Personally I've never checked the measure z stuff being recommend cannabis for muscle tremors to promote fine motor control. I know of someone who went to that same one before oaksterdam before it was raided and tried dry ice hash that they got. They were under 21 visiting for oaksterdam and had out of state recommendation that allowed them in. They seemed pretty relaxed.
USA, WA Recreational dispensary open today PRICES ARE INSANE
- Thread starter ImagineBetter
- Start date
oh shit when was it raided? maybe they aren't as lax as i thought
edit: http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/oaklands-weed-speakeasies-draw-heat/Content?oid=3966172 for anyone who is interested
edit: http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/oaklands-weed-speakeasies-draw-heat/Content?oid=3966172 for anyone who is interested
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2013
- Messages
- 2,616
I understand why rec prices are high, but I don't understand why they have been allowed to get high, and I'll explain.
You vote to legalize Marijuana because a) you think it should be legal, b) you want some quality control, c) you want to keep it out of the hands of kids (well, some of us do), d) you want the criminal element minimized, e) you want the tax revenue and f) you want to minimize or eliminate enforcement and punishment costs.
So let's say you legalize it, but only home growing. All that is going to get you is reduced enforcement costs. I don't know what kind of limits you'd set, but this will have minimal social benefit.
So you legalize it and allow for legal sales. And by extension, some degree of taxation. Theoretically you also get regulation, quality control and reduced access by minors. But you don't legalize home growing. Anyone of legal age can walk in to a store and buy some. It sounds pretty peachy to me, and is almost a win/win situation. Yeah, law enforcement might have budgets reduced slightly and the prison corporations might complain, but society seems to win. As long as you don't fuck with the medical side of it, I would be happy to end the discussion here. I'm Canadian/medical, and if I were a citizen of Washington state I would have voted for I-502 as long as it didn't interfere with my ability to get affordable medicine.
But for rec users is where I really start to get concerned. Medically I use 1g a day; more in the winter and when the weather is changing, and less in the summer. I can easily see rec users at that level of consumption (and more). At $20-25/g (sorry for discussing prices, but this is publicly available knowledge) rec I wonder how sustainable a legal usage habit is? $600-750 a month? So back to the black market with cheaper prices, no regulation, lesser quality control, no age restrictions, less tax revenue and criminal involvement. And society would generally call that a losing situation.
Apologies if I've got this wrong (someone from Washington please correct me if so), but there is a 25% tax on producers (growers), distributors and retailers?
Is the situation going to sort itself out as more growers come online? Can further referendums modify the tax structure of I-502 or is it set in stone?
Sorry for sounding so depressed, but I haven't had enough coffee this morning yet.
Tom
You vote to legalize Marijuana because a) you think it should be legal, b) you want some quality control, c) you want to keep it out of the hands of kids (well, some of us do), d) you want the criminal element minimized, e) you want the tax revenue and f) you want to minimize or eliminate enforcement and punishment costs.
So let's say you legalize it, but only home growing. All that is going to get you is reduced enforcement costs. I don't know what kind of limits you'd set, but this will have minimal social benefit.
So you legalize it and allow for legal sales. And by extension, some degree of taxation. Theoretically you also get regulation, quality control and reduced access by minors. But you don't legalize home growing. Anyone of legal age can walk in to a store and buy some. It sounds pretty peachy to me, and is almost a win/win situation. Yeah, law enforcement might have budgets reduced slightly and the prison corporations might complain, but society seems to win. As long as you don't fuck with the medical side of it, I would be happy to end the discussion here. I'm Canadian/medical, and if I were a citizen of Washington state I would have voted for I-502 as long as it didn't interfere with my ability to get affordable medicine.
But for rec users is where I really start to get concerned. Medically I use 1g a day; more in the winter and when the weather is changing, and less in the summer. I can easily see rec users at that level of consumption (and more). At $20-25/g (sorry for discussing prices, but this is publicly available knowledge) rec I wonder how sustainable a legal usage habit is? $600-750 a month? So back to the black market with cheaper prices, no regulation, lesser quality control, no age restrictions, less tax revenue and criminal involvement. And society would generally call that a losing situation.
Apologies if I've got this wrong (someone from Washington please correct me if so), but there is a 25% tax on producers (growers), distributors and retailers?
Is the situation going to sort itself out as more growers come online? Can further referendums modify the tax structure of I-502 or is it set in stone?
Sorry for sounding so depressed, but I haven't had enough coffee this morning yet.
