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

Colorado Pot Tax Proving More Lucrative Than Expected

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 165 posts

Re: Colorado Pot Tax Proving More Lucrative Than Expected

#151

Post by sanoli »

tsotha wrote: post #36
glesica wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the concern was that we're just replacing illegal cartels with legal cartels. The tax revenue thing is also kind of misleading. First, that number is apparently fixed (based on your wording, I'm not familiar personally), but the there is, presumably, no upper-bound on the actual revenues, so as revenues increase, a smaller percentage goes to education. Second, vice taxes tend to be regressive, the poor pay a…

>I think the concern was that we're just replacing illegal cartels with legal cartels. If that means fewer bear traps and less rat poison in our national parks, it's a win as far as I'm concerned. >Second, vice taxes tend to be regressive, the poor pay a higher percentage of their incomes. Some of the "education lotteries" (state lotteries that benefit education) are basically mechanisms for transferring wealth from…

I just put a couple of bucks on a pool I made with my 5 closest friends, for one of the biggest jackpots ever, here in Brazil. We had loads of fun talking about it in the days leading up to the draw. We made fun of each others numbers (one of my friends chose a number that wasn't even part of this particular lotto, another chose the same number twice), and exchanged dozens of emails talking about what we would do and we also made lots of fun of each others choices. Overall we had a great time that we wouldn't have had, especially since now we don't all live in the same city. It was the best 10 bucks I spent this month, so far.

Re: Colorado Pot Tax Proving More Lucrative Than Expected

#152

Post by angersock »

paulhauggis wrote: post #135
nirnira wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? Legalising drugs destroys every single element which supports violent paralegel cartels. 1) It eliminates legal risk, so drug production becomes instantly a much more lucrative activity, enticing more people to do it. 2) Profits are reduced as the market becomes more competitive. 3) The cartels are unable to pursue their "normal" extralegal means of suppressing competition, because the parties they might see…

Drug legalization isn't the problem, corruption is. When the cartels can buy any officer and government official in Mexico, legalization will only give them more power. "4) In a competitive, legal market, the successful firms will be the ones which offer the best product - the firms with the best drugs, the highest standards of quality and ethics, the nicest stores, and the best customer service. Why buy from dodgy d…

why not boycott all cartel grown drugs?

Because Bayer and Amazon can drive the bastards out of business much faster, simply by being better organized.

Re: Colorado Pot Tax Proving More Lucrative Than Expected

#153

Post by dinkumthinkum »

monkeyspaw wrote: post #137
dinkumthinkum wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ever heard of cocaine?

I'm not sure of your point. Cocaine does have legal uses, especially with ENT doctors/surgeons, who use it as an effective anaesthetic. But the profit margins in the illegal drug market is largely because of the risk involved. Facing legal competition, which does not have to include that risk in its price, is effectively creating a market where legitimized producers have an extreme advantage.

Drug cartels have a myriad of other products, cocaine being one if them. All of their products are commodities worth multiples of their weight in gold. Taking marihuana away from them is not going to make as substantial hit to their profits as you suggest.

Re: Colorado Pot Tax Proving More Lucrative Than Expected

#154

Post by dinkumthinkum »

nirnira wrote: post #126
dinkumthinkum wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legalizing marijuana won't get rid of drug cartels.

Why not? Legalising drugs destroys every single element which supports violent paralegel cartels. 1) It eliminates legal risk, so drug production becomes instantly a much more lucrative activity, enticing more people to do it. 2) Profits are reduced as the market becomes more competitive. 3) The cartels are unable to pursue their "normal" extralegal means of suppressing competition, because the parties they might see…

Are you under the impression that legalizing marijuana means legalizing all drugs? There are many other illegal drugs worth many times their weight in gold. So you get rid of marijuana as a means of income; this is no big deal to cartels.

Re: Colorado Pot Tax Proving More Lucrative Than Expected

#155

Post by glesica »

yardie wrote: post #142
glesica wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the concern was that we're just replacing illegal cartels with legal cartels. The tax revenue thing is also kind of misleading. First, that number is apparently fixed (based on your wording, I'm not familiar personally), but the there is, presumably, no upper-bound on the actual revenues, so as revenues increase, a smaller percentage goes to education. Second, vice taxes tend to be regressive, the poor pay a…

> I think the concern was that we're just replacing illegal cartels with legal cartels. Just like how legalised gambling just made it legal for the mobs to run casinos? Except that's not what happened. Investors came in, bringing real managers, real security, and real regulation. They turned the seedy, Las Vegas strip into Disneyland. And those old mob run casinos, you'll find their demolition videos on youtube.

I didn't say the methods used by the new cartels had to be identical to those used by the old. I also never said anything about criminals. You can have a perfectly law-abiding, non-violent cartel that is, nonetheless, bad for society.

