• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ron Paul, Barney Frank team up to legalize marijuana

So there's no chance that pot can cause lung cancer?

Of course it can, but it also depends on your method of usage.

If you use a vaporizer, takes away the harmful smoke.

If you're smoking straight up Bong, Joint or pipe, then yes you're gonna get some nasty gunk in your lungs, as with smoking anything.

Ingesting is a good way to avoid this, cosmic brownies and the lot.

Did you have any point in saying what you said?
 
I don't think it is. The black market cigarette industry is larger than the illegal drug industry.
The three links you provided do not support this statement. The black market cigarette industry is NOT larger than the illegal drug trade, you were talking out your behind when you said that.

So, a standardized cigarette tax is going to discourage people from evading cigarette taxes? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight!
If you read the links you provided, you'll see that smugglers are buying cigarettes in VA where taxes are low, and selling then in NYC where taxes are high. So yes, disparate taxes are an incentive to smuggle, and standardized taxes would eliminate this incentive. You're not very well read on this subject are you?
 
Either way, we're going to be spending billions going after illegal drugs.

getting rid of the federal war on drugs-especially weed would save us tons
 
I know... I did like one of your posts. I feel dirty.

Basically it's an organized crime thing where they take cigarettes from a state with low taxes on cigarettes and bring them to a state with high cigarette taxes to sell them. I suggest you read up more on google.


this is how federalism is supposed to work--the feds should have nothing to do with cigarettes and each state should have the right to tax them as they see fit--and if one state has idiotically high taxes that aberration would be nullified by other states having lower taxes and their merchants would sell far more product serving as a correction to the out of line state
 
getting rid of the federal war on drugs-especially weed would save us tons
I'd be willing to spend it IF we were getting something out of it that was remotely worth the price. I am unconvinced that the nation is better off because we spend however much we spend putting Cheech & Chong in jail.
 
Some major differences between pot and tobacco are the quantity needed to supply a user and the processing "needed" to generate the end product that the user wants.

I may well be wrong about this...if someone feel like getting the numbers, I would appreciate it.

I think it takes more tobacco plants to support one users use for a year than it takes pot plants to support one users use.

Anyway, the point being, that I suspect that people would be more likely grow their own pot and buy pot from the local farmer's market rather than resort to buying tax smuggled joints.
My guess is based on the theory that it's much simpler to supply oneself or one's local community with pot than it is to do the same with cigarettes.
If that's wrong, then the theory may not hold.
 
Some major differences between pot and tobacco are the quantity needed to supply a user and the processing "needed" to generate the end product that the user wants.

I may well be wrong about this...if someone feel like getting the numbers, I would appreciate it.

I think it takes more tobacco plants to support one users use for a year than it takes pot plants to support one users use.

Anyway, the point being, that I suspect that people would be more likely grow their own pot and buy pot from the local farmer's market rather than resort to buying tax smuggled joints.
My guess is based on the theory that it's much simpler to supply oneself or one's local community with pot than it is to do the same with cigarettes.
If that's wrong, then the theory may not hold.

And, when the government figures out that they are losing billions in revenue, because people are growing their own pot, they will make private pot growing, illegal.

Pot will always be a controlled substance and therefore have laws that control it's use and distribution. My whole point, is that the, "it will create tax revenue", and, "we'll save money because we won't have to enforce the law", arguments are crap, because neither are true.
 
I am all for legalization. My biggest concern about legalizing marijuana is that it might lead to a financial bubble. It would be a bonanza of cash that might lead to a little malinvestment and irrational exuberance.
 
And, when the government figures out that they are losing billions in revenue, because people are growing their own pot, they will make private pot growing, illegal.

Pot will always be a controlled substance and therefore have laws that control it's use and distribution. My whole point, is that the, "it will create tax revenue", and, "we'll save money because we won't have to enforce the law", arguments are crap, because neither are true.

they can always tax the seeds, or require a license to grow, or apply heavy tax on grow equipment, etc, etc.

elimination of enforcement costs alone will produce a net savings - even without a tax scheme applied.
 
I am all for legalization. My biggest concern about legalizing marijuana is that it might lead to a financial bubble. It would be a bonanza of cash that might lead to a little malinvestment and irrational exuberance.

that is the most bizarre concern I have ever read.
 
that is the most bizarre concern I have ever read.

