itsmejonasgreene
Member
This post will be long, but it will not be rambling.
I have seen the complaints about legalization from people that are generally pro-marijuana and from people who are anti-marijuana. I have seen the fears of those who make profits off of it's illegality as well as genuine concerns about price/taxes and/or quality.
STOP THE MADNESS.
Growers/Black market distributors: Legalization provides for you an opportunity to leverage your skills and knowledge in a legal market. It offers freedom from arrest and prosecution. You like to pose your anti-legalization as concern about prices and quality. Stop being dishonest. We know what you're really worried about, your business.
People with genuine (although misplaced) concern about quality/price: I understand where your worry comes from. The worry about commercialization, additives and taxes/price are common fears. These are basic and understandable questions. We will take a look at these below.
-----------------------------------------------
HYPOTHETICAL/"FULL" LEGALIZATION:
Let us take a look at the desired hypothetical situation:
Marijuana is treated just like beer (or other non-distilled forms of alcohol such as wine, cider, mead) is.
This means several things happen.
1.) It is legal to possess (in any amount) for those age 21 or older.
2.) A permit is required to sell. No sales shall be permitted to take place to those persons under the age of 21.
3.) Sales are taxed at a rate decided on by the Fed, the State, and local authorities.
4.) It is left to the states/counties/municipalities to decide the matters of issuing permits, availability, etc..
QUALITY:
Let us now take a look at the state of commercial beer. The market IS dominated by large producers of swill such as Budweiser and Coors (aka commercial-brews). However, as we all know, there are tons of top quality, smaller scale producers (aka micro-brews).
This would be the same with marijuana. Would large scale producers make up the bulk of the market? Probably, yes. It is the SAME WAY now. The vast majority of people in the U.S. already smoke lower grade/mexi/commercial weed. I doubt this would change. Instead of smoking mexi-brick, these people would turn to whoever the national brand is churning out loads of (relatively) poor quality cannabis.
However, those with a more demanding taste/palette look to micro-brews. This would also be the same should legalization occur. Those of us who demand QUALITY bud, will still be able to get it. Will it cost more than the commercial? Yes, of course. It does now with both marijuana and beer. This will continue.
As for "homebrew" or "growing your own".
Homebrewing beer is still illegal in some states. The 21st amendment to the US Constitution leaves the status of homebrewing predominantly with the states. In my state, it is legal to produce 200 gallons of beer per yr without a license to manufacture. 200 gallons is about 1600 16oz beers or 30 16oz beers per week or about 4.5 16oz beers per day.
Obviously, the quantity is not directly relative to an amount of cannabis, however it does show us a few possibilities with regard to our hypothetical. For one, it shows that I cannot (legally) manufacture it for sale/distribution without a license. It shows us that while I can "homebrew", I may not be able to (legally) produce all the "beer" I might consume in a yr at home. To make up the difference, I would need to purchase at least some of my "beer" from either a micro-brewery or from a commercial one.
PRICING:
With beer, you pay taxes on every purchase. With every purchase you pay an excise tax. In most states, (47) you ALSO pay state sales tax.
Don't fool yourself. With the current (illegal) market, growers and distributors are not simply paying for the cost to produce (CTP) and a little bit of profit on top. RISK is priced in. If you take out the risk, the price goes down.
CURRENT ILLEGAL PRICE = CTP + RISK + PROFIT
"FULL" LEGAL PRICE = CTP + TAX + PROFIT
All in all, chances are, price will not go up a single bit. They will stay the same or drop (CTP would most likely be less as certain equipment such as carbon filters would not be necessary. Cost of lights/nutes and other things may spike initially as demand outpaces current supply but would quickly level back to previous levels and would most likely even decrease overall soon after that) .
WHAT WOULD THIS ALL MEAN FOR US (us as in ALL USERS - not just a segment)?
Well, honestly, NOT MUCH (except the most important part). It means no more arrests or prosecution for possession, at all. It means states/counties/municipalities may have differing laws regarding manufacture/sales, taxes on sales, etc..
The future for producers is basically the same as it is now. Except you get a legal business instead. Instead of hiding and facing the threat of arrest, you have some legal hoops to jump through, but once past them, you are free from prosecution and arrest. You continue to make a living doing what you love. You can start your own "micro-brewery" or work for one. Or you could go work for a larger more commercial operation.
For distributors, the same thing. You jump through a couple of hoops and set up shop/store/coffeshop/whatever.
For homebrewers, you produce your own as much as legally possible, but you may (or may not) need to supplement by purchasing a taxed micro-brew or a commercial brew from a distributor permitted to sell such a product.
