[Freakinoldguy]

Curtman Curtman:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

Had they not ended prohibition in the US Bronfman would still have been making legal booze in Canada and illegally selling it in the US for huge profits, which is still bootlegging no matter how you couch it. There's to much money for criminal growers not to keep large grow ops for export to the US and with these growops comes the violence and criminal behaviour.

To remove the violence from the drug trade in Canada, the US is going to have to legalize it and until that happens nothing is going to change on either side of the border.

So, instead of bitching about our laws here in Canada you might be better served to go to Washington DC, and Lobby the President to legalize it it America, so our exporters can hang up their colours and put on their 3 piece suits.

Yes I did read it. Did you? Ending the prohibition of alcohol here in Canada before the U.S. was a great success. The criminals became law abiding, tax paying corporations. There was no need to convince the U.S. to go first. They followed after we proved regulation was the better way.

Until the Canadian Government goes completely off the rails, decides it wants money more than sovereignty or we elect the NDP nothing is going to change until the US legalizes pot.

There is no way in hell the US is going to allow, without serious reprucussions the Canadian Government to blatently allow former crimnal organizations, to grow large amounts of marijuana, ship it to the states and then tax their profits on it.

To get rid of the crime you have to get rid of the profit and the only way to get rid of the profit of selling marijuana tax free to the US is to have them make it legal in the US, just like what happened with prohibition.

There are a also couple of differences between the 1930's and now. The first being the will to prosecute people who ship illegal substances into the US. In the 30's alot of Americans didn't agree with prohibition and turned an blind eye to people like Bronfman smuggling booze. Where as today, pot's not taken as lightly as booze was and there is a lot more willingness to prosecute people who break America's drug laws as witnessed by Mark Emerys incarceration.

[Curtman]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

The first being the will to prosecute people who ship illegal substances into the US.

Ordinarily it's the person who places the order for a substance that is illegal in their jurisdiction who is held responsible. To go back to your handgun analogy, you can place an order for a handgun from any number of places in the U.S. without an FAC. It's YOU who is held responsible, not the guy in Arkansas.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

There is no way in hell the US is going to allow, without serious reprucussions the Canadian Government to blatently allow former crimnal organizations, to grow large amounts of marijuana, ship it to the states and then tax their profits on it.

Wow, yeah, I'm real sure the gov't will issue licences to the Hell's Angels and the Triads to grow pot
Give yer head a shake.
Unlike Bronfman, the criminal organizations today are international in scope. They are businesses in the very real sense. If you take away their profitability up here, they're not going to hang around so they can still grow and ship it to the US.
They'll use the connections they have in the US to set up shop and, as I said previously, avoid the problem of smuggling across the border.
But, the gov't has to play it smart as well. Also make it legal for individuals to grow up to a specific number of plants for personal supplies. Then, anyone growing more than that number without a licence can be automatically tagged as being part of a criminal organization with seized assets and loooong prison terms.
At that point, the crim.orgs. that decided to continue operating grow ops in Canada would likely wind up hiking their prices to cover the increased risk and loss of revenue. Quite possibly to the point where they can't compete with US growers in the US market.
Don't forget, the criminal organizations that are growing it in Canada are the same CO's that are growing it in the US.

[Dayseed]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Wow, yeah, I'm real sure the gov't will issue licences to the Hell's Angels and the Triads to grow pot
Give yer head a shake.

Unfortunately, what follows in your post is more wishful thinking than anything concretely reasoned. While I wish you were right, you're off by a big margin.

Triads are Chinese. Read a newspaper article or check out Superior Court dockets around the country and you'd know that the majority of illegal grow-ops are Vietnamese. In keeping with that trend, marijuana production in Canada has increased in volume to the point that there aren't necessarily criminal orgs in control of marijuana production. The Vietnamese way seems to be independent farmers buying a few houses, recruiting growers and selling to distributers. These distributers may be part of crim orgs that war with each other, but the growers don't appear to be.

