Pot tax would bring california $1.4 billion in revenue. (military, safe)

[Highnlite]

No, you are wrong. See how easy that was?

Now, to do something similar to your statement. Go out on a boat, get that puppy underway, then go to the bow, and take a leak. See how that works.

When you are done with that, take an econ 101, with an emphasis on "economy of scale"

And if that is not enough for you, consider that the hills of California were full of stills during prohibition, what happened to those stills with the return of legal and taxed liquor?

[Roaddog]

The hills of California are full of illegal pot farms now, when they get caught it costs the cartels next to nothing, they have no overhead, if we can't stop them now what makes you think they will stop if it's legal? how can a company compete with the cartel? they can't, this is not rot gut moonshine this is weed, the cartel supplies the USA right now with no problems, they can sell it cheaper than companies with overhead, regulations, testing and taxes added to it. Economics 101

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Roaddog

The hills of California are full of illegal pot farms now, when they get caught it costs the cartels next to nothing, they have no overhead, if we can't stop them now what makes you think they will stop if it's legal? how can a company compete with the cartel? they can't, this is not rot gut moonshine this is weed, the cartel supplies the USA right now with no problems, they can sell it cheaper than companies with overhead, regulations, testing and taxes added to it. Economics 101

MOD CUT

I still think the water wars will be the ones to watch, as well as the cartels destroying legal, commercial crops to keep demand ahead of production.

PS. When I lived in the deep south a couple of decades after the repeal of prohibition, I'd have sworn stills and moonshiners were still around. But like you, I must be wrong.

[Highnlite]

Roaddog, dontcha get it. Clarks, aka: Highnlite, knows everything so if he says it's so, it's so. If he says you're wrong, you're wrong. And that's the end of it.

Dear Miss Smuggy, I do hope no one considers you anything more than a Glenn Becky, Take a look at the this, here is what you said,

PS. When I lived in the deep south a couple of decades after the repeal of prohibition, I'd have sworn stills and moonshiners were still around. But like you, I must be wrong.

Here is what I said, that you thought you were responding to;

And if that is not enough for you, consider that the hills of California were full of stills during prohibition, what happened to those stills with the return of legal and taxed liquor?

Notice the location I specifically stated, see the problem?

If you would like, I am happy to repost other "facts" you posted that were completely made up. Like the reservoir by your house that you said was 930 feet deep, but has a dam only a little over 200 feet high...mmmmmm?

The hills of California are full of illegal pot farms now, when they get caught it costs the cartels next to nothing, they have no overhead, if we can't stop them now what makes you think they will stop if it's legal? how can a company compete with the cartel? they can't, this is not rot gut moonshine this is weed, the cartel supplies the USA right now with no problems, they can sell it cheaper than companies with overhead, regulations, testing and taxes added to it. Economics 101

The cartels use new sites each season, they have paid crews that locate new sites, another paid crew comes in and sets the infrastructure, runs the water lines, clears the growing areas. Another crew brings in the pesticides, herbicides, gear and food supplies for the growing crew, who then come in, spend the season tending the plants, and eating the food supplied for them, they harvest when ready, and turn the harvested crop over to yet another crew who takes the crop to a distribution center, with yet another crew. These crews are brought from Mexico each season and return to Mexico each season. The growers have overhead similar to any other farmer, except they are more labor intensive,

Each of these crews is isolated from the other, they are cells, like terrorist cells, busting one cell does not lead law enforcement to anyone else.

All this costs money, supplies, and wages, just like any other farmer.

Now, back to econ 101, economy of scale, If I am a Cartel dude, I have 1/4 acre to 1 acre patches scattered over miles of trail less countryside, the more rugged the better. But, If I am Philip Morris, I have a thousand flat contiguous acres, mechanically farmed.

Here is another problem, you have;

if we can't stop them now what makes you think they will stop if it's legal?

the only reason we can't stop them, is money, there is more allocated, and many more grows were found this year than last. The grows are actually easy to find. Take a topo (you do know what that is, don'tch?) look for springs, fly to the springs, and there you go. The problem has been that there was not enough money to spend days in helicopters checking canyons below springs.

I would be happy to educate you, but I bet you would rather try to find flaws in my statements, or, like Miss Smuggy, you can just make stuff up.

this is not rot gut moonshine

This sentence shows that you know nothing about the "moonshine" business, but I will try something simple. You run a bar, call it, the Pozo Saloon, there are three or four or five or six moonshiners who want you to buy from them. You will buy the moonshine your customers want, generally the best, and the best moonshine was just as good as what we now drink as legal whiskey. Econ 101.

