why is weed illigal???

[Charon]

I spent about 5 days in Amsterdam and I remember the coffee shop section as being mellow and scenic and the red light district (especially during the weekend evenings) as being drunken frat boy rowdy fest. Started to walk in and turned around. Kinda like the glory that was New Orleans, vomit and all.

Much preffer ed the coffee shop section But, also enjoyed the beer of course in some of the more restrained places, especially the affordable Belgians.

Charon

[bongaroo]

do they give free breast exams at those places bongboy?

Don't feed the troll.

Don't feed the troll.


Don't feed the troll!


From what I've seen they do well, but I wouldn't say its the way to become a millionaire.  You've got to understand that prohibition here in the USA makes the whole situation different.

1) Prices aren't inflated by a black market system.
2) A smaller percentage of their population smokes than ours.  (we could argue over different reasons but I see its legality as one.  Many kids here in the states will do it, just like drinking or cigarettes because they feel rebelous or cool.  It doesn't have that conotation there.)
3) People readily grow their own.  If they have the dedication or just the green thumb they can do it.
4) There are a lot of coffeeshops so competition keeps the prices in check.

Good question though.

[Zazen13]

From what I've seen they do well, but I wouldn't say its the way to become a millionaire.  You've got to understand that prohibition here in the USA makes the whole situation different.

1) Prices aren't inflated by a black market system.
2) A smaller percentage of their population smokes than ours.  (we could argue over different reasons but I see its legality as one.  Many kids here in the states will do it, just like drinking or cigarettes because they feel rebelous or cool.  It doesn't have that conotation there.)
3) People readily grow their own.  If they have the dedication or just the green thumb they can do it.
4) There are a lot of coffeeshops so competition keeps the prices in check.

Good question though.

Hmmm, these direct observations of a regulated, legalized marijuana marketplace sound strangely familiar...I am overcome with an eerie feeling of deja vu...

<Strokes chin in deep contemplation> 

[Vudak]

Wow, these direct observations of a regulated, legalized marijuana marketplace sound strangely familiar...I am overcome with an eery feeling of Deja vu...

<Strokes chin in deep contemplation> 

Uh huh...  Now what about my observation on how the more impressive the drug seizures, the more impressive the product reaching the streets?

No one's claiming it'll be a new gold mine...  But I do think it would be more profitable for the economy as a whole to have it be a legal product that can be taxed.  I dispute the government's claim that it's more profitable to keep it illegal.  I think they tell themselves that so they don't look like as big of ineffective idiots for prosecuting the drug war.

[Zazen13]

Uh huh...  Now what about my observation on how the more impressive the drug seizures, the more impressive the product reaching the streets?

No one's claiming it'll be a new gold mine...  But I do think it would be more profitable for the economy as a whole to have it be a legal product that can be taxed.  I dispute the government's claim that it's more profitable to keep it illegal.  I think they tell themselves that so they don't look like as big of ineffective idiots for prosecuting the drug war.

No arguments there. It may be more profitable in the end to legalize and tax it. The problem is, political will always favors the status quo. Unless politicians are compelled by overwhelming public opinion there will likely be no change in policy. This would be true even if there were irrefutable proof of the economic and social welfare benefits of marijuana legalization.

[SD67]

<Strokes chin in deep contemplation> 

I just got an image of Zazen not at all unlike this 

[Jackal1]

I just got an image of Zazen not at all unlike this 
(Image removed from quote.)

Hmmmmmmmmm. I keep coming up with an image more along these lines.

[SD67]

[mechanic]

Vudak, Zazen...  i have to disagree, i would refer you to my first post here. Legal drugs earn less in tax than stealing drugs at the boarders and selling it to the dealers yourself. That IS what happens globaly even if it is not the government directly it is someone in power who is bent. To legalise cannabis would be to cut off your right to steal people's cannabis and sell it for huge revenue.

Even with a good honest man at the top job, someone, somewhere down the line is going to lose out if street drugs are legalised and therefore campaign against it.
 Look to governments and notice which powerfull people campaign against legalising cannabis the most.....if they dont have an obvious reason ......like an overdosed child died or something horrible.... it is most probably that they are making money from confiscated narcotics.

[Zazen13]

Vudak, Zazen...  i have to disagree, i would refer you to my first post here. Legal drugs earn less in tax than stealing drugs at the boarders and selling it to the dealers yourself. That IS what happens globaly even if it is not the government directly it is someone in power who is bent. To legalise cannabis would be to cut off your right to steal people's cannabis and sell it for huge revenue.

Even with a good honest man at the top job, someone, somewhere down the line is going to lose out if street drugs are legalised and therefore campaign against it.
 Look to governments and notice which powerfull people campaign against legalising cannabis the most.....if they dont have an obvious reason ......like an overdosed child died or something horrible.... it is most probably that they are making money from confiscated narcotics.

