Legalize marijuana---Pay For Stuff....

Right now, everyone gets a cut, except the goverment

People have been debating the re-legalization of marijuana since the criminilizing of the very substance some of our most historical documents were written on, like the Declaration of Independence.


Now we face record deficits and a lack of funding for just about everything we need. The war(s) we are fighting, health care, education and just about anything else you can think of. Unless you want a piece of blatant pork, spent in a republican congressman's district, there probably is a shortfall of funding.

But what about marijuana? Could this, already used recreational substance give a much needed cash infusion to our system? Before jumping to "moral" conclusions on why the goverment shouldn't "endorse" pot smoking....what about the children?....and all that.....keep this in mind....

America repealed the 18th ammendment to re-legalize booze to help out with the depression and help pay for some of FDR's big programs. Taxing cigarettes is a big income source to every state in the union even as our goverment effectively preaches the dangers of smoking. So why not pot?


It is estimated that about 20 million americans smoke marijuana in much of the same way that millions of good americans drink. They do it responsibly, they do it prudentlyy and they do it relatively safely. Indeed, no one has ever died from a marijuana overdose and people who are high on pot aren't exactly known for doing anything worse than eating all the doritos.

If we are to equate 20 million smokers with say a joint a day (an average only), with each joint carrying a 1 dollar tax, we can figure out how much money legalization could raise.

The math is simple. We have 365 days a year. So 20 million times 365 would equal about 7.3 billion dollars. No, that won't cover the war, but that isn't the only part of the equation.

We spend about 20 billion annually on the drug war. Well over 1/2 of that involves marijuana alone. Indeed, marijuana has been the soap box for law enforcement as it is the bulkiest, smelliest and often least profitable of all the drugs that they "fight."
So, now we are up about 18 billion when you figure in money not wasted on chaising ones own tail, which is what marijuana enforcement has long been. This would have covered the entire "reconstruction" budget for Iraq. This amount alone would justify the legalization. But wait, there's more!.......

Also contributing to the income stream will be the new businesses and employees all paying taxes and contributing to the general welfare. The goverment will get to issue a new kind of "business license" which will bring in revenue. Plus, i'm sure they can come up with other little fees and such to boost our numbers even higher. The goverment is always good for that.

Of course, I know that this little article doesn't cover all the issues. But at the end of the day, keeping marijuana illegal and jipping the goverment out of it's fair share while a 70 year old "war" against it has been less than fruitless, seems rather stupid.


By the way, if you enjoyed this...check out my other articles on the subject...some are true stories like " Can You Buy Pot On the Internet?" and "Smuggling Pot from Jamaica- A True Story" both of which can be found on this very blog site. Just check out the articles list at the top or click the links below to be instantly transported.



Link




Link





30,790 views 85 replies
Reply #1 Top
one more quick point,,,,the tax is suggested at 1 dollar,,,making the tax 2 or 3 dollars would of course double, or triple the numbers.
Reply #2 Top
Keep in mind that demand would probably go way up, if it was legal--prices would fall and there'd be no fear of the law. So we'd have a lot more than 20 million smokers and therefore a lot more money than you suggest. (Though of course some of this increased demand would come from people giving up substitute goods which are taxed (ie tobacco, alcohol) so it's not pure profit.)
Reply #3 Top
It's a great debate topic, but you exclude the only real reason behind the ban, it is a moral and ethical issue.
It introduces the slippery slope of where to go from there.
Cocaine ? Legalize that and nearly half in prison would have their convictions vacated.
Heroin ? The perfect cash crop to lift Afganistan from economic devastation.

Sin taxes are always levied on the poor, why do you think North Carolina still has no lottery ? It would help the schools they say, but it would overtax the poor.( large Baptist constituancy screams everytime lotto gets mentioned )

The tax I pay for my cigarrettes has risen from .32 cents to well over $1.20 per pack in the last 2 yrs, and I have seen no great increase in public service, or decrease in my tax liability.

Given more funds, our beauracrats will just find more places to spend it........
Reply #4 Top
I don't buy the "demand would go up" arguement. Prohibition caused the demand of more potent potables during it's reign of terror. Back then, the most popular beverages were the strongest, the highest proof. When prohibition ended, lighter mixed drinks and beer went up in popularity. These days, wine, wine coolers and light beers are the most popular alchoholic beverages purcchased and consumed.