Re: Colorado Pot Tax Proving More Lucrative Than Expected

#156

Post by glesica »

tsotha wrote: post #36
glesica wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the concern was that we're just replacing illegal cartels with legal cartels. The tax revenue thing is also kind of misleading. First, that number is apparently fixed (based on your wording, I'm not familiar personally), but the there is, presumably, no upper-bound on the actual revenues, so as revenues increase, a smaller percentage goes to education. Second, vice taxes tend to be regressive, the poor pay a…

>I think the concern was that we're just replacing illegal cartels with legal cartels. If that means fewer bear traps and less rat poison in our national parks, it's a win as far as I'm concerned. >Second, vice taxes tend to be regressive, the poor pay a higher percentage of their incomes. Some of the "education lotteries" (state lotteries that benefit education) are basically mechanisms for transferring wealth from…

  > There's nothing wrong with taxing stupid.
If you're the type of person who doesn't mind people dying in the gutters, then sure, that's true. If you do mind, then taxing stupid is, well, stupid, because you just end up helping the stupid people out even more on the back-end, especially if the money collected from the stupid people doesn't get funneled directly toward helping them out.

Re: Colorado Pot Tax Proving More Lucrative Than Expected

#157

Post by nirnira »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #154
nirnira wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? Legalising drugs destroys every single element which supports violent paralegel cartels. 1) It eliminates legal risk, so drug production becomes instantly a much more lucrative activity, enticing more people to do it. 2) Profits are reduced as the market becomes more competitive. 3) The cartels are unable to pursue their "normal" extralegal means of suppressing competition, because the parties they might see…

Are you under the impression that legalizing marijuana means legalizing all drugs? There are many other illegal drugs worth many times their weight in gold. So you get rid of marijuana as a means of income; this is no big deal to cartels.

I'm not under that impression. But yes legalising all drugs would destroy the cartels. Hopefully one day when society comes to its senses...

Re: Colorado Pot Tax Proving More Lucrative Than Expected

#158

Post by dllthomas »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #153
monkeyspaw wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure of your point. Cocaine does have legal uses, especially with ENT doctors/surgeons, who use it as an effective anaesthetic. But the profit margins in the illegal drug market is largely because of the risk involved. Facing legal competition, which does not have to include that risk in its price, is effectively creating a market where legitimized producers have an extreme advantage.

Drug cartels have a myriad of other products, cocaine being one if them. All of their products are commodities worth multiples of their weight in gold. Taking marihuana away from them is not going to make as substantial hit to their profits as you suggest.

That means we should be legalizing cocaine as well, not that we shouldn't be legalizing pot. And reducing the profits (and thus power) of drug cartels a small amount is still substantially better than not reducing them at all (doubly so if it's something we want to do for other reasons as well).

Edited to add:

Also, while I have no idea as to the veracity, Wikipedia says that over half the cartels' revenue comes from marijuana, and links http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1269781... in support.

Given the high fixed costs (salaries, bribes, infrastructure) of maintaining a criminal network, I expect that cutting revenues almost in half would be a tremendous blow to their profits.

Re: Colorado Pot Tax Proving More Lucrative Than Expected

#159

Post by Fomite »

sanoli wrote: post #150
Fomite wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buying a lottery ticket is rational if the cost of the ticket is offset by the relative increase in your pleasure that comes from dreaming of winning. For example, if you gain >$price of a Powerball ticket worth's of entertainment from musing about how you'd spend the prize, it's a rational purchase. On the other hand, buying two tickets isn't rational. You get no extra dreaming, and your expectation of winning hasn'…

Not really. If you buy 10 tickets, you're buying an extra dose of thrill because you think "I bought ten , I got a better chance of winning".

My assertion is true even for people who understand probability, and thus won't get much thrill about multiplying ~0 by 10.

Re: Colorado Pot Tax Proving More Lucrative Than Expected

#160

Post by dinkumthinkum »

dllthomas wrote: post #158
dinkumthinkum wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drug cartels have a myriad of other products, cocaine being one if them. All of their products are commodities worth multiples of their weight in gold. Taking marihuana away from them is not going to make as substantial hit to their profits as you suggest.

That means we should be legalizing cocaine as well, not that we shouldn't be legalizing pot. And reducing the profits (and thus power) of drug cartels a small amount is still substantially better than not reducing them at all (doubly so if it's something we want to do for other reasons as well). Edited to add: Also, while I have no idea as to the veracity, Wikipedia says that over half the cartels' revenue comes from…

You said legalizing marijuana, not all drugs. and legalizing all drugs is much, much different issue. There is a big difference between legalzing just marijuana versus all drugs. I don't think the profits would be reduced at all, simply replaced by other products.
Post reply on HN