Colorado considers huge legal weed tax

[DonViejo]

State lawmakers consider possibility of taxing recreational marijuana at a rate near 40 percent

BY NATASHA LENNARD

Taxes on recreational marijuana legalized in Colorado could be so high that recreational users may continue to rely on illegal sales. As HuffPo reported Monday:

The House-Senate committee, which will introduce a bill this week drafted from the 58 recommendations that the pot task force issued last month with taxes being one of several issues the committee is considering, would ask voters to approve a 15 percent excise tax and a 15 percent special sales tax. Those rates plus existing local and state tax rates — for food and beverage sales in Denver, the the combined total tax rate is 8 percent — could mean a total tax rate 0f 38 percent on marijuana purchases in the Denver area.

Currently, medical marijuana is taxed like all food and beverage sales are and fluctuates from county to county, in Denver that rate is just 8 percent.

The proposed Colorado taxes are markedly higher than the taxes placed on recreational marijuana in the only other legalization state — Washington. At present, Washington state’s measure “Initiative 502” legalized small amounts of marijuana and marijuana products for people 21 and older adults and established an excise tax on those products of 25 percent.

###

http://www.salon.com/2013/04/08/colorado_considers_huge_legal_weed_tax/

[marmar]

1. The people have spoken, the politicians don't like it, so they pull this kind of sh*t.

nt

[Dreamer Tatum]

3. Wait, hang on.

Scores, if not hundreds, perhaps thousands of threads over the years about the revenue-positive promise of legal weed,
and you're surprised they want to tax the living shit out of it?

REALLY?

THIS is why I always claimed that legalization will do NOTHING for drug violence - the cartels have an incentive to undercut the state's prices, and people (like yourself, evidently) will continue to buy on the black market to avoid paying the taxes they swore everyone would pay with big sloppy smiles on their faces.

"Legalize it for revenue" was always bullshit to me, and I am more convinced of that than ever.

[Warpy]

30. The trick is to keep taxes low enough to put the black market out of business

If they keep black market prices attractive, they won't do anything to break up the gangs here or abroad and people will continue to be exposed to weed laced with some pretty godawful stuff because black marketeers generally don't care.

It makes absolutely no sense to legalize it and then tax it so that it's completely out of reach. That is simply not going to work and I'm surprised people don't realize that.

[Dreamer Tatum]

33. It almost doesn't matter how it's priced

The cartel will find a way to beat that price, and lower margins will mean more competition, and more violence.

The only way to eliminate drug violence is to make the shit more or less free of charge.

[EOTE]

36. Which is why we have such a huge issue with moonshine in this country?

And the liquor industry is going out of business because they can't keep up with the moonshiners?

Drugs can certainly be taxed reasonably and still make the black market more or less ineffective.

[Dreamer Tatum]

40. False comparison

Explain to me how you'd make your own bourbon whiskey in fewer words than I will explain to you how I'd make my own weed:

Acquire seeds and grow them in or outdoors.

Sorry if you don't like it, but unless weed is basically free, legalization won't do anything for drug violence.

[EOTE]

44. Are you under the impression that weed is cheap and easy to grow?

Not so much. Indoor growing requires a fair amount of time and expensive lights and accompanying electricity. Outdoor growing makes sinsemilla nearly impossible and takes a rather long time. Moonshine requires a small initial investment in a still and some grain and you can start producing within a few days.

[cleanhippie]

52. It would seem that Dreamer Tatum is not a cannabis grower or user and has little to no real-world

experience with the plant. His/her responses are those one expects to see from an academic with zero field study time and only knows what he/she knows from reading news articles.

Here in Washington, the biggest concern is the end-cost to the consumer. High-quality, locally produced cannabis is very easy to obtain right now for roughly $250-300/oz. When the first legal store opens in December, if retail prices are not comparable to current black market prices, very few people will go to the store to buy it.

And as for his/her fantasy the people can easily just "grow" their own is just that; fantasy. It demonstrates a complete lack of horticultural knowledge about cannabis, it's growing and flowering cycle, and just how much energy and time is required to produce quality cannabis. I fell like he/she is speaking from ignorance.

[EOTE]

56. People hear "weed" and that it grows like a weed so they think that it's simple.

Yes, if the government didn't take steps to eradicate it, it would be in lots of places. However, as you note, the quality would be very bad and there would still be labor involved in terms of curing and such. There's a good reason that good bud costs $300+ an ounce and it being illegal is only a part of that.

[Webster Green]

73. Outdoor growing does not make growing sinsemilla nearly impossible.

I've grown plenty of outdoor sinse crops. You need to be able to identify the males and pull them out. I generally leave a few males to throw a little early pollen, but the seeds only show up at the very bottom of the bud near the stem, because there are only a few single hairs at that point. You just pop those very obvious seeds out during the manicuring process in order to have seeds for the next year. Works great!

Another way to do it is to isolate the male in a pot, collect the pollen, and hand pollinate and tag some bottom branches of females to make seed without pollinating the whole crop.

[EOTE]

75. The problem isn't always your own pollen, but pollen from other sources.

I suppose it depends on where you are, but if you have other outdoor grow operations going on nearby, your chances of getting a fair amount of seeds is rather high. Especially so if you're in a windy area.

Regardless, if you're going to do it your way outdoors, that's still a fair amount of work. The main issue I was trying to debate was that growing bud certainly isn't easy enough so that if it were legalized it would need to be almost free in order to avoid the black market. I see no reason why people wouldn't be willing to spend $200 an ounce for really good bud if it were legalized.

Congrats on your grows, I've had some really fantastic outdoor stuff.