$1:

Unlike Bronfman, the criminal organizations today are international in scope. They are businesses in the very real sense. If you take away their profitability up here, they're not going to hang around so they can still grow and ship it to the US.

I would agree with more formal crim org groups like the Hell's Angels or traditional Italian organized crime, but the majority of Canadian pot seems to be grown by independent Vietnamese growers.

$1:

They'll use the connections they have in the US to set up shop and, as I said previously, avoid the problem of smuggling across the border.

There are a lot of shortcomings with the above thought. Firstly, the market for Canadian pot in the United States isn't based on whether it's illegal here or not. Marijuana can be produced in Canada for roughly the same price as in the States; you buy the house, you steal electricity and you start the grow. However, Canada has a legal system which allows for greater defence of marijuana grow-ops than the United States, laxer proceeds of crime measures and worst-case scenario, much more lenient jail times.
Secondly, by that logic, nobody would ever make/produce/manufacture anything in Canada. Why would Toyota bother to build factories in Ontario when they sell more cars in the United States? Then they wouldn't have to go through the problem of having their cars held up at the border when importing them. See the above.
Due to the rampant prolifigation of marijuana grow-ops in Canada, there is an infra-structure in place here that allows for easier grows. While the knowledge of where to cut into the foundation to install a bypass can be found on the internet, actual grow-electricians who do it may be harder to comeby in the US, causing more reliance on sloppier, more detectable methods of power theft.

$1:

But, the gov't has to play it smart as well. Also make it legal for individuals to grow up to a specific number of plants for personal supplies. Then, anyone growing more than that number without a licence can be automatically tagged as being part of a criminal organization with seized assets and loooong prison terms.

Well, no. Criminal organizations in Canada have a very specific definition. "Automatically" tagging a husband and wife growing pot in their house defies the defintion AND has far-reaching consequences. For more information on the effects of a judicial label of criminal organization, I direct you to R v. Bonner.
If marijuana growing for personal use is allowed, then yes, you'd have some sort of maximum plant allowance. But even then, it has its own set of problems. Let's say you're allowed to grow three plants. Can I grow three plants AND my wife grow three plants too? Is it 3 per house? What about a semi-detached house? Or an apartment building? How old does somebody have to be to grow the plant? Is it a mere plant issue? Do I have to disclose that I grew marijuana at all in the house when I sell it?

$1:

At that point, the crim.orgs. that decided to continue operating grow ops in Canada would likely wind up hiking their prices to cover the increased risk and loss of revenue. Quite possibly to the point where they can't compete with US growers in the US market.

That risk is already present. Grow-ops get busted every day, equipment seized and houses forfeited. It hasn't stopped Canadian growers at all. Legalizing marijuana possession isn't going to change that. It would curb some for domestic consumption, but otherwise, the US will be a viable market.

$1:

Don't forget, the criminal organizations that are growing it in Canada are the same CO's that are growing it in the US.

I doubt that very much.

[Choban]

$1:

But even then, it has its own set of problems. Let's say you're allowed to grow three plants. Can I grow three plants AND my wife grow three plants too? Is it 3 per house? What about a semi-detached house? Or an apartment building? How old does somebody have to be to grow the plant? Is it a mere plant issue? Do I have to disclose that I grew marijuana at all in the house when I sell it?

It equals yeild per plant per person, age would be 18 as with alcohol, detached homes aren't the issue as they are usually owned by seperate people and no you would not have to disclose you were growing 3 plants inside said houes, do people who grow tomatoes hydroponically in their homes have to disclose this... no they don't but the potential for mold and moisture damage to the house is the same.
I admit it's a murky area but with some well thought out planning and clearly defined legal lines it is possable.

[PostFactum]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

$1:

As for collecting taxes from the users, well I still don't believe people in this day and age will pay taxes on something that they got tax free before. If society was as law abiding as you say there wouldn't be an underground economy worth billions operating in Canada right now.

