• 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!

Amendment 64 Passes: Colorado Legalizes Marijuana For Recreational Use

You're right, though I do know the federal government was making threats.

The fact that this didn't happen this time (or at least wasn't as effective) though may be indicative of a change in momentum.
 
That's my thought. And the fact that this ISN'T California I think is going to help the movement as well.

Not having nuts in your cause can go a long way.
 
Ok with me. Besides, I just realized this myself, but that's crack I was talking about...Not pot. People in inner cities will just buy weed from the store just like alcohol or cigarettes if it becomes legalized. Are you trying to say I'm anti-minority because I want to take away a form of their income? Or am I totally misreading this situation? Either way, taking a criminal element away from marijuana is a positive for society as a whole.

You're mistakenly assigning a commendable sense of altruism to the members of the minority community that make their income from selling pot. Taking away their only source of income will not be good for them, irrespective of anyone else's sense of benefit to the community. They don't live with their parents, they don't even have parents, they live on the street and make money by selling illegal pot. Look at what the end of prohibition did to responsible citizens like Al Capone.
 
You're mistakenly assigning a commendable sense of altruism to the members of the minority community that make their income from selling pot. Taking away their only source of income will not be good for them, irrespective of anyone else's sense of benefit to the community. They don't live with their parents, they don't even have parents, they live on the street and make money by selling illegal pot. Look at what the end of prohibition did to responsible citizens like Al Capone.

And I'm fine with that. I'm also fine with all the prison guards and DEA agents who will ultimately lose their jobs. It's still a positive on society as a whole, including the members of the minority community.
 
You're mistakenly assigning a commendable sense of altruism to the members of the minority community that make their income from selling pot. Taking away their only source of income will not be good for them, irrespective of anyone else's sense of benefit to the community. They don't live with their parents, they don't even have parents, they live on the street and make money by selling illegal pot.
Oh boo hoo, we're taking money away from drug dealers. Jesus Christ, is that seriously what you're taking from this?

Look at what the end of prohibition did to responsible citizens like Al Capone.
I'm sorry, no one is that stupid. If you're just here to troll and not debate, go somewhere else. I hear TrollPolitics.com is looking for members.
 
What makes anyone think this will put the criminal dealers out of business? Even if some people go to all the trouble, cost and risk of setting up legal business, they're not going to cover anything like the width or depth of the market in the foreseeable future. If anything the gangs will have an easier time of it since I suspect this measure will be matched with a reduction in policing resources focused on it and also what little resource there might be in drug treatment and prevention.
 
All that is needed now is for cocaine to be legalized and the Supreme Court judges, Wall Street bankers, corporate Cleo's etc can come out of the closet
 
Very good news indeed!
 
Apparently Peyton Manning bought 21 Papa John's franchises. Smart man....
 
What makes anyone think this will put the criminal dealers out of business? Even if some people go to all the trouble, cost and risk of setting up legal business, they're not going to cover anything like the width or depth of the market in the foreseeable future. If anything the gangs will have an easier time of it since I suspect this measure will be matched with a reduction in policing resources focused on it and also what little resource there might be in drug treatment and prevention.

Treatment for weed addiction/abuse? The (ab)use of the recreational drug alcohol far exceeds that of weed and costs plenty more, the basis for this "decriminalization" action is to better use state resources for real crime, not to lock up Jane and Johnny because they chose an "alternative" recreational drug. Better to legalize, control and tax weed that to try to make it go away, just as it is with alcohol. Real drug education and examples of ruined lives due to abuse (not simple use) of all recreational drugs is sane, locking people up for simply chosing drug A over drug B is insane.
 
Better to legalize, control and tax weed that to try to make it go away, just as it is with alcohol.
I don't necessarily disagree in principal but my question stands; What makes people think this legislation will make the criminal networks currently supplying drugs disappear?

I predict one or two small ventures will establish the taxed, regulated and controlled legal businesses in the state but the vast majority of users either won't want (because it's inconvenient, expensive, poor choice, don't trust the government) or be able to (because it's too far away, they're under 21) to buy there. The criminal networks, with all the negatives that come with them, will still exist. They could even benefit, from greater public acceptance and reduced police resources aimed in their direction.

I don't pretend to have the answer. I just don't think this should be seen as some kind of end game magically solving all the problems. The idea that you can shift the laws around cannabis to be like those for alcohol or tobacco and the social structures around them will suddenly shift too is either naive or dishonest in the extreme.
 
I don't necessarily disagree in principal but my question stands; What makes people think this legislation will make the criminal networks currently supplying drugs disappear?

I predict one or two small ventures will establish the taxed, regulated and controlled legal businesses in the state but the vast majority of users either won't want (because it's inconvenient, expensive, poor choice, don't trust the government) or be able to (because it's too far away, they're under 21) to buy there. The criminal networks, with all the negatives that come with them, will still exist. They could even benefit, from greater public acceptance and reduced police resources aimed in their direction.