[Webster Green]

81. Agreed.

Point taken. It is indeed very hard work to produce the real deal. Lots of nutrients and water are required, everything has to be fenced against deer intruding and wiping you out. You have to search for males every day or two. Manicuring is incredibly labor intensive.

I've lost plants every way you could imagine. Deer, pack rats, spider mites, powdery mildew, rip-offs, helicopter rides, and on and on. I once had 1000 little seedlings disappear overnight. I finally found a fat toad in my greenhouse that had made a cute little bedding nest out of all of them.

[cleanhippie]

80. Excellent! But you demonstrate why not everyone can/will do that.

You obviously have knowledge and experience growing this plant. Most do not.

I think the point being made here is that growing quality cannabis is just not something the average consumer can or wants to do.

[cleanhippie]

50. "Acquire seeds and grow them in or outdoors. "

If you really think that growing good quality cannabis is that easy and simple, I think you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Dreamer Tatum]

51. Oh brother

It's a fucking PLANT. You put it in the ground and water it and it fucking grows. It isn't magical just because it's weed.

[cleanhippie]

53. Thank you for demonstrating that you really have no idea what it takes to grow cannabis.

Sure, you can put it in the ground and water it, and it will grow, but you will get very little, if any at all, usable cannabis.

If you really think it is that simple, then you are speaking from ignorance and have no idea what you are talking about.

[EOTE]

54. Yes, Mexican brick weed just grows.

That's why it generally costs 25% of what good quality sinsemilla does. Most people are not going to be going to their local 7/11 to pick up shitty ditch weed with 2% THC. Growing good quality bud takes LOTS of work. Much more work than setting up a still and letting it run with some grain. Can you tell me why the great bulk of people don't grow their own tobacco? It's a fucking PLANT, right? You put it in the grown, water it and it grows? Acting like an authority on this matter really doesn't make you seem more informed.

[Dreamer Tatum]

58. I bet my backyard weed would be in higher demand than your rotgut.

Which was the original point. No matter how hard you think it is to grow weed, it is easier than making quality whiskey.

[EOTE]

63. Bullshit.

Backyard weed is crap and no one wants it. There's a reason that mexican brick weed is so cheap. Do you have any idea what sinsemilla is? Do you know that it's pretty much impossible to grow outdoors and for people who actually like weed, it's pretty much all they buy? Of course you don't. I've made moonshine, beer, wine and more with a little bit of free time and some cheap raw materials. The beer and moonshine I made is better than just about anything I've had from a liquor store.

I've also grown weed. It takes a lot of tender loving care AND a whole lot of time. You can make shine in a few days and have it be pretty great. You can't grow weed and cure it in less than 6 months, plus your yield and potency are determined by how much work and know how you put into your grow. In spite of having a fair amount of knowledge and having a bit of a green thumb, I spent 6 months tending to plants and a whole lot of work for a pretty sad yield of less than 2 ounces. But apparently you think you can grow good quality chronic for practically free. You know NOTHING of growing weed and I'm sure you know just as much about making moonshine. Talking out of your ass really doesn't make you seem more knowledgeable. There are people here who know what they are talking about and they know that you're just making up shit as you go. Again, stop talking out of your ass, it makes you seem extremely stupid.

[Dreamer Tatum]

64. You missed the point.

In your zeal to reveal how awesome you are at growing weed, you missed the simple point that
UNLESS Master Horticulturists like you are allowed to ply your trade and supply weed to people almost
free, there will ALWAYS be a black market, and therefore competition to SUPPLY the black market,
and the violence down south will continue.

The black market will also thrive once the state taxes legal weed LIKE EVERYONE AND THEIR SISTER
SWORE THEY'D SUPPORT.

It seems clear now that the argument for legal weed as a boon to tax revenues was bullshit - people
just want legal weed and they don't want to be taxed.

Even so, I maintain that I can grow quality weed MUCH faster, cheaper, and easier than you can come
close to my Elmer T. Lee. Or my Whistle Pig.

[EOTE]

69. Wow, YOU missed the point yet again. It's getting tiring pointing out how clueless you are.

I never said I was awesome at growing weed, are you capable of even a slight amount of comprehension? I said that I'm fairly knowledgeable and in spite of that, I still had a hell of a hard time growing. I'd say I'm pretty bad at it, actually. I bought expensive lights, expensive hydroponic systems, spent many hours putting it all together and then spent a fair bit of time every day tending to them. At the end of all that work, I yielded ~2 ounces of kind. So several hundred dollars of investment and many months of tending yielded me about $600 of product. And yet you are so ignorant as to think that weed would have to be given away to eliminate the black market? That's indescribably stupid.

The bulk of the cost associated with black market weed is not due to its illegal nature, but the fact that it takes a lot of time, effort and money to grow good weed. Something you're still utterly clueless about.

You know absolutely nothing about growing weed, you should really stop talking about it. The black market won't thrive so long as they make weed reasonably priced, and that can still be done even with large amounts of taxes.

[Dreamer Tatum]

76. The black market will thrive forever unless weed is free. nt

[EOTE]

93. Just like the booming booze and cigarette black market.

And they are both a good deal easier to make than weed. Your argument is utterly without merit.

[Dreamer Tatum]

97. Both of those are hard to make.

Weed isn't, and there are well established distribution channels.

