161–170 of 918 posts
One major effect of this is that weed stores will be able to use banks and payment processors legally once the regulators catch up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being gulped up big corporations is good. They will much more efficiently serve the market. SMBs are notoriously unproductive. Though maybe you want your drug dealers to be unproductive, for society's sake! I may take this back...
What SMB has the luxury of being notoriously unproductive? Economies of scale are very real and tend to make larger businesses more efficient, it's true, but you'll find that causes SMBs to be lean and mean to remain competitive.
Bigger companies can pay a lot more because they are more productive. And further research has shown its the same pool/type of people at each.
It's actually wild what the executive can get done in an election year... With the side effect of dangling bait for legislators to take a contrarian, nationally unpopular position.
Election year and not to mention that the President's numbers are in shambles with younger voters. This move feels extremely transparent to me.
Great, now do psilocybin, LSD and MDMA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bet a huge portion of the people here are physically addicted to caffeine, a powerful psychoactive stimulant.
As Terence McKenna used to say, caffeine is legal because it keeps the worker bees working throughout the afternoon.
Weed being illegal on a federal level has had some interesting effects. Because of these laws, all legal weed has to be grown, processed, and retailed within a single state. So much industry and local employment has been created by the legal barriers in place. It’s probably still a net positive to release the federal restriction, but I hope all these small/mid sized businesses don’t get gulped up by big tobacco or ot…
One major effect of this is that weed stores will be able to use banks and payment processors legally once the regulators catch up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People wanna get high. There's a plausible hypothesis that we invented farming to have a more reliable way to make beer. We have 2 main options: 1. Attempt to ban it. 2. Accept that people are going to get high, and try to limit the harm. The first has been a complete and utter disaster. The second -- e.g. applying the same rules about who can use it and where they can use it as alcohol -- is the only sane option. Pr…
3. Make our society so pleasant to live in that people want to experience their day-to-day lives with their minds free from drugs.
On one hand I'm very happy with all the recent policy changes coming down from different federal agencies, but on the other there's a very high likelihood that they will all be reversed a few months from now if/when a new administration takes over. That is always the downside of executive rule. With Congress unwilling/incapable of acting though I guess this is the best we'll get.
This kind of rule should be made by an executive agency, empowered by a congressional delegation of that rule-making power to that agency. This is just the same principle as private organization boards of directors delegating the minutia of running the organization to the executives and their teams. If you think it would be madness for hiring decisions on individual contributors to be made by board votes, then you sh…
Ah, I see. Somehow I doubt that if the US announced it would withdraw from this treaty, to be replaced by an amended version, we'd be invaded immediately by all our (former) allies and be driven straight into the sea. Like, I'm sure there are governments even more obsessed with cannabis than we've been, but like, they'll have to get over it sometime.