Tom
thomas davie, I get what you are saying and agree to some extent, but I don't think that just because cannabis isn't regulated by a government agency like the FDA that it makes it impossible to know what you are smoking. Fruits and vegetables are regulated by governing bodies and yet commercial growers use chemicals that are known to cause cancer and a lot of other terrible things. It is an industry standard and in fact it is actually much harder and expensive in terms of regulations to grow completely organic, without the use of any dangerous pesticides. So, the end product results in a ridiculously higher price for organic vs its main competitor, non-organic. There are other factors that play into the price difference, but a lot of it has to do with the regulation.
There are ways around this, however, and it is possible to eat organic without paying 2-3x the normal price, and still be able to guarantee that it is organic and probably to much higher standards than the USDA and FDA would. The way to do that is to go directly to the source, to meet the grower and buy directly from the farmer or sources like farmers markets and co-ops. There are some people who grow organic but can not call themselves so because they can not afford or do not wish to go through all the trouble of the regulatory process.
Unfortunately our legal system works in such a way that if a corporation has enough money and is wise enough with its money, it can write its own laws, or lobby its own laws to be PC... in practical market terms what you have as a result is corporations like Monsanto that hold patents on both chemical patents that target and kill plants(commonly known as round up) as well as patents on genes of plants that resist this chemical(commonly known as round-up ready crops). Both the herbicides and the GMOs used have been linked to quite a range of pretty negative side-effects that include serious disease, are banned in a number of other countries as more evidence of this grows, and yet is used as industry standard today in the US.
My point being that more regulation is not necessarily more quality control, or cheaper prices or less criminal involvement(less low level crime perhaps but thats mostly due to the fact that what was once a crime will no longer be a crime). There are some parts of the black market that operate with extreme quality control, grow organic and are very ethical in terms of business practices.
But, I do agree to the extent that real, non-regulatory driven legalization of cannabis would definitely shake things up in a good way. Having a large number of entrepreneurs dive into an essentially new(in legal terms) market would be great for the over all market. So long as the regulations are structured in such a way to control supply and pricing.
There are ways around this, however, and it is possible to eat organic without paying 2-3x the normal price, and still be able to guarantee that it is organic and probably to much higher standards than the USDA and FDA would. The way to do that is to go directly to the source, to meet the grower and buy directly from the farmer or sources like farmers markets and co-ops. There are some people who grow organic but can not call themselves so because they can not afford or do not wish to go through all the trouble of the regulatory process.
Unfortunately our legal system works in such a way that if a corporation has enough money and is wise enough with its money, it can write its own laws, or lobby its own laws to be PC... in practical market terms what you have as a result is corporations like Monsanto that hold patents on both chemical patents that target and kill plants(commonly known as round up) as well as patents on genes of plants that resist this chemical(commonly known as round-up ready crops). Both the herbicides and the GMOs used have been linked to quite a range of pretty negative side-effects that include serious disease, are banned in a number of other countries as more evidence of this grows, and yet is used as industry standard today in the US.
My point being that more regulation is not necessarily more quality control, or cheaper prices or less criminal involvement(less low level crime perhaps but thats mostly due to the fact that what was once a crime will no longer be a crime). There are some parts of the black market that operate with extreme quality control, grow organic and are very ethical in terms of business practices.
But, I do agree to the extent that real, non-regulatory driven legalization of cannabis would definitely shake things up in a good way. Having a large number of entrepreneurs dive into an essentially new(in legal terms) market would be great for the over all market. So long as the regulations are structured in such a way to control supply and pricing.
I think the prices will go down. The MMJ industry/black market/grey market is so well entrenched that nearly everyone who smokes has some sort of connection to the MUCH cheaper medical marijuana.
The important part of the law remains valid and in effect: you can not be prosecuted for purchasing or possessing weed. It does not matter if you don't have a medical card - you can't be trouble.
The prices reflect the extremely limited supply caused by the LCB holding up the applications for the growers and processors. The 4% approval rate of applications for a grow license was only at the day of the opening of the stores, that number will increase as the LCB has time to process the applications.
Either way, it is quite an embarassing start. I do not think they will change course and recriminalize. There is too much money involved. In typical government fashion, the process was over-thought by a bunch of idiots.
The important part of the law remains valid and in effect: you can not be prosecuted for purchasing or possessing weed. It does not matter if you don't have a medical card - you can't be trouble.
The prices reflect the extremely limited supply caused by the LCB holding up the applications for the growers and processors. The 4% approval rate of applications for a grow license was only at the day of the opening of the stores, that number will increase as the LCB has time to process the applications.
Either way, it is quite an embarassing start. I do not think they will change course and recriminalize. There is too much money involved. In typical government fashion, the process was over-thought by a bunch of idiots.
ImagineBetter
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2013
- Messages
- 101
thanks for the correction man, I edited my OP accordingly