[EOTE]

98. You know nothing of making any of them.

You've demonstrated quite clearly your knowledge of pot growing. Tobacco is unequivocally easier to grow. You need half a year and lots of tending to grow pot. You can make moonshine in a couple days. Which of this information is inaccurate? I've constructed stills before, they're cheap and easy to make. Once you've done that, you only need grain and water, cheap as hell. To grow good pot, you need several hundred dollars worth of lights, you need a good, dedicated grow room, you need a hydroponic pump system and rockwool and all other associated bits. You do understand that pot is grown for strength, right? It's not hemp that would be grown. You can pick up Mexican brick weed anywhere for cheap, most people don't even think it's worth it with the 1 to 3% THC it provides. Growing good pot requires intelligence and work. Any idiot can make booze. You know nothing of which you speak.

[Dreamer Tatum]

99. Yeah...the people who import weed now have NO idea what they're doing

give it a motherfucking rest already.

Are you telling me that people who already grow the shit and have well developed distribution channels won't continue to
supply the market, especially when it's priced and taxed high enough to make significant money for the states? Wake the
fuck up. People who can, will, and do kill anyone who gets in their path to sell weed won't just pack up because the states
are going to compete with them.

And in any case, I could give a country fuck about your back issues of High Times. I don't care WHAT you say, I can grow
and sell my own weed faster and better than you can sell your own brand of cigarettes, vodka, or whiskey. Know how I know?
BECAUSE IT IS A MOTHERFUCKING COCKSUCKING PLANT THAT GROWS IN FERTILE SOIL LIKE ANYTHING ELSE. Maybe it's not the strain you prefer, but can you show me your Bourbon plant? Your vodka vine? Didn't think so.

[EOTE]

102. People are not going to be smoking ditch weed when the good stuff isn't much more.

Are there still going to be people growing it and selling it themselves? Possibly, but it won't be much. That will also decrease over time. Again, are moonshiners still a big issue now? Why not? Moonshine can be made with corn and water. How fucking easy is it to get corn? How cheap is corn? Vodka can be made easily from potatoes, so there's your vodka plant, genius. Really, your ignorance becomes more amusing each time. I can make peach moonshine in a few days that will be tastier than almost anything you can buy at a store and is far less hangover prone.

Your idiotic ranting aside, booze is easy to make, tobacco is incredibly easy to grow, yet we manage not to have a sizable black market for either of those. Or, in language you might be more inclined to understand, tobacco IS A MOTHERFUCKING, COCKSUCKING PLANT THAT GROWS IN FERTILE SOIL. I'm guessing that even in your language, you're going to have a hard time comprehending that.

[Dreamer Tatum]

104. Whatever, dude

Mark my words: legalization and taxation WILL perpetuate violence, and WON'T raise much revenue at all.

I will bet you a LOT of money.

[EOTE]

111. You've made a really convincing case, dude.

It helps to be at least somewhat informed on a particular issue if you're going to enter into a debate. You've been educated by numerous people on this thread who know far more than you on this subject, but your hubris won't allow you to learn.

[robinlynne]

107. ridiculous.

[cleanhippie]

66. I'll bet your "backyard weed" that you just "put it in the ground and water" produces nothing.

You obviously have no actual experience with this plant, for if you did, you would not be making such simplistic and ignorant statements.

[TeamPooka]

100. I bet not. Anyone can grow roses but it takes skills and talent to grow roses people want to buy....

from a florist for their lover.
Same applies to cannabis, whiskey or whatever.
You are simply adorable to think that your lack of training or knowledge in a subject would let you do what experts can achieve only after years of practice and experience.
Or that training and experience is more necessary in one art-form than another like making whiskey and/or growing quality cannabis.
It's myopic and egocentric but simply adorable.

[Comrade Grumpy]

92. We shouldn't overstate either the ease or the difficulty of growing good weed.

In my northern California neighborhood, it seems like half the houses have pot gardens in the back, so it's not that frigging difficult.

I grow my own and do okay at it. Not great. Okay. I get good quality, but I'm not happy with my yields.

It's not as simple as putting a seed in the ground and watering it, but it ain't rocket science, either.

I imagine that quite a few people in Colorado will grow their own, but many more will not. It takes some effort and know-how, there are many problems that can arise (deer, mites, sticky-fingered neighbor kids), and many people will just not have any appropriate place to grow it.

Tax revenues will probably be less than anticipated.

[haydukelives]

108. wow

you really don't know what you are taking about.

[Bohunk68]

112. Some of the above remarks are somewhat on the mark.

I offer you this. I began growing my own back in the late 70's. I grew outdoors and grew very good quality weed and got very good yields. I also have a degree in Horticulture. Here's what you do. Start your seed indoors right around New Years. Use Florescent lights, full spectrum, down close to the seedlings. By the end of February you have plantlets that are sizeable enough to take cuttings. After rooting, which takes up to 10 days. Put them under a 12 hour light. You have been using an 18 hour light on the other plants. Within a few weeks, the male cuttings will show up. You can then destroy the original male plants, leaving you with nothing but female plants. While you now budding plants are growing their buds, the original plants, still under 18 hour lighting, have grown sufficiently so that you can start taking cuttings off you now proven females. By the middle of April, you can now sample those first cuttings that you took which are nicely budded. Rate them. Now, you are continuing to 18 hour you now proven "mothers" and can continue cuttings until it is safe to put them outside under natural light. Meanwhile, if you wish, you can continue the cutting process if you want to have an indoor grow and keep the very best mothers over into the next year.
Keep your outdoor girls going until at least the "hard frost". If you should happen to have a green house, put them inside for a longer bud flowering period, the buds just get better and better. Usually, here in Upstate NY, I found that I could keep them going until Halloween. I used to harvest pounds, not ounces. It took care of my taxes and our own habits. I stopped in 2003 because I got turned in by an asshole who rolled over on me. The cop investigating shared with me that he had known about my growing for several years and indeed had a friend who shared with him some of my product. He hadn't bothered me, cause I kept to myself about it and didn't grow huge amounts. The only reason I got busted was because they had to investigate complaints. At the time, I had 15 girls that were doing very well and would've yielded me about 11 pounds of sensemilla. Since then, I have not grown because to do so would have endangered my home and acreage. Costs were very minimal. I estimated at the time, that not counting my time which I had anyway, each ounce cost about $14. And, it was NOT ditch weed. I only sold to three persons and they took it from there, one of whom marketed it in NYC and always had a demand.

