up with chamber-o-commerce, stogy, morality legislating Republicans. There isn't a saner choice to vote for.

Wasn't (R) Kasich governor in 2016 when the Ohio MMJ bill passed? And they are close to having the required signatures for a 2022 initiative for recreational use, with a Republican governor again. This is no longer a party-line issue and (wise) Republicans would benefit from accepting legalization.

It's not only politicians but the public too. I've listened to people say the taxes on MM and MJ will bring in extra money for this, that, and the other things. I ask how much revenue? The response is, I don't know but it will be a lot.

Nobody knows, that's why. Are the laws going to be like Ohio or Michigan? Because that can be the difference between $100M and $500M, annually. Short answer is, a lot.

I was just checking one of the bills by Lucas out. $60k for first year permit for a grower/processor/dispensary. And I think that would apply to any the "medical marijuana organization" did, so if they grew and processed it would be $120k first year. $10k each non refundable permit application fee and a $50k permit fee, just $10k each to renew.

"Pay to Play" is the game, right or wrong. I would love for it to be easier to obtain a license, but at the same time, people with skin in the game seem to have the most to lose and operate within the rules. The cost is excessive, but also keeps out people who may not be qualified to open up an operation. This isn't a restaurant, not everyone with a dime bag needs to open up a dispensary, especially with the cash accounting and regulations that need to be followed. It is unfair, definitely, and is only 1 of multiple unfair obstacles these business owner face.

In the last few years I have been stunned to find out how many people I know in their 50's and 60's are using some form of edibles on a regular recreational basis. I thought they had stopped using it after their college days. I am further stunned as to how many people in their 20's and 30's seem to use it several times a day and seem to be able to function within society.

You would be shocked if you went to an actual dispensary, people from every walk of life, the people watching is the best! Ive stood in hour long lines with bikers, grandmas, students, CEO's, teachers, tradesmen. Some surveys show as many as 75% percent of average, every day people are in favor of legalization. Reefer madness is gone, thankfully.

No, actually - now that you've properly qualified your statement - I can see how it might. BTW, are you saying each category - emergencies, deaths and usage - showed a drop or the just aggregate of all three

Even California had a drop in deaths from prescription opioids. I could see the people that are legit on opioids for pain getting off them if MJ would do the job. That could mean less people at risk of slipping into addiction and less pills offered for illicit sale. In Cali they had an increase in heroin deaths as well as a sharp increase in non-prescription synthetics (such as fentanyl) but that is probably a completely different segment of the user population

Edit: If you are going to use NORML as an 'unbiased' source, does that mean I can use CALM?

I'm not trying to make grandiose claims about how legal cannabis will cure opioid addiction. I'm just saying so far, in most cases, the numbers either got better or didn't get worse. Some might have, but the fentynal issue has also never been worse and that factors into the equation. People are dying from fentynal after thinking they bought coke or pills. I know 2 who have OD'd on fentynal but didn't knowingly buy fentynal. I appreciate you acknowledging, if nothing else, legalization has been shown to cut down on prescription pill usage/abuse. And if nothing else, will bring hundreds of millions of tax revenue into the state yearly. Those are positives. More freedom is also a positive.

 

[BugI02]

I'd say republicans on pro gun legislation are about the same as the abortion. Or several other issues.

Sadly, I must agree. Run on ending the evils of [insert hot button here], get elected, do nothing on that issue, run again in two or four years and use the same issue for fundraising and get out the vote

'Re-elect ME so that THIS time I will finally be able to end the scourge of [insert hot button issue here]'

This is why I can't really fathom the animus for Trump. He ran on hot button issue, then DELIVERED on those hot button issues to the extent he was able against formidable opposition from just about every other area of TPTB including turncoats in his own party - but he wasn't NICE about it, so give up on a proven fighter and try the next rando RINO

We have met the enemy and he is us, indeed

 

[BugI02]

California should not be used as an example of how to run a state.

Finally, something we can agree on 100%

 

[BugI02]

Wasn't (R) Kasich governor in 2016 when the Ohio MMJ bill passed?

Immaterial, the 2015 semi-legalization was passed by REFERENDUM, Kasich had little say in the matter

That's why it is somewhat humorous to read criticism of the Ohio legal structures - because it was the stoner vote that pushed it through

Not to mention that Kasich isn't what I would consider an actual conservative or Republican

 

[BugI02]

To me, this kind of sums up this thread

 

[Flash-hider]

.

What about the tax boons that we are supposed to be yielding already? Lottery, casinos, other gambling? What has become of all of that money? Better question yet; How much accountability/transparency is built into specific tax revenue increases?

I have a buddy in Madison who recounted that their little "Podunk" police department was flush with "spend it or lose it" funds for a few years after the riverboat casino was launched. Overnight, they had jet skis, speedboats and all the storage, maintenance, personnel to support them.

.....................................

Wonder if we can wrangle a tax cut as part of the legalization deal? Maybe give us back the 17% sales tax increase that Mitch arranged for us?



.

So, The Michigan lottery brings in about a billion dollar a year currently. Could be a sizeable amount that represents around 7.5% of the total education budget. The 1% of the sales tax that goes directly in the education budget contributes about 47%. Then added to that is the 6-mil statewide property tax levy, plus what the school districts levy. Does it help? Well, that's a billion they don't hit the taxpayers up for.
But my contention has always been, fiscal responsibility at whatever government level is close to non-existent. Any extra revenue that's had, be it the lottery, casino's, mj legalization, whatever, doesn't reduce the tax burden on the taxpayer. In fact, more programs are created, budgets become more bloated and when the revenue can't support the weight of the expenses, they shake down the taxpayers to cough up more because they want us to protect what they created.

 

[phylodog]

To me, this kind of sums up this thread

View attachment 175095

"Don't knock it till you try it, some kids think it's great!"

Anyone remember that one??