admittedly
i have a very basic understanding of economics but

some things i can't wrap my head around.
feel free to explain it better to me than anyone else has in the past.
i'd love to be on board with the cash crop argument.

1) legal weed will still have to be price competitive with illegal weed right? at least that is my understanding, that makes the drug pretty cheap. i'm saying i can get baked on some weeds much cheaper than i can get drunked on some boozes.

2) just about any idiot can cultivate the plant in his home. how does government make money off these guys? charge for a permit? how do you police this?

3) some people will replace legal alcohol consumption with legal weed consumption. perhaps it means less money for alcohol companies.

1) Weed is cheap to grow. You pay way, way more for weed that is illegal than it would cost to grow and sell. Undercutting black market would be easy as hell. But you'd still make plenty of cash from the quantities you'd sell. Lots of people make crap loads of money selling things that are relatively cheap. And you'd also be making money off packaging production, advertising, all that shit that goes into a competitive marketplace.

2) you could grow your own tobacco too, but they still sell a shitload of Marlboros. Hell, same for tomatoes or anything else. 90% of people would rather just buy something than grow it. Don't underestimate the lazy.

3) Probably marginal at most. People smoke and drink at the same time and still will. People who like booze are not giving it up for a joint. They are two different highs. Bottom line is you are opening up a huge new market that would more than offset any small losses.

I really know nothing about this, but I feel like taking a stab at it anyway.



When you take out the cost of importing and the whole legality issue, I would bet that weed could be pretty cheaply produced in massive volume just like any crop. Even if it was imported, if it's done legally and in large quantities, I'd bet that even with heavy taxes, the amount of risk offset by it being legal would allow for the price to be kept down.



It doesn't really take a genius to brew beer, either, but it does require a little special equipment and patience. It can actually work out pretty well, economically, too, especially if you like premium beers. And yet few people actually do it. In my pothead years, I knew very few people who actually grew their own, and I think this was only partly due to it being illegal and fear of getting busted. Never underestimate the value of convenience, especially where stoners are concerned.



I doubt it. The upside to this could actually be that tax revenue is still gained off of the new addiction of former alcoholics.

nobody,
i'm gonna have to underestimate the lazy. i just can't make that jump.
i would grow my own before buying in a heartbeat.
and if i didn't, someone else in my circle of friends would have plenty to go around. tobacco users smoke a hell of a lot more than marijuana users ... harvesting your own tobacco ... a ton of work. where as with weed i could supply myself and my neighbors (who are gonna be in that lazy percentage) with a few plants a year.

I think Cats is talking me into growing weeg.

soooooo much easier to just have one of them deliver it.

the last bag i received was from a grower so lazy he refused to take my money.

best kind of grower

If it were mass produced, you'd be at the corner store picking up toilet paper and could just have 'em toss in a pack of joints all cleaned no stems, no seeds, all rolled up and ready to just light. It would be so much more convenient.

And not everyone has the space to grow or lives with a good climate. While if you live someplace conducive, growing is easy, it is a lot harder if you're gonna have to set up grow lights and expend effort. Add in the quality factor...where brands complete on basis of quality and strength, which would surely happen. Who's gonna wanna smoke your ditchweed when they can easily and quickly go buy something of quality well packaged and ready for consumption?

Cats,
Please remember that not everyone in the marketplace for me is a quasi hippie freak, who has access to a network of growers. Many people who were once quasi-hippie freaks (college) and might imbibe in me have respectable jobs that an arrest for possession would seriously jeopardize, or they moved place where the network of quasi hippie freaks is smaller than their previous place of living. Basically: don't project your current circumstances onto a country of 300 million people, over 60% of whose adults admit to having at least tried me, and in turn extrapolate the taxes consequences.

The Gubmint is going to get theirs from my, just as they did from my cousin "MOOMSHINGE."

Thanks again,
GWEEG

Yeah, I'm going to have to weigh in against cats on this one too. Legalization would make home growing an outsider hobby and bring in barrels of tax revenues.

Oh how I laughed. (and oh how I hate working in an office with other people now)

and im starting to think all these non-users are lazy.

I am, but that has nothing to do with it.

so you're saying my garden would be like linux?

Here's why I don't get the tax revenue argument:

It turns the issue of the drug into one solely based on economics. Whether it's true or not, the role of govt isn't to make money--it's to address public infrastructure and safety.

Maybe the tax thing would be a nice perk but it's beyond the basic point, isn't it? They could be fining people now instead of jailing them.

I have no idea what kind of parallel you're trying to draw here. But legalization means industrial operations that can benefit from economies of scale. Like most other mass-produced goods it will be something you can make yourself but when you add up the costs of supplies and electricity it will barely save you money, and when you throw in your own time, you'll be in the red. Some people will do it for the love, but most people won't do it to save money. The medical marijuana shops in CA are a testament to the fact that people will buy it even if growing is cheaper.



Actually, Congressional power extends way beyond that. Collecting taxes and regulating commerce are right up there.

lrr's got the groove.

i was just being a goofball with the linux comment, and trying to get you into the idea of growing your own.

most of north america is a great climate for outdoor cultivation. i don't know where people get the idea that electricity and hydroponics are necessary to grow the decent stuff. i know it's hard to believe, but plenty of amazing pot continues to be grown outdoors, in places like wisconsin, minnesota and canada.

time is your good argument against me here. cause growing shit does take time.

That's fair, but then swap "electricity" for "land, water, fertilizer, fungicide, and pesiticide," and you're still spending plenty of money.

But then scale it back to what he said earlier, 2 or 3 plants... hell make it ten plants. Go to town. That's, what, a 4'x4' plot and a bucket of water once a week?


Cats is still correct that he'd have to wait, though.

I still don't see why people would grow their own pot if they're unwilling to grow their own food. It's about the same argument. And well, I'm pretty sure stores selling fresh produce still make a go of it. Cheap, high quality pot you can pick up for cheap when you're doing the rest of your shopping sounds way better to me than having to cultivate a garden...especially when viewed as an apartment dweller in an urban area.

Two different arguments being made here - "if someone wanted to grow pot it would be easy" vs. "most people aren't going to want to grow their own pot."

you've got the backyard for it.

city railroad tracks = plausible deniability