After prohibition, after a short lived party, demand never spiked for alchohol. When prostitution was legalized in nevada, the numbers of john's looking for them didn't spike. History has shown that prohibition generally doesn't keep demand down, and the lack of prohibition doesn't cause people to go nuts.

fact is, people smoke pot without fear of the law already.
Reply #5 Top
thank you for your thoughts...i disagree with most of your premises, but i do appreciate the viewpoint.

harder drugs present different challenges and i don't necessarily endorse legalizing everything as you would suggest. whatever someone personally chooses to do for themselves is their own moral decision, not the goverment's decision. if the goverment kept everything that was immoral in someone's eyes illegal then alchohol, tobacco and gambling wouldn't be the only things to be banned...some folks find some religion's to be morally bankrupt and unethical as well. if our goverment was truly concerned with ethics, then they wouldn't be consulting with enron on energy policy.

Reply #6 Top
I agree with you 100%.
I have smoked occasionally for years.....until hubby went in to the military. I have to be a little more careful now!
There is a bigger picture, what about saving trees? Or money for our farmers. It's easy to grow.....weed. It makes great
paper products, clothing, rope, even shampoos and conditioners! It has a plethera of uses or government could put
to OUR advantage.
A couple of comments were made about legalizing the harsher man made drugs, but that wasn't mentioned in the article.
We don't need to legalize the others just because we legalize marijuana.
My opinion, the only reason people look at it like they do, is because of the rep the government has given it. Most people who smoke are good people. Drinking alcohol is more dangerous than smoking marijuana.
Yes, there are people that abuse it or will abuse it, but it is no different than alcohol abuse....except the fact you can't die from liver failure...or other alcohol related problems.
Reply #7 Top
There are some dependability issues with pot. It's psychologically addictive.
Reply #8 Top
thanks for your comments...i din't get into the other uses, but you are right. the medicinal value scares the hell out of the pharmacutical industry...and it's fuel potential (hemp seed oil can power cars as well as gas 16 times more efficiently than gas can) is enourmous...but of course the oil lobby doesn't like the idea of their industry being made obsolete.

but those sources would indeed increase revenues even higher.

thanks again:)
Reply #9 Top
dude,,,everything is psycologically addictive...that has more to do with us than it does the good or service one is addicted to. the goverment endorses both alchohol and cigarettes which are physically addictive.
Reply #10 Top
don't buy the "demand would go up" arguement


I thought your other blog on the subject, about how your friend couldn't find a source for pot, and resorted to buying it online and was scared to death afterward, was a perfect illustration of why the quantity consumed would go up if it was legalized.

Reply #11 Top
There are some dependability issues with pot. It's psychologically addictive.


So are smoking and beer and its kin.

I am very anti-drug, but being illegal does make pot attain 'coolness' and something to do to rebel against 'big brother'.

I agree, hemp is very strong mineral. It will make for a great ropes, clothes that last much longer, and strong papers for books that last many times longer. As usual there is users and there is abusers.
Reply #13 Top
thanks for the comments,,,the fuel things is probably the biggest scam going on...back in the 80's, a candidate for gov. had a car converted to run on hemp seed oil (this isn't new technology, this was about 20 years ago) and drove it all over the state getting 50 miles to the PINT....also way cleaner and much more renewable as growing hemp is about as easy as it gets for a farmer.
Reply #14 Top
I agree with Dynosoar with his slippery slope argument. How do you distinguish Marijuana from Cocaine? A lot more people do it? But that doesn't make it right. It isn't as harmful? You can't justify legalizing this by saying it isn't as harmful as something else.

Then people will say, hey what about tobacco related deaths per year? Nobody dies from pot! Well nobody dies from tobacco either. They die from lung cancer caused by smoke in your lungs. When you smoke pot you're putting smoke in your lungs. Well, shouldn't we legalize pot then, because it's just the same or safer than cigarrettes in terms of health? No, because that's going to add fuel to the fire. We will see adverse health effects from pot in a more flagrant fashion than we do now and thus will be in the same situation with pot as we are with tobacco.

Also insurance companies would probably be forced to cover health cases that are a result of chronic pot smoking. Jacking the price up for the rest of us.

There aren't any adverse health problems that come with pot smoking? Just look at Ozzy Osbourne.

