They must have been stoned...

Food, recipes, fashion, sport, education, exercise, sexuality, travel.
Post Reply
User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33171
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

They must have been stoned...

Post by Gob »

California legalized weed five years ago. Why is the illicit market still thriving?

Five years after cannabis legalization, California is awash with signs of an apparently booming industry. Californians can toke on Justin Bieber-branded joints and ash their blunts in Seth Rogen’s $95 ceramics. They can sip on THC-infused seltzers, relax inside a cannabis cafe, and get edibles delivered to their doors.

But behind the flashy facade, the legal weed industry remains far from the law-abiding, prosperous sector many had hoped for. In fact, it’s a mess.

Voters passed a law in November 2016 making recreational marijuana legal. But today, the vast majority of the market remains underground – about 80-90% of it, according to experts.

Because that 2016 law, known as Proposition 64, gave municipalities the power to ban weed as they see fit, the majority of cities and counties still don’t allow the sale of cannabis, inhibiting the growth of the legal market.

In the places that do allow pot shops and grows, business owners say high taxes, the limited availability of licenses, and expensive regulatory costs have put the legal market out of reach. And many of the Black and brown entrepreneurs who were supposed to benefit from legalization have actually ended up losing money. Meanwhile, consumers remain confused about what’s legal and what’s not.

For now, the only way legal, state-licensed businesses say they are able to stay profitable is to keep one foot in the illegal, unlicensed market – often called the “legacy” or “traditional” market.

Five years after cannabis legalization, California is awash with signs of an apparently booming industry. Californians can toke on Justin Bieber-branded joints and ash their blunts in Seth Rogen’s $95 ceramics. They can sip on THC-infused seltzers, relax inside a cannabis cafe, and get edibles delivered to their doors.

But behind the flashy facade, the legal weed industry remains far from the law-abiding, prosperous sector many had hoped for. In fact, it’s a mess.

Voters passed a law in November 2016 making recreational marijuana legal. But today, the vast majority of the market remains underground – about 80-90% of it, according to experts.

Because that 2016 law, known as Proposition 64, gave municipalities the power to ban weed as they see fit, the majority of cities and counties still don’t allow the sale of cannabis, inhibiting the growth of the legal market.

In the places that do allow pot shops and grows, business owners say high taxes, the limited availability of licenses, and expensive regulatory costs have put the legal market out of reach. And many of the Black and brown entrepreneurs who were supposed to benefit from legalization have actually ended up losing money. Meanwhile, consumers remain confused about what’s legal and what’s not.

For now, the only way legal, state-licensed businesses say they are able to stay profitable is to keep one foot in the illegal, unlicensed market – often called the “legacy” or “traditional” market.

Continues here...
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
Long Run
Posts: 6469
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by Long Run »

This was all predicted when legalization started, though most states do better it than this description of California. Requiring a local ordinance to allow sales in California, as described in the article, is backward. But there are two main Econ 101 problems: 1) under federal tax laws, a legal dispensary cannot deduct its expenses of operation, and one of the promises of legal marijuana was tax revenue, which combined make the prices too "high"; and 2) non-legal sources are cheap and plentiful (nearly free if you are willing to grow your own).

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 15530
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by BoSoxGal »

If I lived in California I’d be very tempted to buy from the legacy market because product out there is so excellent and you can easily obtain medicinal quality without paying dispensary prices.

That said, here in Massachusetts there is no tax on medical marijuana so while prices are a bit higher than the illicit market, they are still reasonable for the quality and I enjoy the ability to shop from a wide variety of choices every time and have some confidence in the regulatory process protecting me from unhealthy adulterations.

However the casual use market is far higher priced thanks to a 20% tax, which I think is just bogus given the way the alcohol market is treated - in Massachusetts the alcohol excise tax amounts to a penny a bottle of beer and 11 cents per bottle of wine, with the purchase price itself being subject to the 6.25% sales tax. Adult use marijuana is excise taxed at 10.75%, plus the 6.25% sales tax, plus as optional local tax of 3% which I’m sure all localities hosting dispensaries are availing themselves of otherwise why bother? Of course these taxes are very important because we all know how dangerous marijuana is while alcohol use is such a positive influence on our society.

Same shit different decade.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Crackpot
Posts: 10853
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:59 am
Location: Michigan

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by Crackpot »

Uhhh… did I say that already? …. Heh heh
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.

User avatar
Long Run
Posts: 6469
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by Long Run »

BoSoxGal wrote:
Wed Nov 03, 2021 3:06 pm
Of course these taxes are very important because we all know how dangerous marijuana is while alcohol use is such a positive influence on our society.
One of the untruths of the legalization movement was/is to ignore or minimize the very real health problems with marijuana, and pretending that it is still the 1960s when the product and market have changed dramatically since the "old" days. Arguing for equivalence with alcohol is a two edged blade -- we know the problems with alcohol usage so why in the world we would want to double down by adding another dangerous and widely misused drug? (All that said, I am in favor of intelligent legalization that accounts for those and other health issues).

