Marijuana tax take nearly double expected in Colorado • Hacker News Board

Re: Marijuana tax take nearly double expected in Colorado

#61

Post by Sir_Cmpwn » Wed, Sep 16, 2015, 9:01 PM UTC

s_dev wrote: post #54

AaronFriel wrote: post #34

This is good news and bad news. The funding for schools will be a boon to education in the state, and that's certainly not bad. However, I expect will almost certainly lead to decreased education funding from other revenue sources, and ultimately place education footing on less solid ground for years to come. It was brilliant PR move to earmark the tax revenue for education, there's no doubt about that. It's very har…

In Ireland in 2008 we were warned the only two industries that would remain unaffected by the looming recession were the funeral and cigarette manufacturing industry. The two were absolutely stable the entire time almost every other industry brought in less tax revenue/revenue. Sin taxes can be some of the most stable sources of income as in the case of cigarettes and this is more evident during times of downturn whe…

Death is inevitable. Cigarettes are addictive - there's a physiological impetus to continue smoking if you're addicted. Marijuana is significantly less addictive, and it takes very little willpower to stop using it during times of hardship.

Re: Marijuana tax take nearly double expected in Colorado

#62

Post by jlarocco » Wed, Sep 16, 2015, 9:03 PM UTC

AaronFriel wrote: post #34

This is good news and bad news. The funding for schools will be a boon to education in the state, and that's certainly not bad. However, I expect will almost certainly lead to decreased education funding from other revenue sources, and ultimately place education footing on less solid ground for years to come. It was brilliant PR move to earmark the tax revenue for education, there's no doubt about that. It's very har…

I don't see what your concern has to do with marijuana taxes. Education funding is always in jeopardy, and has been for decades. Marijuana taxes are another source of funding, but nothing else has really changed.

Marijuana taxes are not the sole source of education funding, and they're not even close to being the biggest funding source. Politicians will have to budget funding for education just like they always have.

Edit: FWIW, I looked it up, and we (Colorado) spent $4.2 billion on K-12 education and another 2.8 billion on higher education in 2013. The marijuana tax revenue number mentioned in the article is only $70 million, which is less than 1% of the total education budget.

http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobhea...

Re: Marijuana tax take nearly double expected in Colorado

#63

Post by drumdance » Wed, Sep 16, 2015, 9:03 PM UTC

s_dev wrote: post #54

AaronFriel wrote: post #34

This is good news and bad news. The funding for schools will be a boon to education in the state, and that's certainly not bad. However, I expect will almost certainly lead to decreased education funding from other revenue sources, and ultimately place education footing on less solid ground for years to come. It was brilliant PR move to earmark the tax revenue for education, there's no doubt about that. It's very har…

In Ireland in 2008 we were warned the only two industries that would remain unaffected by the looming recession were the funeral and cigarette manufacturing industry. The two were absolutely stable the entire time almost every other industry brought in less tax revenue/revenue. Sin taxes can be some of the most stable sources of income as in the case of cigarettes and this is more evident during times of downturn whe…

> it takes very little willpower to stop using it during times of hardship.

...and yet that's often a great time to smoke a blunt. Fewer side effects than alcohol.

Re: Marijuana tax take nearly double expected in Colorado

#64

Post by lotharbot » Wed, Sep 16, 2015, 9:06 PM UTC

rconti wrote: post #40

Phlarp wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alcohol is heavily taxed, and as any liquor store owner will tell you, it's taxed at every possible opportunity: production, distribution and end user sales. We should be striving to bring overall tax rates for tobacco and marijuana up to match alcohol.

The difference is, because of its prohibition, marijuana has a thriving black market. They need to stamp out the black market before they can get taxation to that level.

A friend of mine visited me in Denver from another state. He came back from a weed store with a little bottle and exclaimed "dude, this was only 10 bucks! It'd cost me like $50 back home!"

I'm really looking forward to seeing data on what happens to the black market for other drugs, with marijuana now easier to get legally than illegally.

Re: Marijuana tax take nearly double expected in Colorado

#65

Post by netfire » Wed, Sep 16, 2015, 9:07 PM UTC

AaronFriel wrote: post #34

This is good news and bad news. The funding for schools will be a boon to education in the state, and that's certainly not bad. However, I expect will almost certainly lead to decreased education funding from other revenue sources, and ultimately place education footing on less solid ground for years to come. It was brilliant PR move to earmark the tax revenue for education, there's no doubt about that. It's very har…

Couldn't Colorado just use the additional tax income for more long-term projects (building new schools or upgrading existing ones, for example) or products that could enhance education in schools (more computers, tablets, textbooks, etc), that wouldn't require an ongoing commitment of funds every year?