[Bohunk68]

113. Correction

The males will usually show within 10-14 days, typo as to a few weeks.

[EOTE]

117. So what you're saying is that you throw some seeds in the ground and wait?

Because that was the gist of what the above poster was trying to state.

[Webster Green]

115. So wrong. Nobody uses seeds for an indoor grow.

Clones are used for indoor grows. Everybody knows that.

[tabasco]

83. Why isn't that true for alcohol?

Despite liquor taxes, the end of prohibition ended the bootlegging industry.

People still make moonshine, but it's not a major problem.

[EOTE]

119. Because alcohol is nearly impossible to make (even though it can be made in a jail cell).

Whereas high quality, seedless marijuana grows anywhere and everywhere.

At least according to that pitiful excuse for logic of the poster you're responding to.

[robinlynne]

106. right.

[denverbill]

5. I spoke, and I voted in favor, but I don't really have a problem with the high tax.

I don't know what the going price is for illegal weed right now in CO, but legal weed will most certainly be a helluva lot cheaper once it is produced in quantity. It will still probably be cheaper than illegal weed and hopefully driver illegal weed out of business.

Plus part of the whole idea for me was to raise tax revenue. To me we are taking money from the dealers and giving it to the state, where it's badly needed.

[frylock]

38. MMJ in California costs about the same as what you would buy off the street..

i'm all for taxation of the product, but why not tax it at the same rate as alcohol? 40% is ridiculous.

[denverbill]

47. My preference would be that it is taxed at a level which makes street selling unprofitable.

But it should be at a high enough level to discourage use.

I favor pot being legal and not sending people to jail for possession, use, or even sale, but I don't particularly want to promote pot smoking either. While I don't think occasional pot use poses any major problem, I think it can be psychologically addictive and that can be a problem. You can get to the point where all you want to do is sit around and smoke pot all day every day, and that's not a good thing.

[cleanhippie]

55. "But it should be at a high enough level to discourage use. " Why?

What you describe above is a caricature of the typical cannabis user. Certainly there are some that fit that description, but you seem to have bought into the hollywood/anti-MJ stereotype that doesnt describe most cannabis consumers.

Cannabis is exponentially safer and less addictive than alcohol. Do you describe drinkers the same way?

[denverbill]

65. Alcohol and even more-so tobacco are already taxed to discourage use.

Governments around the world implement 'sin taxes' on things which are not good for people. Alcohol, in moderation, doesn't hurt anyone any more than pot, in moderation. But alcohol is heavily taxed in many places because of it's potential for abuse.

I specifically said that I don't think occasional pot use is a problem any more than occasional alcohol use. But both can easily be abused. It's not the occasional user that taxes target. It's the occasional user who becomes a chronic user who high taxes might in some cases dissuade.

You'll have to excuse me for describing a caricature, but since I was that caricature 30 years ago I know that 'Hollywood'/anti-MJ stereotypes do exist. Though they may not describe most pot users, they do describe some. Pot had an extremely negative impact on my young life and those of several friends as well.

[cleanhippie]

67. "Alcohol, in moderation, doesn't hurt anyone any more than pot, in moderation." Yes, it does.

Alcohol, even in moderate amounts, is destructive to our systems. That is scientific fact.

Cannabis, especially when not smoked (vaporized or in edible form) has little to no destructive effect.


Anything can be abused, and when being used by young people under the umbrella of constant threat of incarceration and/or legal trouble, problems will arise. But as with MOST things, educating people, giving them up-to-date and scientifically factual information, and removing the threat from authority changes how things are used. YMMV.

[denverbill]

70. I was one of the people who voted to legalize it. I helped remove the threat of legal trouble.

I want the criminal element out of the drug business. I don't want kids jailed for smoking pot. I don't care if someone makes a living growing pot. Hell maybe I'd do it. It's no different from people who brew beer.

But I don't think we should be encouraging people to take mind-altering substances, which mj definitely is and which can, and in some instances do, have negative impacts. There are only a few things government can do to discourage that consumption. Jail should be out. That leaves taxes and education, which I support.

[cleanhippie]

71. As was I. But I DO think we should encourage people to take mind-altering substances...

safely and legally.

Recent studies have shown that psylocybin (from mushrooms) taken even in small doses, can have positive and lasting effects, helping to make a person more empathetic. MJ may also have that effect. DMT has altered people entire outlook on life in positive ways.

We should not be so quick to dismiss the positive ways so-called "mind-altering" drugs (of which alcohol is one with numerous negative effects but is widely used and abused) can help us all see things from different perspectives, making us more empathetic toward or fellow humans. I do not consider that a negative trait, and in fact, feel that is just what the world needs more of right now.

I guess my point is, and what I take exception to, is the equivocation of cannabis with alcohol. They are not the same. They produce very different effects and results. Alcohol is a very dangerous and easily abused drug with lasting negative effects. Due to the criminal nature of cannabis and other "mind-altering" drugs, we are unsure at best whether we can expect the same negative effects. But from what little study HAS been done, early indicators show this not to be the case.

