But anyway. I saw this on the Seattle news last night and found it interesting that the tax revenue predictions were off by a mile, the black market still thrives which likely means gangs still thrive and like was predicted on here by certain people, the only way the Gov't can compete in the marijuana marketplace is to basically give the stuff away because people aren't going to pay high taxes on a substance they can easily grow or buy for alot less money.
Per the article:
In fact, only an estimated 60% of purchases in Colorado this year will be through legal channels, according to the Marijuana Policy Group.
The black market has taken 60% hit in 2 years. That far outpaces any known legal measures (War on Drugs), and in the legal marketplace, obtaining a 60% market share over 2 years is unheard of unless you are the sole source provider.
Long story short, legalization has done more good to the War on Drugs in 2 years than the actual War on Drugs has done in 44....while making money!
And, that is supposed to be a bad thing?
They can spin this any way they want, the only is the disparity between federal law and state law, which is causing tax collection problems.
The black market has taken 60% hit in 2 years. That far outpaces any known legal measures (War on Drugs), and in the legal marketplace, obtaining a 60% market share over 2 years is unheard of unless you are the sole source provider.
Long story short, legalization has done more good to the War on Drugs in 2 years than the actual War on Drugs has done in 44....while making money!
And, that is supposed to be a bad thing?
They can spin this any way they want, the only is the disparity between federal law and state law, which is causing tax collection problems.
Another way to look at it is that the illegal users are still illegally buying only now to bypass taxes. And only new users are buying legal. So their has been no reduction in usage, and in fact a huge raise.
Not that their is any good evidence for the numbers of legal buyers.
But even if it was like you said, how is 60% buying legal a reduction or a positive?
The black market has taken 60% hit in 2 years. That far outpaces any known legal measures (War on Drugs), and in the legal marketplace, obtaining a 60% market share over 2 years is unheard of unless you are the sole source provider.
Long story short, legalization has done more good to the War on Drugs in 2 years than the actual War on Drugs has done in 44....while making money!
And, that is supposed to be a bad thing?
They can spin this any way they want, the only is the disparity between federal law and state law, which is causing tax collection problems.
Assuming of course, that those 60% of users were all existing users that suddenly decided to purchase legally and pay more for the same stuff. Or is it new users looking to use the now-legal product?
In fact, only an estimated 60% of purchases in Colorado this year will be through legal channels, according to the Marijuana Policy Group.
The black market has taken 60% hit in 2 years. That far outpaces any known legal measures (War on Drugs), and in the legal marketplace, obtaining a 60% market share over 2 years is unheard of unless you are the sole source provider.
Long story short, legalization has done more good to the War on Drugs in 2 years than the actual War on Drugs has done in 44....while making money!
And, that is supposed to be a bad thing?
They can spin this any way they want, the only is the disparity between federal law and state law, which is causing tax collection problems.
Sure there spinning it
There’s a growing relationship between the 2.9% medical marijuana tax and the 27% recreational variety. This rather big spread suggests that some patients could be reselling their 2.9% medical stock to the public. How tightly is the medical variety regulated? Not very, it turns out.
You visit a doctor, but the hurdle isn’t high nor is the cost. A medical marijuana card costs $15. About 23% of the estimated marijuana users in Colorado have medical cards, according to the Marijuana Policy Group. It isn’t clear whether medical marijuana cards spiked when recreational pot was legalized.
Sounds like black market activity to me?
So the question remains. Why would anyone in their right mind pay 27% more for something they can a. Grow themselves or b. buy alot cheaper from a "sick" drug dealer.
So the wild ass claims are still wild ass claims no matter who makes them and the black market still exists and one segment may have even grown since legalization, especially considering the Gov't, by allowing people to grow 6 plants or get medical marijuana licenses pretty much at will never make selling marijuana a profitable business for themselves and statements like this are the spinning of the truth, not the articles posted.