Re: Marijuana tax take nearly double expected in Colorado

#66

Post by fpgaminer » Wed, Sep 16, 2015, 9:08 PM UTC

AaronFriel wrote: post #34

This is good news and bad news. The funding for schools will be a boon to education in the state, and that's certainly not bad. However, I expect will almost certainly lead to decreased education funding from other revenue sources, and ultimately place education footing on less solid ground for years to come. It was brilliant PR move to earmark the tax revenue for education, there's no doubt about that. It's very har…

Sure, but we didn't earmarking marijuana taxes for education so that we could improve education. Any informed voter would know that. We did it so that we could get uninformed/uneducated voters to pass the legislation. Now, I don't mean "uninformed/uneducated voters" in a negative way. Most voters, even intelligent ones, are classed as uninformed/uneducated when it comes to most topics. Because really, who has time during their day to research all of these measures? And funding education sounds good. So a little "end justifies the means" was used here to make moves towards ending the war on drugs.

I want to re-iterate, using marijuana taxes for education had nothing to do with improving education. Those who have studied the educational system in the U.S. know that funding is not the primary issue. The system itself is sick, and not from malnutrition. It is misguided, is mis-incentivized, and in many ways corrupt (mostly due to incompetence).

For example, in the past few years when schools have gotten additional funding, they have tended to spend it on technology. They buy iPads for students and teachers, smartboards, and online learning management services (Blackboard, Google Classroom, etc).

None of those things have had a meaningful impact on the quality of education. The schools continue to underpay teachers, promote hostile work environments, continue to promote overpriced, poor quality textbooks, don't feed their poor students, force teachers to buy their own supplies, make students sick by not running AC, accept donations from their teachers and parents, and the list goes on.

What I'm getting at is that additional funding for education is not, and will not ever be about improving the quality of education. If voters want to improve education they need to focus their attention on fixing the system itself first. Funding should only ever be increased in tandem with efforts to root out bad actors and steer our sinking ship of education away from the rocky harbor it's currently in.

Blindly increasing educational spending is the same as blindly donating food and money to the proverbial "Africa". In a similar manner, the corrupt governments where that money and food goes steal those resources to continue to fund their wars and terror. We need a Bill & Melinda Gates for education, not more fund raising.

Re: Marijuana tax take nearly double expected in Colorado

#67

Post by chipgap98 » Wed, Sep 16, 2015, 9:08 PM UTC

moonchrome wrote: post #45

chipgap98 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marijuana has an incredibly high tax in Colorado. IRC its like 25%

25% incredibly high ? Some European countries have higher VAT than that :(

Is that a reasonable metric in this case? I'd be more interested in the tax other countries have on marijuana/alcohol

Re: Marijuana tax take nearly double expected in Colorado

#68

Post by jlarocco » Wed, Sep 16, 2015, 9:15 PM UTC

AaronFriel wrote: post #44

aggie wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are sin taxes really that volatile? I don't have good data, but many people suggest marijuana (as well as alcohol) is counter-cyclical and demand is relatively inelastic. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/amid-the-stock-market-volat... edit: This study suggests alcohol is actually pro-cyclical (in Scandanavia). [pdf] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.185...

Even a small (4-6%) change in revenue can wipe out inflationary increases in funding for education. Even if they're counter-cyclical, the evidence is that replacing education funding with something more volatile is risky, because it's replacing consistent funding with something that is based on market dynamics. In the case of marijunaa, it's largely cultural.

Colorado spent over $7 billion on education in FY2012-2013. The marijuana revenue number in the article is $70 million.

Even if the pot revenue completely disappeared, it'd be less than a 1% change in total education funding.

http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobhea...

Re: Marijuana tax take nearly double expected in Colorado

#69

Post by cjensen » Wed, Sep 16, 2015, 9:20 PM UTC

darkstar999 wrote: post #59

cjensen wrote: post #57

Colorado's budget is a $27 Billion per year. Marijuana taxes fund 0.26% percent of the budget. "Big new revenue source" is plainly not an argument for legalization.

If $70 million isn't a "big new revenue source" then what is? Have there been recent tax changes in any other states that have surpassed this?

Sure: California recently increased it's sales tax by 1%. Sales Taxes are 30% of the California budget, so that equates to a 3% change in revenue. That's more than 10X the revenue generation of Marijuana Taxes.

Re: Marijuana tax take nearly double expected in Colorado

#70

Post by ahallock » Wed, Sep 16, 2015, 9:20 PM UTC

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #8

Chicago and Detroit should take note. Allow drugs and tax the hell out that sh .

Why tax the hell out of it? It sounds like some sort of psychological projection where the government are your parents and to appease them, you're willing to bargain badly for something. "If you just let me stay out a few extra hours, I'll clean the entire house tomorrow." Why be so groveling and weak?