[HiPointDem]

94. no surprise. same with cigarettes & beer. obama's putting yet another tax on cigarettes to fund

something or other in his budget proposal.

why would legal pot *not* be taxed, and taxed big?

[msongs]

2. prostitute politicians doing what's needed to keep the illegal market booming despite legalization n

[bluedigger]

4. Should be the same as tobacco and alcohol taxes.

And if it takes yet another referendum to do it, so be it.

[kestrel91316]

8. I disagree. Alcohol and tobacco do a huge amount of harm to the health and lives

of far too many people. MJ won't do that, so a "vice tax" isn't really warranted.

[Scuba]

14. +1,000

[randome]

15. Seeing as how it's been illegal until now, I don't think you can make that assumption.

Most people will prefer to smoke it rather than bake it or vaporize it. Smoking is a faster delivery mechanism.

Which means respiratory disease will begin to tick up in the long term, as well as second-hand smoke effects.

And as for no one being in an accident while stoned, I would think that's just a matter of time.

[Comrade Grumpy]

16. There's been mass pot smoking in this country for nearly a half-century now.

Where's that epidemic of lung cancers?

[randome]

17. Don't know.

How many people with lung cancer admit they smoke pot? How many people who smoke pot also smoke cigarettes?

I am admittedly no medical expert but it seems obvious to me that with a much greater pool of users, there will be a greater incidence of health-related issues.

Keeping it illegal means many fewer people are partaking.

[Comrade Grumpy]

21. "Keeping it illegal means many fewer people are partaking."

Funny you should say that, because I just happened to have this handy. It focuses on claims about Dutch pot policy, but the general lesson--that's there's not much correlation between policy and use patterns--seems applicable here as well:

The DEA repeatedly seeks to tie liberalization of drug policies to increased drug use levels. In its 2011 The DEA Position on Marijuana, p. 45, for instance, it cites European School Survey on Alcohol and Other Drugs (ESPAD) to show that "cannabis usage by young people in the Netherlands is not lower but actually higher than the average in Europe."

But contrary to the DEA's argument by single data point, the Netherlands is not listed as among the EMCDD's "high use" countries by any of the indicators (lifetime use, last year use, last month use) for either youth or the overall population. (European Monitoring Center on Drugs and Drug Addiction, 2009. Annual Report 2009, p. 42.)

Similarly, a comparative study of use among 15-16-year-olds situated the Netherlands squarely in the middle of Europe's "high use" countries (continental averages are skewed by extremely low rates in Scandinavia and some southern European countries). That study also noted that the Netherlands's youth lifetime use rate (28%) is lower than in the US (33%) DEA didn't mention that. (MacCoun, Robert, 2011. "What Can We Learn From the Dutch Cannabis System?" Addiction, 106:11, pp. 1899-1910.)

And more recent data from the EMCDD show Dutch youth marijuana use is stable and actually declining slightly: "The results concerning illegal drug use show an increasing trend for cannabis use since 1988, which stabilized between 1996 and 2007 at rate of 28 % for lifetime cannabis use. In 2011, the lifetime prevalence rate of cannabis use was 27 %." (European Monitoring Center on Drugs and Drug Addiction, 2012. Country Overview: Netherlands.

Similarly, in the DEA's 2010 position statement, Speaking Out Against Drug Legalization, the DEA blamed allowing the public sales of marijuana for a reported tripling in heroin addiction rates. Its footnote for this claim goes to a non-working web page on an all-Dutch language web site.

But a 2011 comparative study found that the Dutch "policy of essentially ignoring cannabis while focusing efforts on harder drugs has been in force in 1976, with slight increases in the use of cannabis among the lifespan of the total population while other hard drug use decreased. As a result of this policy, The Netherlands have some of the lowest levels of drug use, for both soft and hard drugs, across all age groups." (Anderson, Steve, 2011. "European Drug Policy: The Case of Germany, Portugal and the Netherlands," EIU Political Science Review, 1:1)

As for the supposed link between liberalization and increased drug use rates:

In a 2002 study, Dirk Korf tested hypotheses about the impact of decriminalization on Dutch cannabis use rates. He identified two peaks in Dutch cannabis use rates and associated them with changes in the availability of cannabis, but noted that similar changes had occurred in other European countries that hadn't liberalized their policies. Bottom line: "Trends in cannabis use tend to develop rather independently of cannabis policy." (Korf, Dirk, 2002. "Dutch Coffee Shops and Trends in Cannabis Use,"Journal of Addictive Behaviors, 27, pp. 851-866)

In a 2010 study, researchers from the National Institutes of Health reported that "the finding that marijuana use rates did not differ across countries is not consistent with the contention that prohibition-oriented policies deter use or that liberal marijuana policies are associated with elevated adolescent use.&quot Simons-Morton, B., et al., 2010. "Cross-national comparison of adolescent drinking and cannabis use in the United States, Canada, and the Netherlands," International Journal of Drug Policy, 21:1, pp. 64-69)

MacCoun (2011, cited above) also noted that "the prevalence of cannabis use among Dutch citizens rose and fell as the number of coffee shops increased and later declined, but only modestly. The coffee shops do not appear to encourage escalation into heavier use or lengthier using careers, although treatment rates for cannabis are higher than elsewhere in Europe. Scatterplot analyses suggest that Dutch patterns of use are very typical for Europe, and that the ‘separation of markets’ may indeed have somewhat weakened the link between cannabis use and the use of cocaine or amphetamines."

[randome]

23. Interesting points.

I'm not convinced that the Netherlands is comparable to the U.S. but maybe that's a minor point.