I don't pretend to have the answer. I just don't think this should be seen as some kind of end game magically solving all the problems. The idea that you can shift the laws around cannabis to be like those for alcohol or tobacco and the social structures around them will suddenly shift too is either naive or dishonest in the extreme.
If the legal sellers can sell for say 75% of the street price, they will have an expanding business.
How high could the cost of goods sold be on legal marijuana?
I suspect most of the current cost comes from it being an illegal business.
Think about Joe farmer, has farming equipment, Tractors, Plows, seeders, hay cutters and balers.
How much legal pot could one grow on a 40 acre field?
A low end modern wheat field can get 1800 lbs per acre, so a 40 acre field
could yield 72000 lbs. I bet there is a much higher yield from marijuana than wheat.
Current wheat prices are about 20 cents per pound, so I think it may be safe to say it costs
less than 20 cents per pound to grow wheat. I suspect it would be less for marijuana.
So the farmer sell his crop for $4.00 per pound in round bales, The 25% tax makes it $5.00 per pound.
The Distributor processes the marijuana, and sells the marijuana to retailers for $20 per pound.
($25 after his 25 % tax)
The retailer sells 1 ounce units at $10 each including his 25% tax of $2, grossing $128 per pound.
It looks like LOTS of room for profit, taxes, and still undercut the illegal trade.
 
I don't pretend to have the answer. I just don't think this should be seen as some kind of end game magically solving all the problems. The idea that you can shift the laws around cannabis to be like those for alcohol or tobacco and the social structures around them will suddenly shift too is either naive or dishonest in the extreme.

How is it naive? The effects during Prohibition are the same effects that have been witnessed with criminalizing marijuana.

And legalizing marijuana won't eliminate drug cartels, but I would suspect that full legalization of marijuana would surely a chunk out of the drug cartels.
 
I'm sorry, no one is that stupid. If you're just here to troll and not debate, go somewhere else. I hear TrollPolitics.com is looking for members.

Down, RA, down boy! Do you really want to be a poster child for the common perception that Liberals become angry when faced with humor? I think Midwest Lib knew the Al Capone comment wasn't serious.

Additionally, please review your tag line. In his original comment, Emanuel Derman capitalized the word "God." In your comment, both times you have removed the capitalization and improperly changed the word "God" to lower case. The result is that your tagline is hugely variant from Derman's statement and meaning. This sort of infantile plagiarism completely changes the original meaning to reflect your own personal quirks. Accuracy is important in the field of engineering, RA.
 
I don't necessarily disagree in principal but my question stands; What makes people think this legislation will make the criminal networks currently supplying drugs disappear?

I predict one or two small ventures will establish the taxed, regulated and controlled legal businesses in the state but the vast majority of users either won't want (because it's inconvenient, expensive, poor choice, don't trust the government) or be able to (because it's too far away, they're under 21) to buy there. The criminal networks, with all the negatives that come with them, will still exist. They could even benefit, from greater public acceptance and reduced police resources aimed in their direction.

I don't pretend to have the answer. I just don't think this should be seen as some kind of end game magically solving all the problems. The idea that you can shift the laws around cannabis to be like those for alcohol or tobacco and the social structures around them will suddenly shift too is either naive or dishonest in the extreme.

Legal, open markets tend to have much lower costs and be more far more convenient for consumers. Police seizures and the threat of such, violence, and no clear property rights all drive up costs significantly in a black market. Unless the legal market is too heavily regulated or taxed, the product will be far cheaper to produce legally. Consumers will also probably prefer the cheaper, safer, and easier to find pot.

Now, it is always possible for governments to not go far enough, over-regulating, overtaxing, or still restricting the production and distribution of marijuana. The Netherlands had this problem, only decriminalizing pot and keeping distribution illegal. The black market was able to proliferate. Now, I have no idea how the federal government will play into this, but even with numerous raids a large above-ground market has developed in California. Hopefully, something similar will develop in Colorado.
 
Down, RA, down boy! Do you really want to be a poster child for the common perception that Liberals become angry when faced with humor? I think Midwest Lib knew the Al Capone comment wasn't serious.

Additionally, please review your tag line. In his original comment, Emanuel Derman capitalized the word "God." In your comment, both times you have removed the capitalization and improperly changed the word "God" to lower case. The result is that your tagline is hugely variant from Derman's statement and meaning. This sort of infantile plagiarism completely changes the original meaning to reflect your own personal quirks. Accuracy is important in the field of engineering, RA.

First off, I'm not liberal, you're just a clown. Second off, I corrected his grammar error. In the English language, simple nouns such as "god", "dog", "plant", and "human" are not capitalized.

Please, tell me what you know about engineering.
 
First off, I'm not liberal, you're just a clown. Second off, I corrected his grammar error. In the English language, simple nouns such as "god", "dog", "plant", and "human" are not capitalized. Please, tell me what you know about engineering.

Don't try to lie your way out of it. To Christians, God is a proper noun and correctly capitalized as a proper noun. For you to profess to "Correct the grammar error" to further your atheist beliefs is shameful plagiarism, dishonest and would be very offensive to Derman.

I know several engineers who are not insufferable asses.
 
Don't try to lie your way out of it. To Christians, God is a proper noun and correctly capitalized as a proper noun. For you to profess to "Correct the grammar error" to further your atheist beliefs is shameful plagiarism, dishonest and would be very offensive to Derman.

I know several engineers who are not insufferable asses.
Lie about what? Proper grammar? If you don't believe me you can look it up. If you and your buddies want to ignore English grammar that's your business.

Thank you for trying to lump my anti-religious beliefs into my chosen profession.

In the mean time, the rest of the world will be legalizing marijuana, while you sit there with nothing but your religion and hate.
 
Lie about what? Proper grammar? If you don't believe me you can look it up. If you and your buddies want to ignore English grammar that's your business. Thank you for trying to lump my anti-religious beliefs into my chosen profession. In the mean time, the rest of the world will be legalizing marijuana, while you sit there with nothing but your religion and hate.

Don't forget the guns. You Godless loon Obama lovers don't want Americans to have guns. If you actually are in Europe, realize that without the United States, NO ONE is going to come to save your sorry butt.
 
Back
Top Bottom