California To Impose 7.25% Tax On Medical Marijuana

This is bullshit, the cannabis clubs in CA already charge street prices, this will just drive it up even more.

I mean honestly, if this is MEDICAL marijuana, why is it sold at street prices? Shouldn't it be sold cheaper so patients can easily obtain their medicine?
 
the same vendors that supply the medical buds, supply dealers n' factor in selling the bud openly in a store that the clubs have to pay to lease office space n' other bills running the store. your lucky your not paying MORE than street price. oxycontin is more expensive than heroin. medical doesnt equal cheap.

the great thing about medical mj in cali is not the clubs, but just the law u can bring up as a valid defense if you are busted growing, by state police obviously.

i still say its a good idea for cali to legitimze it by taxing it. and besides they arent gonna tax the homegrown or caregivers :) the article stated, only dispensaries.
 
Last edited:
I think the concept of legitimizing cannabis is more important than any legal loop-holes surrounding the taxation of medicine or drug scheduling. People hear the word "tax" and associate it with "acceptable" and "lucrative".

An act of congress could instantly legalize ganja and possibly end the drug war. Since the citizens elect representatives, its the citizens attitudes that need changing. Taxing weed would help this situation greatly.
 
Mehm said:
I think the concept of legitimizing cannabis is more important than any legal loop-holes surrounding the taxation of medicine or drug scheduling. People hear the word "tax" and associate it with "acceptable" and "lucrative".

An act of congress could instantly legalize ganja and possibly end the drug war. Since the citizens elect representatives, its the citizens attitudes that need changing. Taxing weed would help this situation greatly.
Click to expand...



Except for the faction of the citizens that are promoting that the federal income tax is illegal....


Anyway...
An act of congress COULD end the drug war and create a major monetary gain in the federal budget.

The government keeps twisting the facts of the drug war in favor of keeping it going strong - or those submitting information twist it in a way to make the drug war seem favorable.
As well as those pesky international treaties that prohibit the legalization of many drugs...

When the informants are lieing to the government and the government is lieing to the people, no one's attitude is going to change regarding the drug laws.


MDMA for example (Yeah... I know... I'm partial to it....)

In 2001 the Federal Sentencing commission made a report to congress (May 2001)
http://www.ussc.gov/r_congress/mdma_final2.PDF

They changed the marijuana equivelency of 1 gram MDMA to 500 grams of marijuana...
A change from 1 gram of MDMA = 35g marijuana.

This makes the punishments for 1g MDMA more than 2 times the punishment for 1g cocaine. (powdered...)


Using information on cost v. benefit of raising the MDMA penalties, they made estimates that the arrests for MDMA would not rise - as they point out that MDMA importation and distribution were rapidly rising - contradicting themselves paragraphs apart. (Cost in prison beds = X, assuming the rate of MDMA arrests remains constant.)


This, compared with the benefit of keeping an UNSAFE DRUG that CAUSES BRAIN DAMAGE citing the reports from George Ricaurte, M.D.

They note that there is much criticism of his work and many people call his results into question - yet they state that his works being published for peer review gives them credibility.
So... by putting something on paper in a scientific journal for PEER review makes the opinions of the PEERS (those criticizing and questioning his results) irrelevant?


Why, after Ricaurte's results were PULLED for mislabeling methamphetamine as MDMA were the risks not re-evaluated?
Why weren't the laws reformed as the scientific basis for the laws was proven faulty?


They make notes that only 1.9% of people arrested for MDMA posses a weapon... while 21.6% of crack cocaine offenders have weapons charges assessed, and 12.2% of all criminals arrested for trafficking any drug also have weapons charges.
This immediately followed by;
"Furthermore, unlike users
of other drugs, users of MDMA rarely commit crimes to support their consumption pattern."

Alluding to what? MDMA not being ADDICTIVE enough to create criminals out of its users?

Yet... MDMA now carries a STRICTER charge than cocaine?


Odd how that works...

Odd that the science now says it's not causing brain damage - and that Ricaurte's works were all flawed - some MAJORLY, some minorly, but all were biased (as well as government funded... coincidence?) and could not be used to conclude ANYTHING about MDMA's effects on the brain in recreational doses.


His studies were revoked in 2003 (http://www.maps.org/mdma/studyresponse.html) yet the laws based on his research still haunt us in 2007.

Why?

By falsely representing the information they have - stating that MDMA is HIGHLY ADDICTIVE - without proof (other than testimony from 2 poly-drug users... both in recovery with a STRONG aversion to any drugs), stating that MDMA use does not increase crime rates for ANYTHING - including supporting an MDMA habit....

Falsely sticking with the "MDMA causes brain damage!" stance after the research is recalled, more research shows that MDMA can HELP people with Parkinstan's disease - not cause it...
And still using the brain images from Ricaurte's work in Anti-drug ads and propaganda...