Saying that use does not correlate to policy ignores what IS driving the declining use, unless I'm missing something.

Is it official discouragement? Is it just not as cool as it once was?

[Comrade Grumpy]

27. Some of those studies were comparative, not just the Netherlands.

As for declines in Dutch youth pot use, I would say two things:

1. The decline isn't very much (from 28% to 27%)

2. And, yes, I guess it is the "forbidden fruit" factor. It's not forbidden, thus less cool.

But as I said, the decline is small and so is the forbidden fruit effect.

The larger point, though, is that tough pot policies don't seem to have much effect on use rates. So why not have softer policies and save ourselves the expense and heartache of criminalizing this relatively innocuous (compared with alcohol or tobacco) drug and its users?

[cleanhippie]

82. The CDC states that lung cancer has been significantly decreasing over the past decade.

http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/lung/statistics/trends.htm?mobile=nocontent

[Life Long Dem]

35. Vaporizing is just as fast as smoking

[kestrel91316]

114. I smoke very little cannabis. Most of what I ingest is either

cannabis oil (used in my yummy bedtime brownies) or alcohol tincture (a mere teaspoon more than does the trick).

That tincture is lightning fast, BTW. Goes well in a cup of cocoa with a little creme de menthe.

[Vinnie From Indy]

6. Gee, one might get the impression that one criminal enterprise

just muscled another out of the racket.

[JVS]

7. On the plus side, once the state is hooked on revenue they will never overturn the law.

But this is really shitty timing on their part. Taxing something that already has a pre-existing black market is going to guarantee that the black market thrives. They'd have been wiser to wait several years for the supply networks to dry up.

[geek tragedy]

9. Did people really think that pot would be tax exempt

while booze and cigarettes get taxed heavily?

[TeamPooka]

101. no, just not taxed to the point of usury.

[alcibiades_mystery]

10. Wasn't "You can tax it" one of the pro arguments?

[Dreamer Tatum]

11. Until it was legalized, anyway. nt

[geek tragedy]

13. For liberals, yes. For libertarians and pot lifestylists, notsomuch. nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

46. I guess I do immediately discount anything a libertarian has to say

Must have missed it.

[Comrade Grumpy]

18. Absolutely. And it's a good one, provided the taxes aren't too onerous.

People who don't give two shits about pot smoking care very much about the general fund. And things like paying for schools.

It is an argument that resonates with voters.

The quandary is to find the proper level of taxation. I think Colorado is leaning toward erring on the high side. Tax it too much, and people will just stay out of the pot shops. They can grow their own, they can buy some from a friend who grows...

Mark Kleiman, who has just been hired as Washington state's pot consultant, has warned officials there that their estimates of billion-dollar-plus pot tax revenues are probably, ur, pipe dreams.

[cleanhippie]

57. Yes, it was, and still is. But placing a tax on it that drives the price above that of the black

market will generate NO taxes at all. High quality cannabis is easily and safely obtainable right now for a reasonable price. Legal operation must be able to match or beat that.

[randome]

12. I predict legalization will be such a kerfuffle that within 5 years, it will be illegal once more.

Yes, I have been against legalization but this is not me 'crowing' about the difficulties of getting this set up.

I just don't see how this will ever work as fluently as many had hoped.

People are not rational about drugs. Even benign ones.

Politicians and corporations will be even less rational about it.

[Comrade Grumpy]

19. I'll come to Denver and let you buy me a bud at the pot store in April 2018.

Ain't no goin' back now. The genie is out of the bottle.

There are legalization bills in nine states now this year--including Alabama!

Alaska and most likely Oregon will legalize through the initiative process next year.

California, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Massachusetts will try to legalize through the initiative process in 2016.

[randome]

24. I'll put it on my calendar!

[Life Long Dem]

37. And this is before the fed/state issue is resolved

States are holding back right now waiting for Holder.

[madville]

20. Grow your own?

Tons of people make their own alcohol and grow their own tobacco at home, pretty much tax free. I home brew beer and wine, I even like it better than many store bought brands, I know exactly what's in it.

[newblewtoo]

39. Tax evasion is how

they got Al Capone and the moonshiners. I can see the same thing happening here. Growing pot is much easier than tobacco or making shine.

[madville]

42. Making beer and wine is easy

I always wondered why more people don't do it at which is perfectly legal just about everywhere.

Never tried tobacco but that is legal as well, fields of it used to be grown down the road from my house so the climate is right.

I'm curious if growing pot at home for personal consumption will be legal though?

[cleanhippie]

62. No, its not.

Home brewing beer is easy. Growing quality cannabis and achieving a useable yield is difficult and time consuming and expensive.

[Major Nikon]

74. Without your qualifier it's not

If someone wants medical grade stuff, yes they are going to have to devote significant resources to it. If all they want is to get mellow now and then, a few planters on the porch and a bit of knowledge is all they need.

[cleanhippie]

77. I disagree.

To get any yield at all, even of low quality, low THC cannabis from an auto-flowering hybrid like Ruderalis takes effort. As most people have little or no horticultural experience other than a chia pet, I find it unlikely that most would have any degree of success.

That being said, when cannabis does become fully legal, we may very well see a "chia pet" version developed. And that would be a good thing, IMO.

[Major Nikon]

78. Millions of teenagers manage to do it

Just sayin'

[cleanhippie]

79. Manage to do what? Obtain it? For sure. Grow it? Unlikely.

Come on, millions of teens are growing their own cannabis? Really? What data supports that assertion?