You're asuming that the cost would be higher if it was legalized and taxed. Let's see, I currently pay $200 an ounce, but if the gov't sells it for $150(for eg) an ounce plus tax, I'm still saving over $30 bucks. But yeah, I'll still buy the black market stuff cuz the cheaper legal stuff has a tax on it

$1:

The fact of the matter is that unless the US legalizes it there is still gonna be a huge market for illegal growops, the profits they generate and the danger associated with them since our government isn't likely to activelly collect taxes on crops grown for export illegally to the US.

Legalization would kill their market up here. So why would they remain here to grow it illegally just to import it to the US? Seems to me they'd set up shop where their market is and avoid the border completely.

I think you're another one Vancouver 139 East Hastings Street future client. Or maybe not?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Dayseed Dayseed:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Wow, yeah, I'm real sure the gov't will issue licences to the Hell's Angels and the Triads to grow pot
Give yer head a shake.

Unfortunately, what follows in your post is more wishful thinking than anything concretely reasoned. While I wish you were right, you're off by a big margin.

Triads are Chinese. Read a newspaper article or check out Superior Court dockets around the country and you'd know that the majority of illegal grow-ops are Vietnamese. In keeping with that trend, marijuana production in Canada has increased in volume to the point that there aren't necessarily criminal orgs in control of marijuana production. The Vietnamese way seems to be independent farmers buying a few houses, recruiting growers and selling to distributers. These distributers may be part of crim orgs that war with each other, but the growers don't appear to be.

Unfortunately, those "independent" Vietnamese growers are in most cases, allied with the Triads and often times do the street level dirty work for the Triads as well. Think subcontractor.

$1:

Unlike Bronfman, the criminal organizations today are international in scope. They are businesses in the very real sense. If you take away their profitability up here, they're not going to hang around so they can still grow and ship it to the US.

Dayseed Dayseed:

I would agree with more formal crim org groups like the Hell's Angels or traditional Italian organized crime, but the majority of Canadian pot seems to be grown by independent Vietnamese growers.

See above about the connection between the Vietnamese and the Triads.

$1:

They'll use the connections they have in the US to set up shop and, as I said previously, avoid the problem of smuggling across the border.

Dayseed Dayseed:

There are a lot of shortcomings with the above thought. Firstly, the market for Canadian pot in the United States isn't based on whether it's illegal here or not. Marijuana can be produced in Canada for roughly the same price as in the States; you buy the house, you steal electricity and you start the grow. However, Canada has a legal system which allows for greater defence of marijuana grow-ops than the United States, laxer proceeds of crime measures and worst-case scenario, much more lenient jail times.

Which is why, after legalization, they need to make the punishment for growing illegally that much harsher.

Dayseed Dayseed:

Secondly, by that logic, nobody would ever make/produce/manufacture anything in Canada. Why would Toyota bother to build factories in Ontario when they sell more cars in the United States? Then they wouldn't have to go through the problem of having their cars held up at the border when importing them. See the above.

Ahhh but you forget, Toyotas aren't illegal. Toyota et al don't have to worry about their products being seized at the border.

Dayseed Dayseed:

Due to the rampant prolifigation of marijuana grow-ops in Canada, there is an infra-structure in place here that allows for easier grows. While the knowledge of where to cut into the foundation to install a bypass can be found on the internet, actual grow-electricians who do it may be harder to comeby in the US, causing more reliance on sloppier, more detectable methods of power theft.

Prolifigation? Cali pot production is almost as high(if not higher) as all of Canada's production.(puns not intended)

$1:

But, the gov't has to play it smart as well. Also make it legal for individuals to grow up to a specific number of plants for personal supplies. Then, anyone growing more than that number without a licence can be automatically tagged as being part of a criminal organization with seized assets and loooong prison terms.

Dayseed Dayseed:

Well, no. Criminal organizations in Canada have a very specific definition. "Automatically" tagging a husband and wife growing pot in their house defies the defintion AND has far-reaching consequences. For more information on the effects of a judicial label of criminal organization, I direct you to R v. Bonner.

