Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

usatoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 247 posts

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#201

Post by ElevenLathe »

rosnd wrote: post #182
akiselev wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re still liable for paying taxes, which they do largely by mailing the IRS shoeboxes full of cash. By paying taxes they’re essentially admitting to a felony to the US government, which makes them trivially easy to raid. That said, raids are relatively rare now due to executive order and the Oakland mess. In 2012 the DEA raided Oaksterdam [1] without properly notifying the Oakland PD, tying them up right as a loc…

> By paying taxes they’re essentially admitting to a felony to the US government, which makes them trivially easy to raid. That's not how it works, taxpayers enjoy fifth amendment protections against self incrimination. IRS can't share this information with other LE without a warrant anyway.

It's also a little beside the point. Dispensaries operate openly. DEA can just Google "weed" and they will get a list of places to raid.

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#202

Post by Rebelgecko »

Sebguer wrote: post #80

In some California counties, and other adjacent states with similarly-minded sheriffs, the police treat armored cars carrying funds from legal dispensaries as piggy banks where they get to take the cash and the business is responsible for proving its legality. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-01-28/marijuan...

It's also notable that they're only able to do this with the cooperation of the federal government. For the most part, asset forfeiture without due process isn't a thing in California. But it is at the federal level, so local cops can launder money by sending it to the federal DOJ, who take a 20% cut and return the rest of the money to the local police through something called the "equitable sharing program"

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#203

Post by matthewdgreen »

zdragnar wrote: post #91
Doubtme wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cannabis banking came up on this 1.7 trillion dollar bill that just got passed. It wasn't included thanks to Republicans.

I don't think it is unreasonable for them to have blocked it, for the simple reason it would allow banks to engage in businesses that are violating federal law. The only true policy is a coherent policy- anything else is just the whims of whoever holds executive fiat. It should just be fully legalized.

Encouraging legal businesses to deal in cash outside of the standard Federal banking system (with its various AML/CTF protections) seems like it's a bad thing, at least if one believes bank compliance is an important goal.

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#204

Post by CoastalCoder »

CoastalCoder wrote: post #126
josephcsible wrote: post #40

The headline isn't true. Cannabis is illegal in all of America, since it's still on Schedule I at the federal level. While some states may have removed their own laws against it, that in itself doesn't make it legal there.

I've started wondering how much my views on civil ethics are influenced by (likely) having Asperger's. I absolutely hate having a persistent divergence between laws on the books, and what's enforced. In my view, that gap exists only to be exploited by villains: both those who would selfishly break the law, and those who would capriciously enforce it. Policies like this make chumps of anyone who obeys such laws, invit…

Tangent: I also wonder if this correlates with preferring static typing over dynamic typing on programming languages. (Or maybe more generally, using strong contracts at subsystem interfaces.)

The common thread being that everyone agrees up front what the rules are, and then expects all parties to adhere to them.

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#205

Post by pstuart »

BossingAround wrote: post #62
gamegoblin wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Dems explicitly did not make legalization a notable part of the 2020 national campaign. They focused on making the campaign a referendum on Trump in general and COVID in particular. This was a good strategic play. My comment is that making the 2024 election a referendum on legalization (and a few other big issues like abortion) will likely be the good strategic play. You could imagine a future, though, where they…

> My comment is that making the 2024 election a referendum on legalization My take is that most people don't see cannabis legalization as an important-enough issue. It's kind of "would be nice" issue that's overweighted by issues like economy, democracy, and immigration. I'm not in the US, but that's my only explanation for why hasn't cannabis been legalized on the federal level yet, i.e. that people simply don't car…

Part of the problem is that for most people the subject of legalizing cannabis is considered only in the context of "more people are going to use drugs". It needs to be framed in how much it costs society to enforce those laws (both in money and freedom).

