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

Washington voters approve legalized marijuana

mynorthwest.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 142 posts

Re: Washington voters approve legalized marijuana

#51

Post by gokhan »

WalterBright wrote: post #38
pixie_ wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? How do you know, 'it hasn't stopped them.' How do you count the number of people who never got addicted to meth because it wasn't on sale at 7-11, or was never made the secret ingredient in McDonald's new meth burger. Do you know that without rules, there really are no rules, and the examples I just gave are the tip of a scary iceberg. Do you know what worse is? You have no idea.

We do have Prohibition - before, after, and during. Consumption went up during, and back down afterwards. Crime went up during, and back down afterwards.

Being addicted to alcohol is much harder than being addicted to meth, no?

From Wikipedia:

...Methamphetamine has a high potential for abuse and addiction, activating the psychological reward system by triggering a cascading release of dopamine in the brain characterized by Amphetamine /Stimulant psychosis.

Chronic abuse may also lead to post-withdrawal syndrome, a result of methamphetamine-induced neurotoxicity to dopaminergic neurons. Post-withdrawal syndrome can persist beyond the withdrawal period for months, and sometimes up to a year...

Got some junkie friends? I know a couple of them, burned and miserable lives mostly. On the other hand, all my drinking friends are quite normal, no addictions, no suffering from alcohol.

Re: Washington voters approve legalized marijuana

#52

Post by netcan »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #8

I'm not someone who would take advantage of the legalization of marijuana, but I am in favor of legalization because I don't think it's the government's job to tell you what you can or can't do. If drinking is legal, smoking weed should be too. I understand the concept behind a tax on marijuana, but I don't understand a 25% tax on every stage of the process... If you're saying that it's legal to use marijuana respons…

It's part of making an overwhelming argument, overcoming as many objections as possible. Common component of rhetorical arguments, especially by economically minded people.

For example, fre market economists are usually pro economic immigration: Let resources (labour) go to their highest value use. If a graphic designer can make more in an Oslo design office than they can in Bucharest, there is a potential economic surplus. Opponents might make some objections: there will be increased unemployment among local graphic designers, the immigrants will mean increased costs in local services.

The economist-proponent looks at the surplus. Going from a €7k salary to €50k. Adjusted for costs, he calculates a €25k surplus. All the opponents objections can be overcome with €5k at most: new job training centres, schools and hospitals. He throws in another €5k to make the argument stick. He can have his immigration and unemployment will go down, hospitals & schools will be better funded, design firms will have better/cheaper designers and the immigrant will have a better income - even after they charge him €10k a year.

Makes sense on paper. It's a good way of simplifying an argument by creating an on paper ceteris parabus. When it actually makes it into policy ir law, it can be arbitrary and unfair at the best of time (eg immigrants pay higher taxes). It's also a potential faucet for funding that the hungry will flock to.

The weed smoker has a lot to gain. Lower prices. Better quality. Reduced stigma. Easier access. Not getting put locked a cage. Well worth the $500 per year.

Re: Washington voters approve legalized marijuana

#53

Post by Jabbles »

Tuna-Fish wrote: post #39
ComputerGuru wrote: post #8

I'm not someone who would take advantage of the legalization of marijuana, but I am in favor of legalization because I don't think it's the government's job to tell you what you can or can't do. If drinking is legal, smoking weed should be too. I understand the concept behind a tax on marijuana, but I don't understand a 25% tax on every stage of the process... If you're saying that it's legal to use marijuana respons…

> I don't see the point of a whole 25% tax on top of that. I would like to point out that a 25% tax on legally produced marijuana is very low . A 500% tax would still be low. Considering the amounts consumed, growing marijuana is really easy and cheap. Without the legislation against it, when grown in volume by professionals it should have a cost per kg nearing that of hydroponic cabbage, or some 1000 times less than…

A quick internet search suggests the price for "high quality" marijuana is roughly $250 per ounce in California.

That's $9000/kg. For comparison the price of Gold appears to be roughly $55000/kg.

If you're right about it being as easy to grow as cabbage, then I think it could be taxed quite a lot...

Re: Washington voters approve legalized marijuana

#54

Post by InclinedPlane »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #48
jordanthoms wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you could get meth at Mc'Ds, would you take it? No? Then why do you presume that everyone else would?

Because how would you stop Mc'D from putting it in your burger for you? Some people would stop eating there, but most just wouldn't care. Convenience beats ethics for most of the time; otherwise none of us would be buying bottled water, or Adidas shoes, or Apple computers, or any product from any company that was found to abuse people in some way or another.