Laws can be altered to fit the times. We do it all the time. And if a husband and wife are only growing up to the maximum allowable, then they'd have nothing to worry about.

Dayseed Dayseed:

If marijuana growing for personal use is allowed, then yes, you'd have some sort of maximum plant allowance. But even then, it has its own set of problems. Let's say you're allowed to grow three plants. Can I grow three plants AND my wife grow three plants too? Is it 3 per house?

Per household would be appropriate.

Dayseed Dayseed:

What about a semi-detached house?

A semi-detached is two distinct and separate properties.

Dayseed Dayseed:

Or an apartment building?

Again, it would be per household.

Dayseed Dayseed:

How old does somebody have to be to grow the plant?

Same age they have to be to make beer or wine

Dayseed Dayseed:

Is it a mere plant issue? Do I have to disclose that I grew marijuana at all in the house when I sell it?

Once legalized, why bother. At that point it would be like disclosing you grew tomatoes indoors.

$1:

At that point, the crim.orgs. that decided to continue operating grow ops in Canada would likely wind up hiking their prices to cover the increased risk and loss of revenue. Quite possibly to the point where they can't compete with US growers in the US market.

Dayseed Dayseed:

That risk is already present. Grow-ops get busted every day, equipment seized and houses forfeited. It hasn't stopped Canadian growers at all. Legalizing marijuana possession isn't going to change that. It would curb some for domestic consumption, but otherwise, the US will be a viable market.

It's not going to be worth it for them to have the risks(increased or not) if they have no profitability up here. Let's revisit your Toyota example. If Toyota suddenly lost all of its Canadian revenues(or the vast bulk of them anyway), they're not gonna remain in Canada just so they can still ship to the US. IF they still had a market in the US, that's where they'd set up shop.

$1:

Don't forget, the criminal organizations that are growing it in Canada are the same CO's that are growing it in the US.

Dayseed Dayseed:

I doubt that very much.

Aside from a few US biker gangs that don't have chapters up here, they are.

[Freakinoldguy]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

There is no way in hell the US is going to allow, without serious reprucussions the Canadian Government to blatently allow former crimnal organizations, to grow large amounts of marijuana, ship it to the states and then tax their profits on it.

Wow, yeah, I'm real sure the gov't will issue licences to the Hell's Angels and the Triads to grow pot
Give yer head a shake.
Unlike Bronfman, the criminal organizations today are international in scope. They are businesses in the very real sense. If you take away their profitability up here, they're not going to hang around so they can still grow and ship it to the US.
They'll use the connections they have in the US to set up shop and, as I said previously, avoid the problem of smuggling across the border.
But, the gov't has to play it smart as well. Also make it legal for individuals to grow up to a specific number of plants for personal supplies. Then, anyone growing more than that number without a licence can be automatically tagged as being part of a criminal organization with seized assets and loooong prison terms.
At that point, the crim.orgs. that decided to continue operating grow ops in Canada would likely wind up hiking their prices to cover the increased risk and loss of revenue. Quite possibly to the point where they can't compete with US growers in the US market.
Don't forget, the criminal organizations that are growing it in Canada are the same CO's that are growing it in the US.

You're first line is exactly the point I was trying to make in my last 4 posts, legalizing pot for illegal export by gangs isn't gonna happen in our lifetime. This is a totally different bag of snakes than some bootlegger in the 30's running his liqour over the border which is the analogy curtman is want to use as his argument that if we legalize it all the gangs will become corporations and pay huge corporate taxes.

$1:

So, instead of bitching about our laws here in Canada you might be better served to go to Washington DC, and Lobby the President to legalize it it America, so our exporters can hang up their colours and put on their 3 piece suits.

So if you'd read what I wrote in context you'd understand that I was trying to make the point that criminal organizations are still going to operate to ship their product south until it's legalized in the states which would remove the profit margin for these gangs, who'd have to go into another line of illegal work.