I know for a fact that happens with any contraband including weaponry. But, marijuana itself has a relatively low street value compared to how conspicuous and cumbersome it is to transport and sell especially when compared to "hard drugs" like cocaine or heroin.

Precisely because marijuana does not beget physical addiction it has a very finite and relatively easily satiated market. One marijuana user will only smoke so much in terms of both frequency and quantity. Playing the supply/demand game with marijuana isn't very effective because people simply  either just stop smoking it, or grow their own if it gets too expensive on the black market. The supply/demand game with drugs like cocaine and heroin is extremely effective at manipulating price as the users almost literally can't live without it and it cannot be domestically produced by the citizenry. This makes the "hard drugs" extremely susceptible to the type of systemic government corruption you are speaking of.

When it comes to government corruption the name of the game is the fewest "transactions" for the biggest "reward". The more conspicuous and frequent the transactions the more likely the corruption will get "noticed". This means marijuana is rarely the primary focus of the "misdirection of contraband". A kilogram of cocaine is worth 30 times or more than a kilogram of marijuana on the black market and is only a fraction of the physical volume when it comes to efficiently importing, transporting and concealing it.

[mechanic]

Hmmm, a very good point there. It would be interesting to make a study of cannabis users and average income per annum from selling confiscated goods (sadly impossible as these sales are obviously not documented). It would of course turn out that much more pot is getting into the country and sold illegally than is being siezed by customs. But what would the ratios equal in terms of pure profit to be made on stolen drugs compared to the profit of taxing all users of cannabis? Surely, like you say, the black market is limited by home growers and competitive dealers, which keeps the price reasonably low. But would that not apply the same if pot was legal and taxed? What is to stop even more people growing pot and decreasing the demand even further if it were legal? What would be the new cost of enforcing dedicated growers and no one else?
 To sustain the demand as high as possible it is smarter to keep the drug illegal. When a big drug bust happens the demand climbs higher still. It would be a tough calculation to make and a big gamble of profits, far safer to remain as it is and keep the system going as long as the 'free' money is being made from confiscated drugs.

[Zazen13]

Hmmm, a very good point there. It would be interesting to make a study of cannabis users and average income per annum from selling confiscated goods (sadly impossible as these sales are obviously not documented). It would of course turn out that much more pot is getting into the country and sold illegally than is being siezed by customs. But what would the ratios equal in terms of pure profit to be made on stolen drugs compared to the profit of taxing all users of cannabis? Surely, like you say, the black market is limited by home growers and competitive dealers, which keeps the price reasonably low. But would that not apply the same if pot was legal and taxed? What is to stop even more people growing pot and decreasing the demand even further if it were legal? What would be the new cost of enforcing dedicated growers and no one else?
 To sustain the demand as high as possible it is smarter to keep the drug illegal. When a big drug bust happens the demand climbs higher still. It would be a tough calculation to make and a big gamble of profits, far safer to remain as it is and keep the system going as long as the 'free' money is being made from confiscated drugs.

Yup, I am not disagreeing with you. In fact, where marijuana is decriminalized it is not only legal to possess and use it, but also produce it for "personal" use in at least a limited way. So, legalizing it would almost certainly increase not decrease the private, domestic production of marijuana. The systemic government corruption problem is really just another facet of the law enforcement benefit of the seizure of assets incentive, only it is "under the table". But, marijuana, of all the illicit drugs, is the least attractive candidate for diversion in this way. It's bulky, relatively inexpensive, hard to price inflate, not addictive so it's not a "necessary consumable" and it is conspicuous in terms of smell and extremely transport capacity intensive to distribute on a large scale.

[Anaxogoras]

Pot smokers range across all socio-economic strata, from guys in the gutter to phd's.  Just imagine if Hitler had become a stoner instead of trying to take over the world...

[Zazen13]

Pot smokers range across all socio-economic strata, from guys in the gutter to phd's.  Just imagine if Hitler had become a stoner instead of trying to take over the world...

This is because unlike drugs imbibed purely for an addictive physical sensation, such as cocaine or methamphetamine, marijuana is considered one of only a very few drugs considered to be a valuable way to explore altered states of consciousness reasonably safely. This "spiritual" side of its use tends to attract people that are intelligent, well educated and therefore generally wealthier. This is another reason marijuana cultivation is a hobby not necessarily enjoyed for any financial reasons, but just for the pure connoisseur factor. This makes its legality or commercial availability of little importance to this sub-group of marijuana enthusiasts...

[RTHolmes]

recommended reading: "Food of the Gods" by Terence McKenna - a very interesting take on psychoactive substance use and human development.