Reply #15 Top
I forgot to add the issue of driving. How will that be handled. Driving after smoking is not safe. It has been shown to be just as dangerous as drinking and driving in some cases. Do we have the technology for police to use that can detect if people have been smoking. This issue needs to be closely examined before we take any steps at legalizing pot.
Reply #16 Top
1st off,,,i always have disguished marijuana from cocaine...they shouldn't even be mentioned in the same paragraph when talking about dangers or toxicity. Cocaine has much more in common with alchohol than it does marijuana any day.

when i discussed mortality rates and pot i was referring to toxicity (overdose) as compared to alchohol. cigarettes have been proven to cause certain health problems, but so has a good steak. and then there's the pollution we breathe every day that causes disease and death. in my state, which has the distinction of "cancer capital" of the nation, delaware, we don't have unusually high smoking rates or drinking rates or anything like that...people get cancer in this state from corporations pumping crap into our air and water.

and insurance companies already factor in marijuana related health costs in today's numbers as people already smoke it..

i never claimed that marijuana had no adverse health concerns...but again, so does red meat. and ozzy osbourne's problems have been with alchohol mostly and smack some....not pot.

thank you for your thoughts:)
Reply #17 Top
if it were to be legalized, i would support any measure to keep it off the roads,,,just like with drinking. of course, cops are already trained to look for signs of a "high" driver and have been for decades. and i don't remember hearing about an epidemic of stoners crashing into stuff...i do hear about drunks ruining lives every day with their car though.

Reply #18 Top
When I was comparing Marijauna to Cocaine it was in an effort to show that there can't be distinctions made between the two without saying, well it's not as bad as coke so it should be legal. Because then the slippery slope argument comes into play, legalize pot because it's not as bad as this drug and it's more like this other drug, then what are the standards for other drugs? I don't think legalizing a drug should come as a result of how many people use it or even in terms of its potency, and definitely not in comparison to other drugs. Because every drug can have an argument in that scenario, and having all drugs legal is something I think we can all agree is not good news. There just seems to be a mudslide waiting to occur.

Thanks for the information on insurance. I wasn't aware that it was factored in already.
Reply #19 Top
The American people don't want MJ legal. They don't want the government to profit from a material that has no purpose beyond intoxication. They want people who use and sell MJ to go to jail. Isn't Democracy great?

Debate the perceived benefits all you like, it doesn't matter. The vast majority of Americans, and the vast majority of nations in the world, have decided how they want to handle MJ. At the end of the day that is all that matters, unless you want to impose the will of drug users on the rest of society to make money. I think that would be a hard sell during an election.
Reply #21 Top
Actually, having pot illegal is actually better for the government that having it legal. I smoke pot, I admit it, but truthfully, I started smoking it to "be cool" and fit in with the rest of my friends back in high school (I'm 21 now). Now, you make pot legal, and all the kids who want to be bad won't start smoking pot...they will find the next illegal substance that is readily available, such as cocaine, ecstasy, etc. Instead of a kid smoking a harmless joint to fit in, he snorts a harmless line of coke to fit in, and what you will end up with won't be pretty. If you go to Amsterdam, Holland, where pot is legal, the #1 drug there is not even pot, it's cocaine. People are more attracted to things when they are illegal, it gives them a sense of excitement, breaking the law and all. Tobbaco and Alcohol are both highly ADDICTIVE substances which is why both are widely used today, even though they are legal.

Hope that all makes sense...
Reply #22 Top
What, can't he advocate his position in the hope of changing people's minds?

He isn't changing people's minds about MJ, he is telling them that if they swallow their beliefs about it, they could make a killing. Not very persuasive to me.
Reply #23 Top
Rephrasing that: he's pointing out that there are costs to the current policy, and there would be benefits from a change in policy. Sounds like advocacy to me. Whether it's *successful* advocacy is an entirely different question.
Reply #24 Top
Yeah, but the exception people take with MJ isn't the cost, it is the general malaise of the potheads we see every day. We don't agree with its use, and we really don't care if there would be benefits from changing the policy. The cost/benefit ratio isn't the issue, we just don't want MJ legal.
Reply #25 Top
one of the things about this forum and what i wrote is that it is not necessarily supposed to be complete thoughts all the time. what i offered was 1 of many points about legalization. there certainly are other pros and cons. And of course, i would welcome more ideas and thoughts on the subject.

also,,,thanks to those who have posted on this so far,,,thanks for keeping everything on a "civil" tone.