I guess next time I'll put the (sarcasm) in for clarity's sake.

[Spaniard]

I know from someone that was prescribed that medical Maui grown by the government is Hog-Wash, smoke grams and catch a very small Buzz.

[andyt]

Ok FOG, so we'll still have criminal gangs growing and exporting to the US. But, legalizing it here will take a lot of the wind (profit) out of their sales. It will free up a lot of law enforcement that's now chasing pot for Canadian use, to go after the illegal stuff that would still be grown. We'll have less people in jail costing us money, instead they'll be contributing citizens paying taxes. We'll have less kids using, because right now it's easier for kids to get pot than alcohol.

None of this will make things perfect. But half a loaf is better than none. You can't try to tell me that our current strategy is working, nor that the US with much harsher laws has been successful in stamping it out. And, if we do legalize, and can show some success, it will strengthen the hands of the legalizations movement in the US.

My first choice, if prohibition worked, would be to make all drugs illegal. That includes alcohol at the top of my list for all the misery it causes. (All other illegal drugs combined pale in comparison). But prohibition doesn't work, so I go for the next best alternative: Legalization with regulation and education and treatment.

[Dayseed]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Unfortunately, those "independent" Vietnamese growers are in most cases, allied with the Triads and often times do the street level dirty work for the Triads as well. Think subcontractor.

Um, you basically just rephrased what I said. The majority of marijuana production in Canada appears to be by the Vietnamese. Unlike prosecutions of the Hell's Angels, Sicilians or other more traditional criminal organizations, there has yet to be a bust/trial for a Vietnamese criminal organization that isn't local or familial.

Which is why my statement said that whomever distributes/traffics the pot may very well be a Triad gang, it doesn't follow that Triad gangs form the majority pot distributers in Canada.

$1:

Which is why, after legalization, they need to make the punishment for growing illegally that much harsher.

Increasing punishment, be in the form of lengthier jail sentences, seized assets or fines in lieu don't come without a cost. By raising the judicial stakes, you increase the likelihood of lengthier trials as plea bargains suddenly don't become that attractive vis a vis rolling the dice in a grow-op trial. Case-law concerning marijuana production is really only trumped by drunk-driving case-law.

Secondly, just because Parliament deems greater punishments doesn't mean that they won't contravene the Constitution. Punishment has to fit the crime and the Supreme Court is there to enforce it. A jail sentence of 14-16 years (which is average for a crime like cocaine importation of less than 50 kgs) for growing 200 plants would get quashed. You'd have appeals out the wazoo.

$1:

Ahhh but you forget, Toyotas aren't illegal. Toyota et al don't have to worry about their products being seized at the border.

That's a convenient side-step. The further from market you are, the greater the costs of getting it there. Toyota sells vehicles all over North America, but in greatest volume south of the border, yet it produces them in Cambridge and Woodstock.
The point is that were pot legalized here, it wouldn't change other factors that make growing here beneficial. Vietnamese growers aren't suddenly going to live illegally in the United States to grow there in greater judicial danger when they and their families are already here legally. Since growing in both places is illegal and the grower isn't the one exporting, why increase your risk?

$1:

Prolifigation? Cali pot production is almost as high(if not higher) as all of Canada's production.(puns not intended)

Actually, it's not. According to a drugfact.org report, it was estimated that there was 9,000,000 indoor plants grow in California in 2006. According to a Frasier Institute report from 2010, they estimated that there were approximately 45,000 to 60,000 indoor marijuana grow-ops in British Columbia alone. If each of those houses has 4 cycles of only 100 plants each, that's 18,000,000 indoor plants. That's the conservative estimate.
No, the years don't line up, but it's unlikely that the 4 year difference would catapult California ahead of all Canada.

$1:

Laws can be altered to fit the times. We do it all the time. And if a husband and wife are only growing up to the maximum allowable, then they'd have nothing to worry about.

