Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
You keep saying that, but you have not been able to explain how the CA black market would suddenly go away if pot is legalized in other States. Black market pot is cheaper than legal pot, which is why it is there to stay.
It is important to note that you used the word "cheaper" rather than "cheap"... two different things.... Black market pot isn't "cheap" but it is more expensive in that small CA market than legal pot. The question that isn't why black market pot is cheaper but why is legal pot expensive.
It is all right in the article.... read it.
Quote:
"And those retailers are a big part of the problem – there aren't enough of them. "There's less retailers in California than there are in the state of Oregon," he tells Alfonsi. California has nearly 10 times the population of Oregon.
The California law gives local governments the right to regulate the pot shops so towns can prohibit them. A whopping 80% of the state's towns and cities have turned legal pot shops down.:"
"The law also calls for strict regulation and fees that can hamper licensed growers"
"Black market growers also sell their illegal weed out of state, a market closed to California growers who may only sell in-state. So the black market growers have a huge market."
For all intents and purposes pot really isn't "legal" in CA if it is over regulated as it is.......
Black market pot is only cheaper now because of legislature.. resulting in a smaller market for legal pot versus a huge market for black market pot. If you read the article there is a consistent theme that much of the cost and problems monetizing legally is associated with limited access to market and regulatory.
It is simple business concepts. Cost of a product is determined by market value; how much a customer is willing to pay for it. Quality of product and availability will determine price. Neither of which is happening right now. Cost is also relative... there is nothing innate or concrete in your assertion that black market pot is cheaper than legal pot given the right circumstances (legalization at federal level being one of those). On top of that, black market weed isn't consistent in quality nor price stable...
We've seen this already in alcohol prohibition. One of the main reasons alcohol prices of legal alcohol is so affordable yet profitable is consistent quality and availability coupled with the fact that federal and state taxes on alcohol for the most part haven't changed significantly since 1950s.... not kept up with inflation. Even slight increases at the state level haven't kept up with inflation.
The government isn't spiking inhalants intended to cause neurological impairment that are proliferating directly upwind from pedestrians on crowded public sidewalks in large cities because of hepster city government relaxation of drug laws.
Last edited by eastriver; 10-28-2019 at 06:55 AM..
The government isn't spiking inhalants intended to cause neurological impairment that are proliferating directly upwind from pedestrians on crowded public sidewalks in large cities because of hepster city government relaxation of drug laws.
No idea what you are talking about... nor how it is relevant. Sounds like you just feel like ranting... but I'm not sure.
Actually, every dem candidate except Biden is running on legalizing it. Some even running on legalizing all drugs. Biden, however, is only in favor of legalizing it for medicinal purposes, not recreational.
The dems had 2 terms under Obama to get this done though?
Plus, it was under Obama that the opioid prescription drug laws were created and took effect, these were some of the toughest drug laws ever created...and it was under a Dem administration!
It is worth reiterating that legalization at the state level was completely unconstitutional. When my state (WA) legalized pot, there was a letter of agreement signed between Gov. Jay Inslee and then-atty. gen. Eric Holder to not enforce federal law.
Article I Section 1 of the constitution says that "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
Neither Holder nor Inslee were members of Congress, and should not have had the power to effectively alter legislation.
Actually, ALL drug laws are unconstitutional, Govt does not have the right to create or enforce laws on these substances.
The dems had 2 terms under Obama to get this done though?
Plus, it was under Obama that the opioid prescription drug laws were created and took effect, these were some of the toughest drug laws ever created...and it was under a Dem administration!
Obama and most dems were weak when it came to legalization, but they didn't crack down on the states that decided to do so.
If Romney had been elected in 2012 there would be zero states in the US today where recreational use and sales were legal.
Last edited by jburress; 10-28-2019 at 09:46 PM..
Reason: might have used a banned word describing dems
Obama and most dems were weak when it came to legalization, but they didn't crack down on the states that decided to do so.
If Romney had been elected in 2012 there would be zero states in the US today where recreational use and sales were legal.
If you remember, the DEA made it VERY clear they would not even consider rescheduling marijuana, back in those days!
Imo, that says, it doesnt matter which party is in power at a given time, its this one agency that seems to hold the cards!
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.