• 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!

in italy the cannabis

Erod said:
I've spent LOTS of time in both cities, particularly downtown. Now, you can't walk down the street in downtown Denver without wasted potheads roaming around all over the place, smoking openly.

It used to be very family friendly down there. Now, nobody wants to take their kids downtown.
Click to expand...
I haven't been there, but suspect you're reasonably accurate here.

If so, this is the downside to decriminalization.

I would hope that as decriminalization occurs, laws against public consumption would be put in place - similar to alcohol regs.

No one and their family should have to breath in someone's second-hand drug as they go about their public business! That's freakin' ridiculous! :doh
 
Chomsky said:
I haven't been there, but suspect you're reasonably accurate here.

If so, this is the downside to decriminalization.

I would hope that as decriminalization occurs, laws against public consumption would be put in place - similar to alcohol regs.

No one and their family should have to breath in someone's second-hand drug as they go about their public business! That's freakin' ridiculous! :doh
Click to expand...

Legal or not, it still quite expensive. Those who have become lazy from smoking too much are more likely to steal to get money to pay for it and other drugs.
 
WCH said:
Legal or not, it still quite expensive. Those who have become lazy from smoking too much are more likely to steal to get money to pay for it and other drugs.
Click to expand...
Well, we'll have to see about that - I'm not going to jump to stereotypes, and the pot-heads I've known have generally been pretty benign.

Now the alkies are a whole 'nother story! :doh
 
Chomsky said:
I haven't been there, but suspect you're reasonably accurate here.

If so, this is the downside to decriminalization.

I would hope that as decriminalization occurs, laws against public consumption would be put in place - similar to alcohol regs.

No one and their family should have to breath in someone's second-hand drug as they go about their public business! That's freakin' ridiculous! :doh
Click to expand...

It would likely follow smoking standards...and they do.
 
Erod said:
Well, it's driven the crime rate up in Denver and Seattle, which used to be great cities to visit. You should think twice about it.

Crime Rates Are Soaring in Seattle and Denver -- Is Marijuana to Blame? -- The Motley Fool
Click to expand...

Apparently you didn't actually read the article you posted. From the article...

It's plausible for sure, but correlation does not equal causation. There are so many variables that the aforementioned data doesn't account for that it's probably best to treat this correlation as nothing more than an interesting coincidence at the moment.
Click to expand...
 
Carjosse said:
That is the problem, skyrocketing housing costs benefit those who own a house but screw over the younger generation. Then the older generation complains about young people living at home or not wanting to start a family. But I imagine that Colorado has not really seen such a dramatic price increase as that, yet.
Click to expand...
There is a negative aspect of this for home owners too though, and it is especially troublesome to retirees:

Property taxes more-or-less directly scale with property values, so if the house value doubles so will your taxes.

Now your equity doubles which is great! But if you don't have the cash flow, equity won't pay the taxes. So you're forced to sell.

Now I will say that selling and capturing a nice equity stake sounds better than not having the ability to buy in the first place, but then unfortunately that equity cashed-out will not allow one to purchase in the same area - since all the available places have gone up as well!

Consequently, those in this situation often split for some cheaper geography.

Not saying it's bad to own an appreciating house (I love mine!), but there's ramifications to everything and one of them is homeowner's can be forced out of their homes due to rising taxes if they don't have the cashflow to pay more.
 
Chomsky said:
I haven't been there, but suspect you're reasonably accurate here.

If so, this is the downside to decriminalization.

I would hope that as decriminalization occurs, laws against public consumption would be put in place - similar to alcohol regs.

No one and their family should have to breath in someone's second-hand drug as they go about their public business! That's freakin' ridiculous! :doh
Click to expand...

Precisely. And that is what both the Oregon and Washington law put in place.
 
Erod said:
Well, it's driven the crime rate up in Denver and Seattle, which used to be great cities to visit. You should think twice about it.

Crime Rates Are Soaring in Seattle and Denver -- Is Marijuana to Blame? -- The Motley Fool
Click to expand...

LOL! You've been slapped down now so many times with nonsense like that I'm surprised you still bother to post it.

A. Correlation does not imply causation.
B. You cannot rationally compare cities to entire states, which are the jurisdiction in which it was legalized
C. Why would you lie about your own link? "For the time being I don't think it would be wise to imply that marijuana is increasing crime rates in Seattle or Denver."

Game. Set. Match.
 
WCH said:
Legal or not, it still quite expensive. Those who have become lazy from smoking too much are more likely to steal to get money to pay for it and other drugs.
Click to expand...

Please provide the data that backs up your claim.
 
NO1 said:
Anyway they can increase the supply and lower the prices.
Click to expand...