All the other concerns are bogus. There would be a rush of investment and a LOTTA glorious money to be made. You would be legalizing a huge market.
 
I don't think it is. The black market cigarette industry is larger than the illegal drug industry.

Cigarette Smuggling Linked to Terrorism (washingtonpost.com)

North Country Gazette » Illegal Cigarette Traffickers Snuffed Out

Because NY is trying to control the behavior of it's citizens. Problems surrounding the government's increasing prohibition against cigarettes is not an argument in favor of prohibition of marijuana. If NY taxes were simply guided by revenue instead of trying to control behavior this problem disappears.
 
All the other concerns are bogus. There would be a rush of investment and a LOTTA glorious money to be made. You would be legalizing a huge market.

a rush to invest is not a bubble. and remember, production costs are already in existence (demand would largely remain constant IMO). In truth, investment costs are already a bubble because of the black market element artificially raising prices to meet presetn demand. what would actually happen is costs would be reduced and the bubble that exists would deflate. but it would be offset because this investment money would not be in the black market any longer.
 
they can always tax the seeds, or require a license to grow, or apply heavy tax on grow equipment, etc, etc.

elimination of enforcement costs alone will produce a net savings - even without a tax scheme applied.

Then, we'll have to have to turn the ATF, DEA, whomever, into the license and tax cops for pot seeds and growing equipment.

Now, let's get into the growing equipment tax. That's the same stuff that people buy at Home Depot to grow tomatoes in their back yard. So, evidently, the price on those goods are going to increase.

Those damned unintended consequences!
 
Then, we'll have to have to turn the ATF, DEA, whomever, into the license and tax cops for pot seeds and growing equipment.

by that reasoning, we should eliminate fishing license laws too. what with the heavy costs of enforcement, better just to ban this recreational activity outright.
 
I don't think it is. The black market cigarette industry is larger than the illegal drug industry.

Cigarette Smuggling Linked to Terrorism (washingtonpost.com)

North Country Gazette » Illegal Cigarette Traffickers Snuffed Out

No.. it is not. I am telling you first hand it is not. You had AQ involved in cigarette trafficking in the 90s, sure, but again, that doesn't mean the size of the general black market to be larger than the illegal drug industry. Thats just a retarded notion.
 
here is my thoughts on it, this is one issue that not even 10 years ago a lot of you would be totally against and probably a lot of you would have been totally for. To me it makes perfect sense however. Create the medical and perhaps even recreational marijuana industry and put a sin-tax on them similar to that of cigarettes and alcohol. You will greatly reduce prison and jail populations, reduce the need for such large police forces in certain cities, and save the federal government a lot of time and money as well. This policy is only positive all around. Of course, productiveness can go down, I recall studies saying habitual tokers are 10% less productive but hey, Im sure habitual drinkers are too. I could seriously see the passing of this law make things better for USA in more than one way. Totally for it.
 
by that reasoning, we should eliminate fishing license laws too. what with the heavy costs of enforcement, better just to ban this recreational activity outright.


Part of fishing/hunting license fees go to conservation.
 
The reason why this law is so maddening, is because the laws are not consistent. When I was growing up, I was forced to be a part of multiple DARE cop lectures throughout the years. The premise of the government's argument against drugs, are the fact that they are unhealthy.

So why is alcohol and tobacco legal again? There is the inconsistency. If you want marijuana to be illegal, then be consistent and make alcohol and tobacco illegal because they are more unhealthy than marijuana. If you want alcohol and tobacco to remain legal, then there is no reason to keep marijuana illegal. Simple as that.
 
And, when the government figures out that they are losing billions in revenue, because people are growing their own pot, they will make private pot growing, illegal.
Much like they did with growing our own mint and basil and tobacco. Yes, I see your point. It's entirely inevitable. No possibility of anything else happening.
But, in the interest of debate, for the sake of argument, could you provide some evidence that this an inevitability?

My whole point, is that the, "it will create tax revenue", and, "we'll save money because we won't have to enforce the law", arguments are crap, because neither are true.
It would be cool if you could provide some substantial evidence that if pot were legalized that it would still require the same amount of money to enforce the laws related to it. Before that, though, you should show that there would be laws that were in need of enforcing if pot were legalized. After that, you can show how the enforcement of these laws would cost as much as the cost of the current laws.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom