
Can Marijuana Save California's Economy? - jaxn
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090313/us_time/08599188495600
======
DanielBMarkham
Why did I know that the top comments would be complaints about the topic?

Ok -- why as a hacker (and non-pot-consumer) am I interested?

First, entrepreneurs are always playing the angles seeing where there might be
some economic traction where there was none. Obviously if pot becomes legal,
there will be social changes both in California and the rest of the U.S. I
could easily imagine pot-based vacation planning as a web service. Or better
still, some kind of pot fanboy sites, just like we have with wine and beer
drinkers. None of these business options have been on the table until now. To
me this pot stuff sounds like a lot of cash on the table. Sure the growers,
distributors, and governments are going to pick most of that up, but there are
lots of really interesting places to tap into that cash flow.

Second, as a government-hacking project, the idea fascinates me. Will the
California legislature pass this? Will Arnold (a bit of a famous pot-smoker
himself) sign it? If so, does the federal government step in? What's more
important, having states try new unusual tactics to keep funded or having the
feds control drug policy? Will the feds step in or not? It's a long way from
ignoring enforcement to having states flout the federal laws. Ever since
Lincoln decided that no, states aren't all that powerful there has been this
interesting power struggle between states and the federal government that the
feds mostly win. Will this be an exception?

I wouldn't want to see pot stories everyday, at least pot stories that are
simply "legalize pot, now!" kind of things. But stories about significant
other concepts, like startup opportunities or civics, that just happen to
involve pot? I'm okay with that every now and then.

------
mahmud
I have happily lurked for a year and a half and finally created this account
to say one thing: enough with the Marijuana news. This is not reddit. Please.

WRT to the article, people have been saying weird things since the economic
crisis started. For a truly strange proposition read this[1] Times article
where a Western banker wants the application of Islamic Sharia banking to the
financial sector:

[1][http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article58...](http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article5889624.ece)

I didn't post it when I saw it first, why? because the news paper took one
fringe opinion to bait for viewership. If California passed prop-8 to deny
some humans the right for marriage what makes you think it would grant others
the right to consume a recreational drug? this is just one politician
"planning an 'off the hook' public-relations offensive to attract younger
voters, especially blacks and Hispanics, by applying the party's principles to
urban-suburban hip-hop settings." With apologies to Michael Steele :-)

~~~
ciscoriordan
I agree that polarized topics like marijuana making the front page here tend
to make things trend towards reddit.

However, this particular article focuses on the economic effects legalization
would have on California. I think it would be a shame if informative articles
like this were flagged/removed, because I think the points it raises are
relevant and fascinating. If it hadn't been posted here, I'm not sure if I
would have heard about it.

------
kyochan
If cigarette and other "sin" taxes indicate, no.

I am for legalization but I wish people would talk up marijuana like its some
miracle drug with great health and economical benefits.

~~~
Leon
Don't underestimate the power of sin taxes in relation to other states.
California would be the only state with legalization and would pull interested
tourists from across the country. Their market would effectively be the entire
US with no legal means of competition for tax revenue.

The same thing happens with alcohol and cigarette taxation: a lot of people
will cross state lines for the cheap smokes of NC or better alcohol of nearby
states, if they are within proximity to the states border. This effect is
particularly noticable in driving across the country and having the chance to
see the businesses that exist next to state lines selling these items.

Another similar situation is that of casinos. The states that allow unfettered
gambling in certain areas (table games, slots, etc.) have their casinos built
in nexus points of travel near states with more conservative laws.

------
Rod
_"The last thing we need is yet another mind-altering substance to be
legalized. We have enough problems with alcohol and abuse of pharmaceutical
products. Do we really need to add yet another mind-altering substance to the
array?"_

That's a good point. Since I am not an expert on the topic, I will abstain
from commenting on how mind-altering marijuana is. However, it does seem
natural to conjecture that if one smokes more pot, then one's mind will be
"more altered", right? Hence, why not follow the Dutch model? This would mean:

\- all shops selling marijuana would require the customers to provide some
identification card / document.

\- a network would connect all the marijuana shops to a central database where
each person's purchase would be logged. Each person would be allowed to
consume a certain quantity of marijuana per day. If one exceeded this limit,
the shop would NOT be allowed to sell marijuana.

That way, one could legalize the consumption of marijuana, but impose upper
bounds on how much can be consumed daily.

Of course, the shops could sell pot and not register the transaction at the
database, but if caught they would be closed down. There could be a limited
number of licences to sell pot per county, so that no shop would have an
incentive to break the rules, as that would lead to loss of the precious
licence. The downside is privacy. All marijuana sales would be logged at the
database.

Would this make any sense? What do you guys think?

~~~
ruby_roo
Just try it. At least once. Don't like the smoke? Have a cookie. Within 15-20
minutes, you'll be wondering why you can't get marijuana from a liquor store,
taxed and regulated in a similar manner to the rest of the products they sell
there (which happen to be far more harmful to you and society anyway).

Side effects from over-doing it are basically mental slowness and a lack of
motivation (even this will go away if you just stop for a while). If you start
sucking at your job, your suckiness should show up on your performance review
and HR should handle you accordingly. Maybe you get fired. This is how an
alcoholic would be handled, anyway.

There is way too much fear and over-analysis surrounding this topic. The tools
to manage it are already here. _Marijuana_ is already here, and will continue
on just fine regardless of whether it is legal or not. Overachievers like
Michael Phelps and Barack Obama will smoke marijuana and go on to do great
things, just as they always have.

Just legalize it already so we can finally benefit from California's number
one cash crop, out in the open, rather than letting the majority of the
profits go into the pockets of people who very often do pose a credible threat
to society and require insane amounts of tax dollars to manage.

~~~
tome
> which happen to be far more harmful to you and society anyway

Are you sure that it's not that they're more harmful precisely because they're
legal?

~~~
jerf
Yes.

As much as I'd like to leave it at that one snarky word and leave you to fill
in the rest, I had better fill out my argument by pointing out that this
experiment was actually, factually tried, and it went _terribly_. Illegal
alcohol was far worse for society than legal alcohol. Prohibition resulted in
the only flat-out repeal of an amendment of the Constitution ever.

~~~
tome
You're right: I wasn't precise enough in communicating what I meant.

What I was trying to get at was not "wouldn't alcohol cause fewer problems if
it was illegal?" but rather "won't legalization of a niche* drug be guaranteed
to massively amplify the social ills it causes?".

I have no experience with cannabis, so I'm asking because I'm interested: how
do you know that the massive increase in participation which would follow
legalization will not cause cannabis to become more of a problem drug than
alcohol?

* let's face it, cannabis use is niche compared to alcohol and tobacco

------
axod
Please don't let drugs become HackerNews' equivalent of Reddits' Ron Paul.

------
liminalist
They could always tax religion instead.

~~~
ojbyrne
They really should modify the tax-exempt status of churches, especially the
big mega-churches that make a mint.