There's only so much land. Besides, before the California exodus ****ed up our home prices we had trees and untouched land. We liked it that way and frankly it's part of what drew in the Californians. Folks always do this, see a beautiful spot and then start going there in droves, bringing their city bull**** with them and destroying the beautiful place. Once the cycle is done they move on to the next beautiful place.
 
Ikari said:
It would likely follow smoking standards...and they do.
Click to expand...
I'm good with that if it's enforced, along with public intoxication laws.

I'm happy after all these decades that pot is finally getting decriminalized. I'd also like to end the insane War on Drugs.

I just don't want to deal with dope smoke or stoned tokers, as I go about my public business. If so, then we're all good and I wish the kids well!
 
Chomsky said:
There is a negative aspect of this for home owners too though, and it is especially troublesome to retirees:

Property taxes more-or-less directly scale with property values, so if the house value doubles so will your taxes.

Now your equity doubles which is great! But if you don't have the cash flow, equity won't pay the taxes. So you're forced to sell.

Now I will say that selling and capturing a nice equity stake sounds better than not having the ability to buy in the first place, but then unfortunately that equity cashed-out will not allow one to purchase in the same area - since all the available places have gone up as well!

Consequently, those in this situation often split for some cheaper geography.

Not saying it's bad to own an appreciating house (I love mine!), but there's ramifications to everything and one of them is homeowner's can be forced out of their homes due to rising taxes if they don't have the cashflow to pay more.
Click to expand...

Maybe the higher tax is positive. If it jolts you into action, breaking out and conquering new horizons in new parts of the world. ;)
 
Chomsky said:
I'm good with that if it's enforced, along with public intoxication laws.

I'm happy after all these decades that pot is finally getting decriminalized. I'd also like to end the insane War on Drugs.

I just don't want to deal with dope smoke or stoned tokers, as I go about my public business. If so, then we're all good and I wish the kids well!
Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, you probably have been all along, you just didn't know it. Some of us know how to maintain. :mrgreen:
 
clownboy said:
There's only so much land. Besides, before the California exodus ****ed up our home prices we had trees and untouched land. We liked it that way and frankly it's part of what drew in the Californians. Folks always do this, see a beautiful spot and then start going there in droves, bringing their city bull**** with them and destroying the beautiful place. Once the cycle is done they move on to the next beautiful place.
Click to expand...

They used to refer to places to which the rich still went as untouched places.
 
Erod said:
I've spent LOTS of time in both cities, particularly downtown. Now, you can't walk down the street in downtown Denver without wasted potheads roaming around all over the place, smoking openly.

It used to be very family friendly down there. Now, nobody wants to take their kids downtown.
Click to expand...

I live in Denver, the CITY of Denver. The only thing that marijuana has done that might affect the crime rate is bring in many new people from around the country. The sixteenth street mall was always popular with the homeless. The problems there are as much a result of heroin (illegal) as anything. Even still, Denver is a VERY safe, clean and progressive place to live. Your conservative nay-saying is predictably ignorant.

Calling people "wasted" and implying they are high on weed alone is utter misinformation. If you don't like my city, stay in Texas where nothing bad ever happens, unless you count racism, religious extremism and Ted Cruz (redundant?). Talk about a place where it's unsafe to bring your family.
 
clownboy said:
There's only so much land. Besides, before the California exodus ****ed up our home prices we had trees and untouched land. We liked it that way and frankly it's part of what drew in the Californians. Folks always do this, see a beautiful spot and then start going there in droves, bringing their city bull**** with them and destroying the beautiful place. Once the cycle is done they move on to the next beautiful place.
Click to expand...
Obviously there's short-term and micro-fads that occur, and sometimes move-on.

But in the macro sense, we cannot escape the trend of a growing population inhabiting a finite amount of land!

The moral of the story: If you own or buy land and real estate in a stable desirable area, and it or you has an income stream that can handle the carrying costs, at some point down the road in your progeny stream they will be very happy! ;)
 
joG said:
They used to refer to places to which the rich still went as untouched places.
Click to expand...

Well, we used to use that phrase to denote places that were enjoyed and then left as they were found. "Leave only footprints, take only memories". It's not just the rich who are pilgrims (those who have to make every place they go into the same craphole they were trying to get away from in the first place).
 
joG said:
Maybe the higher tax is positive. If it jolts you into action, breaking out and conquering new horizons in new parts of the world. ;)
Click to expand...
Well, I guess that's one way of looking at being forced to move to a cheaper place! :lamo
 
clownboy said:
Well, to be fair, you probably have been all along, you just didn't know it. Some of us know how to maintain. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
Can't argue there.

But with decriminalization, can we still call it "an illegal smile"? :lamo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom