U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Thanksgiving Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-14-2010, 02:20 PM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
7,327 posts, read 4,043,712 times
Reputation: 4347

Advertisements

A recent Field Poll (http://www.newsweek.com//frameset.aspx/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.field.com%2Ffieldpollonline% 2Fsubscribers%2FRls2306.pdf - broken link) found 56 percent of Californians backing legalization and taxing of marijuana. If the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act is approved by voters in November, what'll things look like afterwards... for taxes, the economy, pot-related businesses (new & old), society, etc.?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-14-2010, 02:25 PM
 
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
2,895 posts, read 8,016,831 times
Reputation: 1685


Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2010, 05:19 PM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
7,327 posts, read 4,043,712 times
Reputation: 4347
Actually I'm aware of that thread, although I can see how it might all look like the same thing to some, especially of the more conservative persuasion.

But am not asking whether anyone approves of legalization, or the initiative. The end of prohibition caused alot of changes, so I'm asking what changes folks think the legalization of pot will bring to Cali (pro & con), if the initiative passes.

One possibility, already suggested by Humboldt growers, is that California's "product" (3/4ths of which is shipped out of state) may eventually acquire "appellations", similar to Napa wine, since Humboldt marijuana is considered a "premium" variety among some connoisseurs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2010, 07:22 PM
 
Location: Earth
11,984 posts, read 13,373,203 times
Reputation: 4101
Quote:
Originally Posted by mateo45 View Post
Actually I'm aware of that thread, although I can see how it might all look like the same thing to some, especially of the more conservative persuasion.

But am not asking whether anyone approves of legalization, or the initiative. The end of prohibition caused alot of changes, so I'm asking what changes folks think the legalization of pot will bring to Cali (pro & con), if the initiative passes.

One possibility, already suggested by Humboldt growers, is that California's "product" (3/4ths of which is shipped out of state) may eventually acquire "appellations", similar to Napa wine, since Humboldt marijuana is considered a "premium" variety among some connoisseurs.
A boost to tourism which would benefit one of the poorest regions in the state.

More jobs, which would help out the economy, and generate further jobs, and generate tax revenues which would alleviate the state's fiscal crisis (although it would not solve all of it).

More growing in agricultural areas throughout the state.

More room for real, violent criminals in jails and prisons. More police attention to gangs, violent criminals, pedos, etc. instead of pot smokers and minor pot dealers.

The black market won't instantly disappear but will wither away. The small time independent dealers will be the first to go. It will hurt gangs and cartels in the pocketbook and deal them a blow but they'll still be around, however - after all, heroin and cocaine are more profitable than weed, and they'll still have that (and meth). OTOH there'll be more resources to fight them. The marijuana black market will come to resemble the black market for contraband tobacco, i.e. small and pretty insignificant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2010, 07:38 PM
 
Location: LA
6,220 posts, read 11,896,369 times
Reputation: 2566
Quote:
Originally Posted by majoun View Post
A boost to tourism which would benefit one of the poorest regions in the state.

More jobs, which would help out the economy, and generate further jobs, and generate tax revenues which would alleviate the state's fiscal crisis (although it would not solve all of it).

More growing in agricultural areas throughout the state.

More room for real, violent criminals in jails and prisons. More police attention to gangs, violent criminals, pedos, etc. instead of pot smokers and minor pot dealers.

The black market won't instantly disappear but will wither away. The small time independent dealers will be the first to go. It will hurt gangs and cartels in the pocketbook and deal them a blow but they'll still be around, however - after all, heroin and cocaine are more profitable than weed, and they'll still have that (and meth). OTOH there'll be more resources to fight them. The marijuana black market will come to resemble the black market for contraband tobacco, i.e. small and pretty insignificant.
well said majoun. my only concern with legalization of weed would be if farmer's switch over to pot in huge numbers. currently, many farmers are heavily subsidized by the government, making just enough to make ends meet. i'm also unaware of whether weed has an adverse effect on soil, similar to cotton. otherwise, the revenues that would actually be returned to the markets would amazing for our crummy economy (and i'm not just talking about taxes either).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2010, 08:12 PM
 
Location: Earth
11,984 posts, read 13,373,203 times
Reputation: 4101
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRinSM View Post
well said majoun. my only concern with legalization of weed would be if farmer's switch over to pot in huge numbers. currently, many farmers are heavily subsidized by the government, making just enough to make ends meet. i'm also unaware of whether weed has an adverse effect on soil, similar to cotton.
If it did, it would have been known by now.

BTW, cotton production in California is insane and has only been kept going due to federal subsidies to large agribusiness. It began because of the early American population of the Central Valley largely coming from states where cotton was grown especially Texas. Cotton is not suited for California and it is no surprise it has caused damage to the soil.

Quote:
otherwise, the revenues that would actually be returned to the markets would amazing for our crummy economy (and i'm not just talking about taxes either).
Definitely. It would generate all sorts of jobs and generate economic growth in areas of the state that need it even more than the state does in general.

Although I don't know what would happen if the initiatives on the ballot in Oregon, Washington, and Nevada this year to legalize would also pass - in that case I'd expect legalization in other western states (with the probable exceptions of Utah and Idaho due to Mormon influence in those states) to follow shortly and legalization on the federal level to occur after that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2010, 08:49 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
146 posts, read 131,674 times
Reputation: 116
Don't think my opinion however pro it may be would matter much so I would rather just quote a study done by Dale Gieringer, Ph.D. in regards to this subject. This study was done for the California chapter of NORML in 2009 and was done so to show the fiscal impacts that Cannabis legalization would have on the state of California.
Benefits of Marijuana Legalization in California
Quote:
California NORML estimates that a legally regulated market for marijuana could yield the state at least $1.2 billion in tax revenues and reduced enforcement costs. A basic $50/ounce excise tax (roughly $1/joint) would yield about $770 - 900 million per year plus another $240-360 million in sales taxes. In addition, the state would save over $200 million in enforcement costs for arrests, prosecutions and prison. Additional benefits would accrue from increased employment and spinoff industries. Total retail sales of marijuana could be on the order of $3-$5 billion, with total economic impact of $12-$18 billion including spinoff industries such as coffeehouses, tourism, plus industrial hemp.