For consumers. It means being able to buy cannabis like you do beer or any other product. You can choose the cheaper commercial stuff or the more expensive high quality stuff.
EVERYTHING BASICALLY STAYS THE SAME EXCEPT PEOPLE AREN'T GETTING ARRESTED FOR IT.
Growers will still grow.
Sellers will still sell.
Buyers will still buy.
All in all, rather than an end to anything, legalization only affords OPPORTUNITY. Rather than an end to quality cannabis, it merely offers legitimacy.
----------------------------------------------
Hypothetical over, let's talk about the current California proposed initiative for a moment.
Now, as to the current proposed initiative in California. The proposed initiative in California does NOT LEGALIZE. What it does is further decriminalize. It is also kind of sloppily written, more on that in a moment.
It merely removes any penalty for possession of 1Oz. or less.
Beer is legal. Right now, I can purchase and possess as much of that beer as I want. I could buy and posses 1case or 100cases or 1,000cases and not be subject to arrest or prosecution if I so desired.
The proposed initiative does NOT do this. All it allows me to possess is 1case. If I have two cases, I get arrested. That is NOT the "full" legalization.
The proposed initiative only allows for 25sq ft of garden (5ftx5ft) and only possession of 1oz of usable cannabis. For someone like me, this about a 1.5 to 2-week supply.
Think about that. A 5x5 area but only 1oz.. Obviously whoever proposed this initiative does not have a sense of what a reasonable amount is.
It does state in Section 11300(a)(iii) that it would be lawful to
"Possess on the premises where grown the living and harvested plants and results of any harvest and processing of plants lawfully cultivated pursuant to section 11300(a)(ii), for personal consumption."
Which, I assume, means that it would be lawful to possess in quantities more than 1oz., so long as it was grown on the premises pursuant to Section 11300(a)(ii) - (25 sq ft of garden). Something tells me that this would have to be clarified by the courts.
And this is where the proof is that this is NOT LEGALIZATION. Not even close. It is just *further* decriminalization.
What this is, is a toe in the water. The state is trying to gauge how much revenue might be generated by FULL LEGALIZATION. However, their method is flawed. Full legalization would generate much more (possibly exponential amounts more) than the amount this initiative is meant to gauge.
I could get into all of the possible revenue saved/generated by "full" legalization but I've gone on enough for the moment.
I have seen the complaints about legalization from people that are generally pro-marijuana and from people who are anti-marijuana. I have seen the fears of those who make profits off of it's illegality as well as genuine concerns about price/taxes and/or quality.
STOP THE MADNESS.
Growers/Black market distributors: Legalization provides for you an opportunity to leverage your skills and knowledge in a legal market. It offers freedom from arrest and prosecution. You like to pose your anti-legalization as concern about prices and quality. Stop being dishonest. We know what you're really worried about, your business.
People with genuine (although misplaced) concern about quality/price: I understand where your worry comes from. The worry about commercialization, additives and taxes/price are common fears. These are basic and understandable questions. We will take a look at these below.
-----------------------------------------------
HYPOTHETICAL/"FULL" LEGALIZATION:
Let us take a look at the desired hypothetical situation:
Marijuana is treated just like beer (or other non-distilled forms of alcohol such as wine, cider, mead) is.
This means several things happen.
1.) It is legal to possess (in any amount) for those age 21 or older.
2.) A permit is required to sell. No sales shall be permitted to take place to those persons under the age of 21.
3.) Sales are taxed at a rate decided on by the Fed, the State, and local authorities.
4.) It is left to the states/counties/municipalities to decide the matters of issuing permits, availability, etc..
QUALITY:
Let us now take a look at the state of commercial beer. The market IS dominated by large producers of swill such as Budweiser and Coors (aka commercial-brews). However, as we all know, there are tons of top quality, smaller scale producers (aka micro-brews).
This would be the same with marijuana. Would large scale producers make up the bulk of the market? Probably, yes. It is the SAME WAY now. The vast majority of people in the U.S. already smoke lower grade/mexi/commercial weed. I doubt this would change. Instead of smoking mexi-brick, these people would turn to whoever the national brand is churning out loads of (relatively) poor quality cannabis.
However, those with a more demanding taste/palette look to micro-brews. This would also be the same should legalization occur. Those of us who demand QUALITY bud, will still be able to get it. Will it cost more than the commercial? Yes, of course. It does now with both marijuana and beer. This will continue.
As for "homebrew" or "growing your own".