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 15530
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by BoSoxGal »

Long Run wrote:
Wed Nov 03, 2021 3:56 pm
BoSoxGal wrote:
Wed Nov 03, 2021 3:06 pm
Of course these taxes are very important because we all know how dangerous marijuana is while alcohol use is such a positive influence on our society.
One of the untruths of the legalization movement was/is to ignore or minimize the very real health problems with marijuana, and pretending that it is still the 1960s when the product and market have changed dramatically since the "old" days. Arguing for equivalence with alcohol is a two edged blade -- we know the problems with alcohol usage so why in the world we would want to double down by adding another dangerous and widely misused drug? (All that said, I am in favor of intelligent legalization that accounts for those and other health issues).
I’m actually very well read in this area and I dispute your assertion based on that fairly extensive education. I don’t for a moment agree that marijuana is as widely misused as alcohol, and it most certainly is not nearly as dangerous. There has never been a documented case of death by marijuana overdose, whilst deaths by extreme alcohol intoxication are sadly common and take the lives of far too many promising young high school and college students every year in binge drinking rituals tied to fraternal organizations, sports teams, and just stupid partying antics. Regular alcohol consumption is linked to cancer, heart disease, organ failure and the substance is much more addictive. Marijuana is not physically addictive, but a relatively small percentage of users will develop a psychological dependency. A much higher percentage of users of a substance called food develop a psychological dependency that results in very significant adverse health issues.

As a former prosecutor who advocated for legalization while in the work, I can attest that marijuana was almost never a factor in any of the crimes of violence that I prosecuted myself or saw in the criminal justice system over years of participation. Marijuana was linked to crime due to the illicit status of the drug itself - so possession and distribution, or occasionally disputes between dealers. Marijuana was present in less than 10% of the DUI cases, the vast majority were alcohol or prescription drugs. It was alcohol that fueled most of the domestic violence and other assault cases I saw, and was present in most of the murders and suicides I saw as well. Alcohol was very often present in rape cases as well.

So yes they’re not on equal footing, marijuana even at present strengths is a far less dangerous drug and no amount of freshly polished reefer mania propaganda will change my mind about this. Research as of 2016 established that every US jurisdiction that had legalized marijuana had seen a significant drop in opiod abuse and overdose - marijuana use is an effective pain management tool, and also treats depression, anxiety and ptsd very well for many people, which keeps them from seeking much more addictive and unhealthy substances.

I am 100% pro-marijuana and I think it’s disgusting that my state is taxing alcohol at the same rate as in 1975 when the excise tax was last adjusted, while taxing marijuana so very much more steeply. It’s twisted Puritan thinking and nothing more - the biological and social science doesn’t support favoring alcohol in this way.

Here’s this, you can easily find many more online resources that support my assertions. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.busine ... 7-11%3famp
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 7268
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Onalaska, Wi (suburb of La Crosse)

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Alcohol has the stamp of approval of the Deity, marijuana doesn't.   After all, according to the Bible story in John 2: 1-12, Jesus turned the water into wine, not weed.
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 12199
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by Joe Guy »

I seem to recall somewhere in my Catholic upbringing that Jesus once said, "Let he who is without gin, use weed to get stoned". I might be a bit off in the exact wording.

Jarlaxle
Posts: 4924
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:21 am
Location: New England

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by Jarlaxle »

Five guys getting drunk start a fight. Five guys smoking pot start a band.
John Ross for president

rubato
Posts: 14117
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by rubato »

Long Run wrote:
Wed Nov 03, 2021 2:39 pm
This was all predicted when legalization started, though most states do better it than this description of California. Requiring a local ordinance to allow sales in California, as described in the article, is backward. ...
Bullshit. Oregon had an immediate and huge glut of Marijuana minutes after 'legalization'

Legal cannabis was a shit business model for soft-headed people. It is a weed which is easy to grow at high quality, for little cost. What did you think was going to happen?

yrs,
rubato

rubato
Posts: 14117
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by rubato »

Jarlaxle wrote:
Thu Nov 04, 2021 6:48 am
Five guys getting drunk start a fight. Five guys smoking pot start a band.
Having dealt with drunk and stoned college students for 10 years I would rather deal with 100 stoners than one drunk.

Stoners are generally very pleasant and sweet-natured. Easily convinced.

yrs,
rubato

User avatar
dales
Posts: 10908
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:13 am
Location: SF Bay Area - NORTH California - USA

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by dales »

Pass the brownies.

Your collective inability to acknowledge this obvious truth makes you all look like fools.


yrs,
rubato

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 18858
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Eventually, yes
"I don't have dreams. Either in dreams or life."
- Bert Kibbler

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 4479
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

I'll pass the brownies just as soon as I get them to light up. Not having much luck so far.

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 18858
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Try these Image
"I don't have dreams. Either in dreams or life."
- Bert Kibbler

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 7268
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Onalaska, Wi (suburb of La Crosse)

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Ohmigod, Godiva really crapped in their hat this time.  Chocolate cigars??  Don't they realize that this is promoting smoking, and could result in their being shunned, cancelled, or worse?

They should have done a solid chocolate 'poop' emoji  💩  instead, like a king-sized Hershey's Kiss®.  After all, poop is natural, and everybody poops.  And of course, while only certain people can say 'nigga' or 'queer' or 'faggot', ANYONE of any age, race, or sexual orientation is permitted to say 'shit'.  Even in what used to be described as 'polite company'.
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

rubato
Posts: 14117
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: They must have been stoned...

Post by rubato »

it's milk chocolate. Not really that appealing.

yrs,
rubato

Post Reply