How do you stop them from putting caffeine in your soda?

Easy, because we have laws about food and drugs. If someone puts caffeine in a drink it must be labeled. If someone puts salt in food then it must be labeled. Do you imagine that government and society would spontaneously decide to take methamphetamine less seriously than caffeine if it were fully legalized?

Re: Washington voters approve legalized marijuana

#55

Post by marcos123 »

pixie_ wrote: post #24
TruthElixirX wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has banning people from shooting meth into the webbing of their fingers stopped them? No. It has only made things worse. 100% legalization for all substances.

Really? How do you know, 'it hasn't stopped them.' How do you count the number of people who never got addicted to meth because it wasn't on sale at 7-11, or was never made the secret ingredient in McDonald's new meth burger. Do you know that without rules, there really are no rules, and the examples I just gave are the tip of a scary iceberg. Do you know what worse is? You have no idea.

It's funny how humans tend to fully forget about things that happened only 100 years prior.

Back in the late 1800's and early 1900's, some 50% of the American population was addicted to opiates in one form or another, usually without even realizing it (due to there being no failed drug laws yet, and no laws regarding the listing of ingredients on common "elixirs"). And yet, we didn't live in some apocalyptic wasteland with drug addled zombies roaming the land, we had a very modern, progressive, civilized society. Just look up images of America in the 1890's to see what America would look like without asinine drug laws, and with a large part of the population physically dependent upon legal narcotics.

Re: Washington voters approve legalized marijuana

#56

Post by vitalysh »

aes256 wrote: post #49
jordanthoms wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you could get meth at Mc'Ds, would you take it? No? Then why do you presume that everyone else would?

Get drunk, go to McDonalds. Bit of peer pressure. "Dude, try the Big Meth!" Congratulations, you are now addicted to meth.

McDonalds is a bit of extreme scenario. Sell it in specialized shop, where everything is explained, where you have to sign paper that you do understand the consequences of trying this drug.

Re: Washington voters approve legalized marijuana

#57

Post by chuppo »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #8

I'm not someone who would take advantage of the legalization of marijuana, but I am in favor of legalization because I don't think it's the government's job to tell you what you can or can't do. If drinking is legal, smoking weed should be too. I understand the concept behind a tax on marijuana, but I don't understand a 25% tax on every stage of the process... If you're saying that it's legal to use marijuana respons…

Governments are by definition a protection racketeering club.

Monopoly on violence and all that...

Re: Washington voters approve legalized marijuana

#58

Post by flyinRyan »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #8

I'm not someone who would take advantage of the legalization of marijuana, but I am in favor of legalization because I don't think it's the government's job to tell you what you can or can't do. If drinking is legal, smoking weed should be too. I understand the concept behind a tax on marijuana, but I don't understand a 25% tax on every stage of the process... If you're saying that it's legal to use marijuana respons…

Maybe the politicians have set it up to fail so they can come back and claim legalization doesn't work? If you raise the taxes high enough, you'll keep the black market alive because the price difference offsets the danger for a large enough customer base. Black market cigarettes are a "thing" in Europe, for example.

Re: Washington voters approve legalized marijuana

#59

Post by flyinRyan »

gokhan wrote: post #51
WalterBright wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do have Prohibition - before, after, and during. Consumption went up during, and back down afterwards. Crime went up during, and back down afterwards.

Being addicted to alcohol is much harder than being addicted to meth, no? From Wikipedia: ...Methamphetamine has a high potential for abuse and addiction, activating the psychological reward system by triggering a cascading release of dopamine in the brain characterized by Amphetamine /Stimulant psychosis. Chronic abuse may also lead to post-withdrawal syndrome, a result of methamphetamine-induced neurotoxicity to do…

I don't think that's a fair comparison. There are plenty of people for whom alcohol has destroyed their lives (or is in the process of doing so). You happen to know a set of people who aren't afflicted in this manner and a different set of meth users. I'm sure there are people out there who can use meth just as responsibly as others use alcohol.

Re: Washington voters approve legalized marijuana

#60

Post by flyinRyan »

Tiktaalik wrote: post #15

It'll be interesting to see what, if any, effect this has north of the border in British Columbia. Marijuana decriminalization and legalization has often been discussed in Canada, but one of the main arguments against a change in the law is that the United States would not approve. Seems like that may be changing.

>but one of the main arguments against a change in the law is that the United States would not approve.

How embarrassing for your country. The US doesn't approve of prostitution either, though?

Post reply on HN