[Major Nikon]

86. What makes you think they aren't?

I'm talking world wide here and not just US. Millions doesn't seem that far off to me. Just in the US, 1 in 15 high school seniors are smoking pot daily. 1 in 3 have used it in the last year.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/19/national-drug-survey-youth-marijuana/1779563/

Now consider that this same subset of people manage to perform all sorts of tasks that are far more complicated than growing your own weed. Back in my day lots of kids figured out how to brew their own beer, make their own wine, and some of us even figured out how to make spirits. Now fast forward to the day of social media and no well kept technical secrets where any kid with access to the internet can find out exactly how to grow their own weed, indoor or outdoor, complete with video instruction, for free.

[cleanhippie]

87. The lack of data to support that assertion and my experience as a teen.

I just have no reason or evidence that would change my POV on that. I'm open to reviewing any that may exist.

[Major Nikon]

88. How long ago were you a teen?

Because if it's more than 20 years ago, I'm not sure you realize how much is different now. The thing that kept most people who had the will back then from doing it was the technical challenges. That is no longer any sort of obstacle today. Teenagers just aren't that dumb. If they want something bad enough, they will figure out how to get it, and it's pretty clear they want it bad enough.

[cleanhippie]

89. Longer than that, hahaha! But I do work with teens and Mrs. Cleanhippie is a teacher.

We are around kids and teens everyday. I have seen nothing that would support the idea that teens of any measurable quantity are growing their own cannabis. But I could be mistaken. Without any hard evidence or facts to support that, I find it difficult to accept.

[cleanhippie]

60. Growing quality cannabis to achieve a useable yield is just not that simple.

[lame54]

22. So much for states rights

[Bjorn Against]

25. It is very possible that the 40% tax won't be as bank breaking as people assume

You have to remember that the primary reason for the high cost of weed is the black market. Marijuana is just a plant, the cost of growing it is roughly the same as what it costs to farm other plants like tomatoes or spinich. When it is legal there is really no reason a business could not sell it at the same price they sell other vegetables and still be profitable. $10 an ounce sounds really cheap, but that is far more than farmers get for most crops. If you can get an ounce for $10 is an extra $4 in tax really going to send you back to the black market where it runs $400 an ounce?

Please note: I am not promising you will be able to find legal weed for $10 an ounce, but the fact that it is a plant that is easy to grow suggests that when it is legal it will be very low cost.

[frylock]

41. an oz still costs you about $400 at a dispensary in california

[Bjorn Against]

43. A dispensary operates under different rules than stores do

A dispensary is a place where you can legally buy a product that is normally illegal, once it is legal across the state where anyone can buy it the rules are different and real competition arrives. We have not yet seen what pot will cost when it is legal, while it is technically legal now in CO and WA we are still not to the point in which you can go into any store and buy it. Once we do get to that point I would expect to see a drastic drop in price.

[Trillo]

26. It's interesting to contrast this against the desires to further reduce corporate taxation.

Why can't corporations pay 40% income taxes, with no off-shoring allowed?

[Bjorn Against]

28. Now that is a good question

Tax the rich at the same rate they tax marijuana.

[RainDog]

29. They are going to have to find the point

at which taxation does not continue to fuel an underground market.

If taxation is too high, people will continue to purchase through other venues.

This is something economists have been looking at ever since the issue of legalization became a possibility.

[Blue_In_AK]

31. Grow your own.

[Newest Reality]

32. Well,

legalization is the main point, no matter how they want to muscle in on the money. That's another matter.

Now, another stumbling block is our Orwellian, thought-control corporations and businesses that won't hire you if you do smoke cannabis, so when will they relax their restrictions and expand their caffeine/alcohol-only as acceptable drugs model? They have stimulant/depressant, so when is mellow going to be allowed by the tyrannical hierarchy?

[Comrade_McKenzie]

34. My pro-legalization argument has never been about revenue.

People should have a right to put in their bodies what they please without the burden of having their bank accounts drained.

And marijuana legalization is one area in which I am critical of the President.

[Tender to the Bone]

45. Uh no. 15% is too much.

I'll pay up to 10%.

[bigtree]

48. just let us grow our own

. . . always with the middle man and the govt. looking to cash in; in this case, just to cover for their restrictive laws.

[randome]

59. Wait until the corporations move in.

Joe Camel II.

[bhikkhu]

49. In a way, that makes pot a valued commodity to the state

...which puts it in a pretty safe position. If it works well, then the other states and the federal government see that they are missing out.

I don't see 25% or whatever as onerous, especially if it constitutes a complete reversal of past attitudes.

[CalFresh]

61. HA HA HA

People have been saying it for years. "Make it legal and tax it" Now it's legal. Now here comes the taxes. The State will need the extra money to help support the people who can't pass the drug test to get a job.

[cleanhippie]

68. If it is legal, there is no reason to test for it to get a job.

What you stated makes no sense.

[CalFresh]

85. It's not legal

in the eyes of the Federal Government. Any City, County, State employees or worker who's gets ANY funds from the Federal Government. Like Schools, Highways, Airports, Food Programs, Courts, Parks, Public TV/Radio, Public Safety, Head Start and the Arts will lose their funding if the workers are not drug free.

The golden rule is. The people with the gold, makes the rules.

Now if the State of Colorado starts to make some money from the weed tax. Look for the Feds to cut back on Federal funds to the State. I guess the people who wanted to pass the bill just forgot to bring this up.

[green for victory]

91. Many say medical marijuana is legal in California but talk to some of these

people:

September 25 2012- Federal authorities took legal action against 71 medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles County, including all known collectives in downtown and Eagle Rock part of an ongoing campaign to crack down on medical marijuana.