Depending on how draconian you want to make punishment and/or search and seizure powers for the police, you're going to start running afoul of the Constitution. Sure, Parliament can make up any law they wish governing anything, but it doesn't mean it will stick.
I skipped all the parts about legalized growing. Despite having ready answers to my immediate grey areas, it simply wouldn't be that easy. No matter what law you make, people always find a way to find out exactly what it governs and what it doesn't. Judges become involved. Case in point: In Ontario, the Chief Justice of the Appellate Court is calling for family law reform to remove the adversarial angle. Why? He thinks, inter alia, that it's a waste of time litigating whether or not the Monday of a long weekend counts as normal weekend visitation.
People abuse laws in the courts all the time. Especially if the risk of punishment has been jacked up.

$1:

It's not going to be worth it for them to have the risks(increased or not) if they have no profitability up here. Let's revisit your Toyota example. If Toyota suddenly lost all of its Canadian revenues(or the vast bulk of them anyway), they're not gonna remain in Canada just so they can still ship to the US. IF they still had a market in the US, that's where they'd set up .

Why not? How much of China's production ends up sold in China if allowed to be sold there at all versus being exported?
Also, Zenn Motor Company makes electric vehicles that aren't roadsafe in Canada and therefore can't be sold here, but they make them in Quebec solely for export.
So there's precedent.

$1:

Aside from a few US biker gangs that don't have chapters up here, they are.

Sorry, there simply isn't a factual basis to believe that marijuana is produced by the same people in Canada as in the United States. If you've got some sort of study, I'd be keen to read it.
The pattern that is emerging from Canadian court cases is that marijuana production is predominantly an independent venture done by Vietnamese who practise the trade. It's become so prolifigate here it appears to be like believing that home renovations are controlled by just a few conglomerates rather than independent contractors.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Dayseed Dayseed:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Unfortunately, those "independent" Vietnamese growers are in most cases, allied with the Triads and often times do the street level dirty work for the Triads as well. Think subcontractor.

Um, you basically just rephrased what I said. The majority of marijuana production in Canada appears to be by the Vietnamese. Unlike prosecutions of the Hell's Angels, Sicilians or other more traditional criminal organizations, there has yet to be a bust/trial for a Vietnamese criminal organization that isn't local or familial.

Because in order to do that, the prosecution would have to be able to prove that the individual(s) had actual ties to the Triads. Considering the Triads raised the bar when it comes to ruthlesness compared to the more "traditional" organizations, I doubt very many busted Vietnamese growers talk. Of course, I'm not saying that every Viet grower is working for/with the Triads either. Often times they grow for the Hell's Angels and other biker gangs as well but you can bet they're just as tight lipped when they get busted.
You're 2nd sentence in the quote is bang on though. The Vietnamese gangs now largely control the pot growing operations in Canada, but the bulk of that is being grown "on contract".

Dayseed Dayseed:

Which is why my statement said that whomever distributes/traffics the pot may very well be a Triad gang, it doesn't follow that Triad gangs form the majority pot distributers in Canada.

Absolutely but, they've been here since the 1850s. They are the single largest criminal organization on the planet. So one could certainly argue they are also the biggest here.

$1:

Which is why, after legalization, they need to make the punishment for growing illegally that much harsher.

Dayseed Dayseed:

Increasing punishment, be in the form of lengthier jail sentences, seized assets or fines in lieu don't come without a cost. By raising the judicial stakes, you increase the likelihood of lengthier trials as plea bargains suddenly don't become that attractive vis a vis rolling the dice in a grow-op trial. Case-law concerning marijuana production is really only trumped by drunk-driving case-law.

Secondly, just because Parliament deems greater punishments doesn't mean that they won't contravene the Constitution. Punishment has to fit the crime and the Supreme Court is there to enforce it. A jail sentence of 14-16 years (which is average for a crime like cocaine importation of less than 50 kgs) for growing 200 plants would get quashed. You'd have appeals out the wazoo.

