[andyt]

You're trying all the same arguments I am. Doubt if they'll hear you any better than me. OTI knows that legalizing pot will just lead to a huge groundswell in usage by all the law abiding people out there who just can't wait to try pot as soon as it's legal, and that the gangs will be stronger than ever. Gunnair and Brenda think pot should be legalized, but not because it confers any benefit - we'll still have just as many gangsters making just as much money off it - but just well, because.

[Brenda]

This landlord would still be "fee-ed" because that grow-op would still be illegal...

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Brenda Brenda:

This landlord would still be "feed" because that grow-op would still be illegal...

Of course it would be. The difference is IF, and that's a BIG if, the gov't was smart enough to reduce the price to a point where it was taxed at 3-5 times what tobacco is taxed at, you'd see fewer grow ops. The street price of weed isn't determined by demand alone, it's primarily priced based on risk assessment. Every time the penalties for cultivation and/or trafficking have gotten tougher, the price has gone up. Every time!

[Brenda]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Brenda Brenda:

This landlord would still be "feed" because that grow-op would still be illegal...

Of course it would be. The difference is IF, and that's a BIG if, the gov't was smart enough to reduce the price to a point where it was taxed at 3-5 times what tobacco is taxed at, you'd see fewer grow ops. The street price of weed isn't determined by demand alone, it's primarily priced based on risk assessment. Every time the penalties for cultivation and/or trafficking have gotten tougher, the price has gone up. Every time!

And here is where we differ in opinion. I don't believe we would see fewer grow-ops.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Brenda Brenda:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Brenda Brenda:

This landlord would still be "feed" because that grow-op would still be illegal...

Of course it would be. The difference is IF, and that's a BIG if, the gov't was smart enough to reduce the price to a point where it was taxed at 3-5 times what tobacco is taxed at, you'd see fewer grow ops. The street price of weed isn't determined by demand alone, it's primarily priced based on risk assessment. Every time the penalties for cultivation and/or trafficking have gotten tougher, the price has gone up. Every time!

And here is where we differ in opinion. I don't believe we would see fewer grow-ops.

I'm sure the Portugese would show you differently.

As I said, the gov't has to be smart about it. The reason I used the price of $75/oz in previous posts is because it costs the same to produce a gram of weed as it does to produce one cigarette. A package of extra-large king-size smokes contains 0.66 ozs of tobacco. A carton of smokes contains 5.28 ounces of tobacco.
Using equal production costs, this would put the actual cost of an ounce of weed in the $15-20 range. Now, if they charge the same price for an ounce as it costs for a carton of smokes, this would be an effective tax rate of 4-5 times what it is on cigarettes. Compare that to street prices of $200-300 an ounce. Yer just not gonna see many people interested in getting a grow-op running so they can turn around and sell weed for less than $80-90 and ounce. The risk to profit ratio is way out of whack at that point.
One last thing about pricing. Back just before the Liberals first toyed with decrimming weed, prices were about $100-120 an ounce. When they announced their intent to push for decrimming, the price pretty much doubled. Why? Because the criminal aspect involved saw the potential to lose a LOT of money so they tweaked the price to make as much as they could before the deluge of money was slowed to a trickle, comparatively speaking.
Prices dropped since then but only marginally, but that was also the point where OC started making the BIG bucks in the pot trade in Canada. Decrim never went through but the doubling in price encouraged a LOT more grow-ops to spring up.

[Brenda]

Ok, seriously, you lost me with your $75/oz. I have NO clue how much grams there are in an ounce. Canada was metric before I was born, so I never felt obligated to learn the other system. I know feet and inches, but when it comes to weight, I prefer grams and kilo's, and NOT oz. and grams mixed together.

[andyt]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Brenda Brenda:

This landlord would still be "feed" because that grow-op would still be illegal...

Of course it would be. The difference is IF, and that's a BIG if, the gov't was smart enough to reduce the price to a point where it was taxed at 3-5 times what tobacco is taxed at, you'd see fewer grow ops. The street price of weed isn't determined by demand alone, it's primarily priced based on risk assessment. Every time the penalties for cultivation and/or trafficking have gotten tougher, the price has gone up. Every time!

Wouldn't that be an argument for getting really tough on pot? The price would go up so much it would greatly reduce use.

But whatever. As you say, the price on the street right now is 200 bucks an ounce, and it costs small fraction of that to grow it. If pot was legalized and sold in liquor stores at say $100 an ounce, that would have a big impact on gang income. Since many people would prefer to buy it legally gangs would have to cut their prices to much less than half to compete, and still would lose market share. Even if they cut the price down to just $100 and lose half their market share, that means they would lose 75% of current revenue. That's not chicken feed. Meanwhile the govt would get a nice boost in tax income off all you dope heads.