According to the U.S. attorney's office, officials sent warning letters to 68 pot dispensaries, filed forfeiture lawsuits against three properties that house such businesses and served search warrants at three additional facilities. Read more.


January 9, 2013 - Former South Lake Tahoe medical marijuana dispensary operator Gino DiMatteo pleaded guilty to a single count of possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, as part of a plea agreement. On August 31, 2012, US agents say they found 5 pounds of processed marijuana and 15 pounds of “shake,” at DeMatteo's home. Also found were various edible marijuana products, a scale, pay/owe sheets and a heat sealing machine. DiMatteo listed himself as receiving $7,000 biweekly in one of the documents found. He is scheduled to be sentenced by U.S. District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on April 17. The maximum penalty for possession with the intent to distribute marijuana is 30 years in prison. Source.
On May 19, 2011 Patricia Albright and her 26-year-old son Jordan Wirtz of Nevada City were indicted by the federal government for growing 89 plants for 10 patients on Albright's property, which is now the object of a forfeiture action. Albright is facing 20 years and Jordan 15 years, because the government is trying to accumulate the number of plants grown over more than one year for sentencing (as they did with Mollie Fry and Dale Schafer).


Albright's oldest son Trevor was diagnosed at age 15 months with bi-lateral retinoblastoma (eye cancer). After losing both of his eyes, he developed bone cancer at the age of 8. Medical marijuana, recommended by his doctor, was a great relief in the days before he died. Diagnosed with anxiety, depression and hypervigilance, Albright has a recommendation for medical marijuana, as does Jordan, who has had a dozen broken bones, with steel pins put in his humerus to hold his arm together.

December 11, 2012 - Bryan Smith, 28, of Elk Grove, pleaded guilty to federal drug charges stemming from owning and operating the R & R Wellness marijuana dispensary formerly located at 75 Quita Court in Sacramento and growing marijuana related to the dispensary operation.


According to the terms of the plea agreement, Smith agreed to a sentence of not less than 5 years in prison and not more than 7 years and 3 months in prison. His sentencing date is scheduled for Jan. 25.

7/17/2012 - Federal agents raided a medical marijuana dispensary in unincorporated Lake Elsinore, for the second time in three months. Drug Enforcement Agency agents seized marijuana from Compassionate Patients Association, in the 17500 block of Grand Avenue, and told them to shut down. No arrests were made.

many many more:
http://www.canorml.org/costs/federal_medical_marijuana_prisoners_and_cases

[marcusc81]

95. indeed

We'll all be better off for it.

[One_Life_To_Give]

72. $2/lb needs a decent tax

Once it's fully legal no reason I see for Weed to cost more than Tobacco for commercial operations to produce. So retail that's what 50 cents an ounce?

[MadHound]

84. Oh bullshit,

Dope, at least in most places, is incredibly easy to grow. If you are growing outside, an ounce of good dope probably costs a buck, maybe two, to grow. If you're growing inside, probably triple that, after adding in the cost of electricity and chemicals. So let's be generous, and say that dope growers want to sell an ounce of good weed for fifty bucks, that raises the price to the consumer up to $69.00 after taxes. Big whoop, that's still cheaper than what it costs now.

Dope was always artificially expensive because of the legal risks involved in growing and dealing it, the actual product is a weed that has very low overhead. With dope legal, growers and dealers are going to have to lower their prices because the risk factor simply isn't there anymore. If they don't do this now, they will have to later when the serious dope growing states come online and start turning out a great product really, really cheap.

Basic capitalism at work. Yes, this tax is unfair, but it to will go away as other states come online and start competing for the dope smoker's dollar. Right now, Colorado is in at the start of the gold rush so to speak, and the state is going to make its money while the making is good.

[cleanhippie]

90. May I assume that you have NOT actually grown any cannabis yourself?

Because statements like "it only cost a buck or two" to grow even a single plant and obtain any useable quantity is ludicrous. I mean no disrespect, but your assertions seems to have no basis in reality.

[MadHound]

110. LOL!

You know what they say about ass u me.

I do know that I can assume one thing, you are reading my post for the quick snark, rather than comprehension, because if you actually go back and reread my post, I stated that it costs one or two bucks per ounce, not per plant. Big difference, at least where I come, since the plant generally produces somewhere around a pound.

I'm not going to go through my qualifications, since this is a public forum, but yes, I'm pretty well qualified to make such assertions, though it has been a couple of decades. However, I do readily admit that it probably depends on where you grow. My experience is here in Missouri, where there is/was a lot of guerrilla growing. The point being is that if you have good sun, good soil, good seed, you can go through, plant seed, come through once and sex, and barring serious drought, come through once again and harvest the plant. The cost is in the labor after harvest, namely hanging the plant, then trimming off the buds and packaging. Like I said, not much cost at all. The real cost lies in the risk.

Any other foolish assumptions you'd like to make?

[cleanhippie]

116. Fair enough.

I did misread your post, but in your zeal to berate me, you overlooked the fact that I was respectful and polite, so, thanks for that.

Feel better now?

[HiPointDem]

96. unfair? why? taxes are something like 90% of the cost of a pack of cigarettes, why should

pot get a pass?

[babylonsister]

103. What a bunch of crap. So damn greedy. nt

[robinlynne]

105. Tobacco tax is well over 100%, and sales are doing fine.

[Logical]

109. If it is legal, I am 100% OK with this. n-t

[fadedrose]

118. What is the going price for marijuana/

It's hard to figure what the tax amounts to if there's nothing mentioned anywhere about the cost of a "joint."