[Roaddog]

LOL moonshine has nothing to do with weed. Weed is weed, the cartels kidnap people from Mexico to take care of the crops the cartel kidnap women and children to hold hostage just for this reason, it's not to sophisticated, they use the same areas over and over, I camp in areas where crops are found every year, I see the watering system, theres nothing complicated about any of it, plastic hose laid in a creek running down hill, no big over head. A company will invest in property, millions of dollars, they will follow strict laws and regulations that cost millions, they will have to pay their workers and provide benifites, pay county and state taxes, permit fees, inspection fees, they will have to have their product tested and approved, they will have to have security, storage and transpertation and it will all have to be secured. They will need a structure of managment, development, sales and a host of employees to run a company, there will be labor laws to follow and all this costs millions, they cannot compete with the cartel.
I've owned a buisness and had to compete with people who didn't follow any regulations or laws, they could charge half of what I had to and they made more profit, thats just the way it works.

[dougstech]

Originally Posted by Apples&Oranges

A bill to tax and regulate marijuana in CA is in the works.

The state Board of Equilization report estimates retail sales of pot would bring $990 million from a $50 per ounce fee.

About 443,000 signatures are necessary to place the Tax, Regulate and Control Cannibis Act on the 2010 ballot.

The measure would repeal all state and local laws that criminalize cannibis.

Anybody have any more details? This was in my newspaper today, from the Associated Press.

$50 per ounce? + the fee for the marijuana itself?

that would be hundreds, nobody will pay that. it will continue to be done the way it is now.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Highnlite

Dear Miss Smuggy, I do hope no one considers you anything more than a Glenn Becky, Take a look at the this, here is what you said, Here is what I said, that you thought you were responding to;Notice the location I specifically stated, see the problem?

If you would like, I am happy to repost other "facts" you posted that were completely made up. Like the reservoir by your house that you said was 930 feet deep, but has a dam only a little over 200 feet high...mmmmmm?

Moonshiners are moonshiners and repeal was not the end of their trade. Why would one suppose it to be so in CA, either?

As for the lake, I admitted my error which was an honest mistake. It doesn't matter any longer, but this does:

Originally Posted by Highnlite

A bit delusional there sport?

Here, a minor factoid, I am poor, infact, so poor, I am one of those 47 million without health insurance, can't afford it. I don't work, I would not mind working, but at my age all I can get is Walmart greeter, I surely do not work for a non existent family concern. Without all of you paying your taxes to support our excellent socialist healthcare system for Veterans, I would be in big trouble, worse, I'd be dead.
Complaining about California, a poll.

How one so poor can own two boats, vacation in the Pyrenees and spend weeks at a time hiking trails and camping is curious and calls into question anything you post, including and especially anything you declare to be fact.

No cred!

Roaddog, you obviously get the point. Legalization won't stop the illegal trade and enforcement will still be a huge issue. If the MJ trade begins to dry up there will simply be a concerted effort to push other, more potent drugs that are still illegal.

[bluenoter]

I thought the best pot was grown in Oklahoma. Why does California want to squeeze out competition? TAXES= BS!!!

[Highnlite]

How one so poor can own two boats, vacation in the Pyrenees and spend weeks at a time hiking trails and camping is curious and calls into question anything you post, including and especially anything you declare to be fact.

Ah, poor smuggy, you try so hard, and fail so spectacularly, I commend you though, you made a whole post without referring to your military years, good on you. You make a lot of "honest mistakes".
Regarding your infinite curiosity about my financial status, are you considering dating me? That is the only reason I can imagine.

Criticial thinking test here;
Question 1. Smuggy, does being poor, mean always have been poor? Let me help you with the answer, no.
2.If one does not have a job, doesn't that free up time for hiking and camping?
And isn't camping a fairly inexpensive recreation?
Unless of course, you, like many, think camping is parking your motorhome.
3.Vacation... in the Pyrenees, I do a little freelance work for ETA occasionally I will let you cogitate on that, but don't set the woods on fire

calls into question anything you post, including and especially anything you declare to be fact.

Because unlike Glenn Beck and you, I like my facts to be facts, not stuff he and you make up.

[Curmudgeon]

OK, Clarks. Whatever you say, not that most of it's to be believed but that's OK too. Enjoy your delusions of superiority.

As for the MJ issue, one concern would be precisely what would be done with the revenue. It's supposed to go to allow local governments to regulate legalized activities, permit local governments to impose and collect marijuana-related fees and taxes, and authorize various criminal and civil penalties. While the end result may diminish jail and possibly prison populations initially, the proposition creates new laws with offenses that include incarceration at both the state and local levels. Also, there are plenty of people "waiting" to occupy any cells that are emptied so I see significant administrative costs without, perhaps, as much in the way of savings as the proponents claim.

The proposition precludes the state from collecting related fees and taxes. However, it will retain some responsibility and authority for enforcement and incareceration and if nothing else, we all know how "good" the state is at borrowing from special and categorical funds.

If this passes, I hope I'm ultimately proven wrong about the results, including the chuckle factor across the rest of the country. I hope Clarks is right regarding an exodus of cartel operatives. But I'm skeptical on all counts. In the end I still think the trade-offs will nullify any possible, significant benefits except, of course, for those who like their herb. Kumbayah, y'all!