[andyt]

Brenda Brenda:

Ok, seriously, you lost me with your $75/oz. I have NO clue how much grams there are in an ounce. Canada was metric before I was born, so I never felt obligated to learn the other system. I know feet and inches, but when it comes to weight, I prefer grams and kilo's, and NOT oz. and grams mixed together.

Just follow his math. 28 grams/ounce.

[Gunnair]

andyt andyt:

You're trying all the same arguments I am. Doubt if they'll hear you any better than me. OTI knows that legalizing pot will just lead to a huge groundswell in usage by all the law abiding people out there who just can't wait to try pot as soon as it's legal, and that the gangs will be stronger than ever. Gunnair and Brenda think pot should be legalized, but not because it confers any benefit - we'll still have just as many gangsters making just as much money off it - but just well, because.

You've been given reasons for because, it just doesn't mix well with your brand of koolaid.

[andyt]

Gunnair Gunnair:

andyt andyt:

You're trying all the same arguments I am. Doubt if they'll hear you any better than me. OTI knows that legalizing pot will just lead to a huge groundswell in usage by all the law abiding people out there who just can't wait to try pot as soon as it's legal, and that the gangs will be stronger than ever. Gunnair and Brenda think pot should be legalized, but not because it confers any benefit - we'll still have just as many gangsters making just as much money off it - but just well, because.

You've been given reasons for because, it just doesn't mix well with your brand of koolaid.

Guess I can be as deaf as you - look at how you distort what I say, just so you can argue against something you actually agree with.

If you maintain that gangs will be as powerful as present, and continue to produce illegal pot in equal amounts, how does that support your contention that the only effect of legalization is saving on enforcement costs? We'd still have to go after all those illegal grow ops and the crime that goes with them, unless we wanted pot to just be a free for all. Nobody rational supports that. As usual you're not following your own logic here - but that doesn't really matter as long as you can stir shit by arguing out of both sides of your mouth, right?

[Brenda]

andyt andyt:

Brenda Brenda:

Ok, seriously, you lost me with your $75/oz. I have NO clue how much grams there are in an ounce. Canada was metric before I was born, so I never felt obligated to learn the other system. I know feet and inches, but when it comes to weight, I prefer grams and kilo's, and NOT oz. and grams mixed together.

Just follow his math. 28 grams/ounce.

Oh, I'm sorry. But I am being a pig head here and refuse. Canada is METRIC. Use the damned system.

[andyt]

Must be tough for you when you go shopping and the store still lists it's prices in pounds. If you were a pot head, you'd know this stuff. Who says pot makes you stupid. If you were an ex older pot head like me, you'd also know what a lid is. (Hint, it's the same as a dime bag) And a nicklebag.

[Gunnair]

andyt andyt:

Gunnair Gunnair:

andyt andyt:

You're trying all the same arguments I am. Doubt if they'll hear you any better than me. OTI knows that legalizing pot will just lead to a huge groundswell in usage by all the law abiding people out there who just can't wait to try pot as soon as it's legal, and that the gangs will be stronger than ever. Gunnair and Brenda think pot should be legalized, but not because it confers any benefit - we'll still have just as many gangsters making just as much money off it - but just well, because.

You've been given reasons for because, it just doesn't mix well with your brand of koolaid.

Guess I can be as deaf as you - look at how you distort what I say, just so you can argue against something you actually agree with.

If you maintain that gangs will be as powerful as present, and continue to produce illegal pot in equal amounts, how does that support your contention that the only effect of legalization is saving on enforcement costs? We'd still have to go after all those illegal grow ops and the crime that goes with them, unless we wanted pot to just be a free for all. Nobody rational supports that. As usual you're not following your own logic here - but that doesn't really matter as long as you can stir shit by arguing out of both sides of your mouth, right?

You cherry picking points to substantiate your predictable shut disturbing is hardly surprising. It's why many think you're a whiny prat.

[andyt]

Cherry picking points? You said the only reason you're for legalizing pot is because it would reduce law enforcement costs, and I showed you how that's pretty stupid logic. If you think there are other benefits to legalizing pot, well great, but you're really going out of your way to stir the shit with me. But I'll keep that in mind next time you make build one of your straw men.

[Brenda]

andyt andyt:

Must be tough for you when you go shopping and the store still lists it's prices in pounds. If you were a pot head, you'd know this stuff. Who says pot makes you stupid. If you were an ex older pot head like me, you'd also know what a lid is. (Hint, it's the same as a dime bag) And a nicklebag.

A store that still lists their stuff in lbs after over 40 years and not in kilo's or both, can forget about my business.

If I were a pothead, I would have been a Dutch pot head, and be metric too. So seriously, quit your fucked up excuses.
I take it you are a pothead, since you "know your stuff", and with that, you contradict the point you are trying to prove.