Homebrewing beer is still illegal in some states. The 21st amendment to the US Constitution leaves the status of homebrewing predominantly with the states. In my state, it is legal to produce 200 gallons of beer per yr without a license to manufacture. 200 gallons is about 1600 16oz beers or 30 16oz beers per week or about 4.5 16oz beers per day.
Obviously, the quantity is not directly relative to an amount of cannabis, however it does show us a few possibilities with regard to our hypothetical. For one, it shows that I cannot (legally) manufacture it for sale/distribution without a license. It shows us that while I can "homebrew", I may not be able to (legally) produce all the "beer" I might consume in a yr at home. To make up the difference, I would need to purchase at least some of my "beer" from either a micro-brewery or from a commercial one.
PRICING:
With beer, you pay taxes on every purchase. With every purchase you pay an excise tax. In most states, (47) you ALSO pay state sales tax.
Don't fool yourself. With the current (illegal) market, growers and distributors are not simply paying for the cost to produce (CTP) and a little bit of profit on top. RISK is priced in. If you take out the risk, the price goes down.
CURRENT ILLEGAL PRICE = CTP + RISK + PROFIT
"FULL" LEGAL PRICE = CTP + TAX + PROFIT
All in all, chances are, price will not go up a single bit. They will stay the same or drop (CTP would most likely be less as certain equipment such as carbon filters would not be necessary. Cost of lights/nutes and other things may spike initially as demand outpaces current supply but would quickly level back to previous levels and would most likely even decrease overall soon after that) .
WHAT WOULD THIS ALL MEAN FOR US (us as in ALL USERS - not just a segment)?
Well, honestly, NOT MUCH (except the most important part). It means no more arrests or prosecution for possession, at all. It means states/counties/municipalities may have differing laws regarding manufacture/sales, taxes on sales, etc..
The future for producers is basically the same as it is now. Except you get a legal business instead. Instead of hiding and facing the threat of arrest, you have some legal hoops to jump through, but once past them, you are free from prosecution and arrest. You continue to make a living doing what you love. You can start your own "micro-brewery" or work for one. Or you could go work for a larger more commercial operation.
For distributors, the same thing. You jump through a couple of hoops and set up shop/store/coffeshop/whatever.
For homebrewers, you produce your own as much as legally possible, but you may (or may not) need to supplement by purchasing a taxed micro-brew or a commercial brew from a distributor permitted to sell such a product.
For consumers. It means being able to buy cannabis like you do beer or any other product. You can choose the cheaper commercial stuff or the more expensive high quality stuff.
EVERYTHING BASICALLY STAYS THE SAME EXCEPT PEOPLE AREN'T GETTING ARRESTED FOR IT.
Growers will still grow.
Sellers will still sell.
Buyers will still buy.
All in all, rather than an end to anything, legalization only affords OPPORTUNITY. Rather than an end to quality cannabis, it merely offers legitimacy.
----------------------------------------------
Hypothetical over, let's talk about the current California proposed initiative for a moment.
Now, as to the current proposed initiative in California. The proposed initiative in California does NOT LEGALIZE. What it does is further decriminalize. It is also kind of sloppily written, more on that in a moment.
It merely removes any penalty for possession of 1Oz. or less.
Beer is legal. Right now, I can purchase and possess as much of that beer as I want. I could buy and posses 1case or 100cases or 1,000cases and not be subject to arrest or prosecution if I so desired.
The proposed initiative does NOT do this. All it allows me to possess is 1case. If I have two cases, I get arrested. That is NOT the "full" legalization.
The proposed initiative only allows for 25sq ft of garden (5ftx5ft) and only possession of 1oz of usable cannabis. For someone like me, this about a 1.5 to 2-week supply.
Think about that. A 5x5 area but only 1oz.. Obviously whoever proposed this initiative does not have a sense of what a reasonable amount is.
It does state in Section 11300(a)(iii) that it would be lawful to
"Possess on the premises where grown the living and harvested plants and results of any harvest and processing of plants lawfully cultivated pursuant to section 11300(a)(ii), for personal consumption."
Which, I assume, means that it would be lawful to possess in quantities more than 1oz., so long as it was grown on the premises pursuant to Section 11300(a)(ii) - (25 sq ft of garden). Something tells me that this would have to be clarified by the courts.
And this is where the proof is that this is NOT LEGALIZATION. Not even close. It is just *further* decriminalization.
What this is, is a toe in the water. The state is trying to gauge how much revenue might be generated by FULL LEGALIZATION. However, their method is flawed. Full legalization would generate much more (possibly exponential amounts more) than the amount this initiative is meant to gauge.
I could get into all of the possible revenue saved/generated by "full" legalization but I've gone on enough for the moment.