I will defer to your apparent knowledge of law, mostly cuz mine isn't all that great tbh

$1:

Ahhh but you forget, Toyotas aren't illegal. Toyota et al don't have to worry about their products being seized at the border.

Dayseed Dayseed:

That's a convenient side-step.

Not at all.

Dayseed Dayseed:

The further from market you are, the greater the costs of getting it there.

But this doesn't apply to pot growing?

Dayseed Dayseed:

Toyota sells vehicles all over North America, but in greatest volume south of the border, yet it produces them in Cambridge and Woodstock.

Unless things have changed, it's because it's cheaper to manufacture them here than in the US.

Dayseed Dayseed:

The point is that were pot legalized here, it wouldn't change other factors that make growing here beneficial. Vietnamese growers aren't suddenly going to live illegally in the United States to grow there in greater judicial danger when they and their families are already here legally. Since growing in both places is illegal and the grower isn't the one exporting, why increase your risk?

Most of the "shady" Asians that come here (supposedly)legally use Canada as a staging point to enter the US illegally already, according to the RCMP. And if it's about the distribution network, if there's no real incentive for it to remain in Canada other than to supply the US, that network will simply look for growers in the US.

$1:

Prolifigation? Cali pot production is almost as high(if not higher) as all of Canada's production.(puns not intended)

Dayseed Dayseed:

Actually, it's not. According to a drugfact.org report, it was estimated that there was 9,000,000 indoor plants grow in California in 2006. According to a Frasier Institute report from 2010, they estimated that there were approximately 45,000 to 60,000 indoor marijuana grow-ops in British Columbia alone. If each of those houses has 4 cycles of only 100 plants each, that's 18,000,000 indoor plants. That's the conservative estimate.
No, the years don't line up, but it's unlikely that the 4 year difference would catapult California ahead of all Canada.

Unfortunately, drugfact report forgot the fact that a good part of Cali has a 12 month outdoor growing season. Although I'm willing to admit my initial claim could be wrong.

$1:

It's not going to be worth it for them to have the risks(increased or not) if they have no profitability up here. Let's revisit your Toyota example. If Toyota suddenly lost all of its Canadian revenues(or the vast bulk of them anyway), they're not gonna remain in Canada just so they can still ship to the US. IF they still had a market in the US, that's where they'd set up.

Dayseed Dayseed:

Why not? How much of China's production ends up sold in China if allowed to be sold there at all versus being exported?

Actually, I should correct myself here. Toyota would most likely stay in Canada and export to the US because it's cheaper for them to manufacture their cars up here.

Dayseed Dayseed:

Also, Zenn Motor Company makes electric vehicles that aren't roadsafe in Canada and therefore can't be sold here, but they make them in Quebec solely for export.
So there's precedent.

Notttt quite. When Zenn got permission to sell the car in the US, they still weren't allowed to produce it in the US. Bringing production closer to the marketplace, ie:Canada, makes logistical sense.
If ZMC had initally been allowed to build in the US, I'd be willing to bet there wouldn't be a plant in Quebec at all.

$1:

Aside from a few US biker gangs that don't have chapters up here, they are.

Dayseed Dayseed:

Sorry, there simply isn't a factual basis to believe that marijuana is produced by the same people in Canada as in the United States. If you've got some sort of study, I'd be keen to read it.
The pattern that is emerging from Canadian court cases is that marijuana production is predominantly an independent venture done by Vietnamese who practise the trade. It's become so prolifigate here it appears to be like believing that home renovations are controlled by just a few conglomerates rather than independent contractors.

Sorry, my mistake, I meant the distributors. But the predominancy of the Viet growers might not be so great if it wasn't for the already existing distribution network and the known connection between Viet growers and the Triads in particular. But knowing the 2 groups collude regularily and frequently is a far cry from proving that Mr.Long Duck Dong was actually growing for Mr. Liu. And Mr.Long Duck Dong generally isn't going to give a shit about a plea bargain. He ain't talking, and for damn good reason.