They're creating a fear in the public to prevent the changes from happening.

The people in power regurgiate the lies they're fed.
How will the public opinion ever change under these circumstances?
 
Last edited:
Considering the federal vs. state thing w/ regards to roads, no way the fed will stop helping for road money, you know how much stuff from china comes over on boats into CA and is shipped across the country? the country depends on CA roads. the federal gov is fairly handicapped with regards to punishing CA, it makes up around 50% of the economy and you don't want to piss off the terminator, girly man.

Perhaps things are coming full circle, marijuana was first made "illegal" via a tax stamp...

The notion of taxing a drug is rediculous, legalize it already. give it 10 years, barring a major international/terrorist-type event happening in CA territory.
 
bromance said:
There's just a few more people in the US than the Netherlands.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I forgot to mention as a percentage of the population, they drink and smoke cigs more, and smoke less pot.
 
The people in power regurgiate the lies they're fed.
How will the public opinion ever change under these circumstances?
Click to expand...

other, trutiher information exists. the internet makes it widely and easily accessible.

most people can think for themselves. regarding ganja, the facts point in one direction.
 
Mehm said:
other, trutiher information exists. the internet makes it widely and easily accessible.

most people can think for themselves. regarding ganja, the facts point in one direction.
Click to expand...


Except they don't have a need to KNOW this information - users know enough to get by... but still don't expect to get caught - don't care about the laws.

Non-users don't about the effects or the laws.

If drugs are bad, the laws don't matter - as long as the public believes their working.


How do you raise public awareness about something they don't care about?
 
Trogdor said:
Does California still receive its federal highway subsidy? Because if they do, they won't for very much longer. Let's hope they rake in more money taxing weed than they would have gotten from the feds for fixing roads....
Click to expand...

I honestly don't think the Gubbermeant has a plan to eradicate marijuana usage. I think they're perfectly content picking off the unlucky and the stupid whom are caught. I doubt they'll force the issue, because people obviously want to smoke pot. They will keep up their current state of harassment until the middle class truly comes out against its illegalization. And the middle class will only do that when they see the ridiculousness of it all. I suffer little hope, but alas... maybe one day...

PAX,
PL
 
I think thats reasonalbe its a product just like everything else, now only if theyd give out heroin the way they give out med marijuana... hmmm such is life. If the govt. could tax it and gwt away with it they'd go crazy.
 
dapurpman said:
the same vendors that supply the medical buds, supply dealers n' factor in selling the bud openly in a store that the clubs have to pay to lease office space n' other bills running the store. your lucky your not paying MORE than street price. oxycontin is more expensive than heroin. medical doesnt equal cheap.

the great thing about medical mj in cali is not the clubs, but just the law u can bring up as a valid defense if you are busted growing, by state police obviously.

i still say its a good idea for cali to legitimze it by taxing it. and besides they arent gonna tax the homegrown or caregivers :) the article stated, only dispensaries.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I have to call bullshit.

This law is in place specifically to get medicine into the hands of people that need it, in a safe and affordable way. When this law was passed one of the major supporting arguements was that patients who need marijuana are typically forced to buy from street dealers, which is unsafe and costly. By charging street prices these clubs are just basically acting as drug dealers.
 
Average Whiteboy said:
Sorry, I have to call bullshit.

This law is in place specifically to get medicine into the hands of people that need it, in a safe and affordable way. When this law was passed one of the major supporting arguements was that patients who need marijuana are typically forced to buy from street dealers, which is unsafe and costly. By charging street prices these clubs are just basically acting as drug dealers.
Click to expand...


Legally.


I worked in the Fairfax dispensary (for 3 days...) and the markup is... a lot.

Sure, security, rent, and stuff costs money...

But 90% of the markup is pure profit.
There's no marketing costs...
It's all word of mouth...


Drug dealing is the perfect business...
Your supply is limited, so you can charge what you want...
Your demand is unlimited - you're never stuck with stuff left over (for more than a day or two if it's a LOT you get stuck with....)
Your marketing is all done for you (I don't get how they say "drug dealers target children" - it doesn't make sense to me... drugs sell themselves - why would anyone LOOK for drug buyers? Normally you're trying to hide from drug buyers you don't know... not supply drugs to kids....)
You work on a referral basis - so you're not dealing to anyone that hasn't had SOME experience with the drugs - they have reasonable precautions and thought processes to protect themselves from potential downsides (Od'ing, overheating(mdma), etc...)
And.... the return policy is at your digression... and people don't get too upset if you refuse.

It's the easiest business you can run.
Customers come flocking...
Your overhead is only your initial investment (which can be as little as 1 dose you mark up 5%)

Any other business gets buried in marketing cost debts so large they have to produce enough customers just to break even.



If the dispensaries had marketing costs I could understand the markup.
They don't.

They're just legal drug dealers.
That's it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top