California NORML's analysis of the benefits of marijuana legalization are as follows:
* An excise tax of $50 per ounce of marijuana would raise about $770 - 900 million per year.

* Retail sales on the legal market would range from $3 - $4.5 billion, generating another $240 - 360 million in sales taxes.

* Legalization would save over $200 million in law enforcement costs for arrest, prosecution, trial and imprisonment of marijuana offenders. Need for CAMP helicopter surveillance would also be eliminated.

* Based on experience with the cigarette tax, total revenues of $1.5 - $2.5 billion might ultiimately be realized.

* Based on experience with the wine industry, the total economic activity generated by legal marijuana could be nearly four times as great as retail sales, around $12 - $18 billion. Amsterdam-style coffeehouses would generate jobs and tourism. If the marijuana industry were just one-third the size of the wine industry, it would generate 50,000 jobs and $1.4 billion in wages, along with additional income and business tax revenues for the state.

* Industrial hemp could also become a major business, comparable to the $3.4 billion cotton industry in California.
In regards to the industrial hemp its history and current farming practices can easily be researched to understand what the impacts would be.
One excellent study was done right here in my home state of MN.. Hemp would actually be the perfect alternative to CA's cotton industry.
http://www.industrialhemp.net/pdf/MG...trial_Hemp.pdf

The one opinion I would like to express is based on the horticultural needs that high grade cannabis requires when flowering, that being; You would never see a field of high grade cannabis meant for personal consumption being grown outdoors or any where near an industrial hemp farm. Instead the vast majority of cannabis grown to smoke or consume by the public would be grown in a controlled environment(indoors/greenhouses)because of the simple fact that the pollination of a female cannabis plant greatly lowers the quality of the harvest, in addition to producing unwanted seeds.

For Cannabis "buds" to be considered high quality they must be or are greatly preferred to be harvested from a non-pollinated female plant. This would be literally impossible to achieve in a field next to or any where near industrial hemp; where pollination is needed to create seed for industrial use and next seasons crop.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2010, 09:40 PM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
7,327 posts, read 4,043,712 times
Reputation: 4347
Quote:
Originally Posted by keroppininja View Post
Don't think my opinion however pro it may be would matter much so I would rather just quote a study done by Dale Gieringer, Ph.D. in regards to this subject. This study was done for the California chapter of NORML in 2009 and was done so to show the fiscal impacts that Cannabis legalization would have on the state of California.
Benefits of Marijuana Legalization in California
In regards to the industrial hemp its history and current farming practices can easily be researched to understand what the impacts would be.
One excellent study was done right here in my home state of MN.. Hemp would actually be the perfect alternative to CA's cotton industry.
http://www.industrialhemp.net/pdf/MG...trial_Hemp.pdf

The one opinion I would like to express is based on the horticultural needs that high grade cannabis requires when flowering, that being; You would never see a field of high grade cannabis meant for personal consumption being grown outdoors or any where near an industrial hemp farm. Instead the vast majority of cannabis grown to smoke or consume by the public would be grown in a controlled environment(indoors/greenhouses)because of the simple fact that the pollination of a female cannabis plant greatly lowers the quality of the harvest, in addition to producing unwanted seeds.

For Cannabis "buds" to be considered high quality they must be or are greatly preferred to be harvested from a non-pollinated female plant. This would be literally impossible to achieve in a field next to or any where near industrial hemp; where pollination is needed to create seed for industrial use and next seasons crop.
That's a good point re: harvesting the female buds, although I'd imagine that would likely continue to be done in an indoor hydroponics setup instead of soil, albeit run as a much larger commercialized affair (or god forbid, made in China!).

Have also heard some folks suggest the possibility of nightclubs with dedicated "smoking" rooms, similar to current hookah bars in some college towns. But unlike alcohol, seems like the "intoxication" from 2nd-hand smoke would be hard to control. And then there's the issue of driving afterwards.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2010, 09:45 PM
 
Location: Yes
2,663 posts, read 4,183,879 times
Reputation: 855
From an outsider's perspective (never even been to CA), I can say that MANY people would consider moving to CA in the future ... including myself and my wife. Would CA be able and ready to handle a huge influx of people who would move there for the ease of mind that they would not be arrested (or fined or put on record for an offense) for smoking?

Of course, if Oregon or Arizona followed suit ... I would choose there ... no offense .

BTW, can your state talk some sense into Missouri or Alabama in regards to this issue?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2010, 09:57 PM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
7,327 posts, read 4,043,712 times
Reputation: 4347
Quote:
Originally Posted by oscottscotto View Post
From an outsider's perspective (never even been to CA), I can say that MANY people would consider moving to CA in the future ... including myself and my wife. Would CA be able and ready to handle a huge influx of people who would move there for the ease of mind that they would not be arrested (or fined or put on record for an offense) for smoking?

Of course, if Oregon or Arizona followed suit ... I would choose there ... no offense .

BTW, can your state talk some sense into Missouri or Alabama in regards to this issue?
An increase in "immigration".... that's an interesting idea. Or instead of "sex tourism", we could have "pot tourism"!

But as far as MO & AL, etc., don't worry, we've got plenty of those here too. Why do you think the the poll only shows 56% support?!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:29 PM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top