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#206

Post by pstuart »

eldritch_4ier wrote: post #147
perardi wrote: post #141

This is frustrating, because I think it’s a near certainty marijuana will be legalized federally. If I was a betting man, which I’m not, certainly not enough to mess with prediction markets, I’d call myself 95% certain. All this ambiguity is just grinding inefficiency in the meantime. Look at all that states where this is legal or decriminalized: https://disa.com/maps/marijuana-legality-by-state And even in states wh…

I think right now is exactly where I want weed to be in society: a taboo, not normalized in the mainstream, you get in trouble if you’re stupid with it, but otherwise if you’re just an occasional user you can get it just fine. This is pretty much perfect to me. What I don’t want is broad normalization of it. Maybe some cultures do just fine with that, but the trend is America has been to maximize the individual liber…

> Not every vice needs to be legal.

Yes, they should. We've collectively agreed that dangerous drugs should be legal (i.e., alcohol and tobacco). Making them illegal doesn't make it go away, it just fosters criminal activity.

Tax and regulate them. Educate the people about the dangers (honestly) and treat abuse as a health issue, not a criminal issue.

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#207

Post by HDThoreaun »

gamegoblin wrote: post #104
GeneralMayhem wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They had full control and could have legalized it That's not how the Senate works. A 50-50 "majority" is not full control. In any case, it's pretty silly to blame the party that's on your side for not being able to overcome the bad-faith obstructionism of the opposing party. It's not about political "footballs", it's about having finite time and public attention to be able to get things done. If every single fight h…

Yes, the current fillibuster rules require a 60-40 supermajority to get anything done, but the fillubuster rule itself can be changed with a simple majority of 50%+1. But the incentive structure is not there to actually change this rule -- both parties benefit from it.

As much as manchin likes to say, democrats do not benefit from the filibuster. Tons of Republican issues are single issue nonsense that the majority of the country would detest if passed, so republicans rely on the filibuster to just not do anything. Forcing republicans to actually pass laws would be good for democrats politically.

The filibuster continues to exist because it gives people like manchin compete power, so the most moderate of each party will always try to keep it alive.

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#208

Post by HDThoreaun »

xwowsersx wrote: post #127
gamegoblin wrote: post #16

Prediction: Dems will make a move on federal legalization in the months before the 2024 presidential election, or at least make federal legalization a major election issue. A lot of right wing / libertarian adjacent people were hoping Trump would come out in favor of it as a 2020 election issue, to outflank Biden on at least one issue. It didn't happen, but I bet it would have made the election a bit closer -- it wou…

> and force the Republican candidate to come out strongly against it If the polls are to be believed, this seems an unlikely outcome. I don't see a Republican candidate doing this, but stranger things have happened, I guess. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/11/22/americans-o...

The only thing that matters is the primary. Ignore general polls and look at the party ones to see which policies will be championed. Candidates try to back off after they win the primary but it’s usually ineffective and commonly backfires when the opponent calls them a flip flopper.

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#209

Post by HDThoreaun »

trynewideas wrote: post #153

Dispensary payment is a big opportunity in the weed tech space. Dutchie's tried to solve it with a combo of tech and lobbying,[1] cashless ATMs tried to hack around it it,[2] but it's such a weird and difficult space. It's productized social engineering around a policy that makes no sense. 1: https://business.dutchie.com/payments 2: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-05/how-to-bu...

All of the dispensaries in Illinois and Michigan at least are doing the cashless atm thing now. Costs $3 extra but well worth it for me, and certainly for them since I don’t think it costs them anything.

Re: Cannabis is legal in most US states but federal laws block businesses from banks

#210

Post by quadrifoliate »

ransom1538 wrote: post #171
quadrifoliate wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sucks how uneducated about basic things US voters are. The Affordable Care Act is probably the most impactful law passed by Democrats in the recent past. In a survey of 2000 voters, a staggering thirty-five percent did not know [1] that the ACA and the colloquial "Obamacare" were the same thing. Bizarrely, an additional number didn't know that 'Obamacare repealed = ACA repealed'. I cannot blame either party for pl…

"The national uninsured rate in the United States has reached an all-time low of 8%". Given this, I would say 92% US citizens don't care. Most people get insurance from work, family or are of the 120 million Medicare/Medicaid patients. On the other hand, if the US population wasn't health care insured (like Europe believes) - they would know each word of those bills.

> Given this, I would say 92% US citizens don't care.

That's what is so mind-boggling to me.

The US as a whole spends more on healthcare than any other OECD country, and the fact that most people in the electorate don't care about this is kind of depressing.

Post reply on HN