How marijuana legalization in Colorado and Washington is making the world better

Post by dragontamer » Sun, Oct 19, 2014, 9:09 PM UTC

jMyles wrote: post #19

dragontamer wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Cannabis prohibition, on the other hand, has historically been targeted explicitly at minorities" Note: targeted at minorities by minorities. The African American community was hugely supportive of the "War on Drugs", until it became clear that it wasn't helping. But seriously, in the 1960s through 1990s, plenty of powerful African American politicians supported the War on Drugs. http://prisontime.org/files/2013/07/…

Cannabis prohibition, starting right from the 1914 El Paso ordinance, unambiguously and often transparently targeted Mexicans. You are talking about a much later stage, when the power dynamic was one of entrenched power.

Post by krschultz » Sun, Oct 19, 2014, 9:28 PM UTC

kyllo wrote: post #10

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #2

Colorado, probably. Washington, not yet. The Washington Liquor Control Board, in its infinite wisdom, only authorized about 25% of the total amount of legal pot-growing necessary to satisfy demand in the state, which means that the black market here in Washington is still flourishing: http://www.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2014/07/08/how-wash... Thankfully, it sounds like the LCB started changing its tune about pot…

And as a result the price of legal recreational pot in WA is around $35 a gram which is over three times the going rate for medicinal pot and illicit pot.

Post by guard-of-terra » Sun, Oct 19, 2014, 9:45 PM UTC

dllthomas wrote: post #20

guard-of-terra wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting that it was introduced by a Dem. I think there should be a move that Dem formally apologise for this law - or all the weed smokers no longer vote for them and they become unelectable.

The nature of both parties have changed substantially since the 30s, no current legislators of either party were involved in government when that bill was passed, and both parties have had ample opportunities to correct the mistake. Holding current Democrats disproportionately responsible is myopic. Refusal to vote for politicians of any party who are on the wrong side of this issue is another matter, for anyone who…

Post by aaronbrethorst » Sun, Oct 19, 2014, 9:58 PM UTC

dllthomas wrote: post #20

guard-of-terra wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting that it was introduced by a Dem. I think there should be a move that Dem formally apologise for this law - or all the weed smokers no longer vote for them and they become unelectable.

The nature of both parties have changed substantially since the 30s, no current legislators of either party were involved in government when that bill was passed, and both parties have had ample opportunities to correct the mistake. Holding current Democrats disproportionately responsible is myopic. Refusal to vote for politicians of any party who are on the wrong side of this issue is another matter, for anyone who…

Post by tjradcliffe » Sun, Oct 19, 2014, 10:09 PM UTC

canjobear wrote: post #4

lisper wrote: post #3

The U.S. has done the prohibition experiment twice now, and it was an unmitigated disaster both times. The data are unambiguous: prohibition doesn't work, never has, never will. And yet we're still arguing about it. Funny thing, though, we've done a similar experiment with tax cuts for the wealthy three times now: once in the 1920's, once starting in the 1980s, and most recently in Kansas. The results have been simil…

It is not unambiguous that Prohibition didn't work. http://www.nber.org/papers/w3675.pdf Whether or not it was worth the cost is a separate issue; I think it's pretty clear that it wasn't. But the argument can be made that it did "work" in reducing alcohol consumption.