Lawmakers were too optimistic in their revenue forecasts: State law requires the government to refund taxpayers if it collects more than expected. Wanting to avoid returning money collected from retail marijuana sales, lawmakers made "rosier" projections, state lawmaker Jonathan Singer said recently. To be fair, Colorado is in uncharted territory as the first state to legalize the drug for recreational purposes, and it's only been six months. While lawmakers are examining the the tax structure, "it's too early to be worried," said state Rep. Dan Pabon.
So they can legalize it, keep it illegal or just plain ignore it but the fact remains that marijuana reform isn't likely to be the magic bullet financially or criminally that the marijuana lobby is trying to portray.
Assuming of course, that those 60% of users were all existing users that suddenly decided to purchase legally and pay more for the same stuff. Or is it new users looking to use the now-legal product?
If we assume that they are all new users, than legalization is as big as the internet!
It would be rivaling it in growth.
As much as that is technically possible, I find it highly unlikely. Most likely is that new user growth is fairly in line with typical new product releases...5-10%.
Since they are not 100% effective immediately, what is the point?
By the way, the Mexican government disagrees with you and is estimating that the cartels will be taking billions in financial hits over this.
They are already seeing Cartels move into...wait for it...legitimate resource extraction (ironically, because the very same cartels have saturated the illegal resource extraction market) to supplement revenue loses.
If we assume that they are all new users, than legalization is as big as the internet! It would be rivaling it in growth.
Or it's smugglers buying legal and reselling out of state. I know if I was a drug dealer and I had a legal source I'd buy from that and sell at a markup.
As much as that is technically possible, I find it highly unlikely. Most likely is that new user growth is fairly in line with typical new product releases...5-10%.
How does a new product, have a percentage growth? Wouldn't it be infinite, from zero to something?
I think what we are seeing is a lowering of cost because illegal producers are under less legal pressure, so their costs have fallen in terms of security. The old users are still going to their old hook ups but buying more. Some people with questionable medical conditions are getting around the tax and reselling and in general everyone is acting just like you would expect from criminal drug users. Still acting in a criminal manner.
Overall use is up on two fronts, first from high use of old users and second because the government has said it's safe, acceptable and legal to use this product. Leading to a huge net gain in use.
Since they are not 100% effective immediately, what is the point?
By the way, the Mexican government disagrees with you and is estimating that the cartels will be taking billions in financial hits over this.
They are already seeing Cartels move into...wait for it...legitimate resource extraction (ironically, because the very same cartels have saturated the illegal resource extraction market) to supplement revenue loses.
None of them are 100% period so it doesn't matter but, then again they don't make claims that they can't keep like those Colorado legislators and the pro marijuana crowd.
So the Cartels are going to suffer? Is the Mexican Gov't using the same psychic accountant that the Colorado Politicians used or do they have actual proof it's gonna hurt the cartels and not just conjecture?
The Colorado people should have just kept their mouths shut and let the chips fall where they may but, by announcing to the world the amount of tax money it was going to raise and the crime it was going to stop it just made their bullshit lies all the more glaring when it didn't happen.
Legalizing marijuana isn't going to bring in the big money nor stop crime so why don't we all just start acting like grownups and call a spade a spade. Most people champion marijuana much like they did alcohol because they use and like it nothing more nothing less.
So, if the Gov't want to legalize it fine but, they'd better be alot more realistic when explaining the benefits and hazards to Canadians than the twits in Colorado who are just now finding out that the promises they made are unattainable under their current system.
Since they are not 100% effective immediately, what is the point?
By the way, the Mexican government disagrees with you and is estimating that the cartels will be taking billions in financial hits over this.
They are already seeing Cartels move into...wait for it...legitimate resource extraction (ironically, because the very same cartels have saturated the illegal resource extraction market) to supplement revenue loses.
I'm glad that the Cartels are going to suffer but the fact remains that the projections and predictions that it was going stop crime and raise tons of revenue seem to be a bit of a misnomer.
No one said it would stop crime, but a significant reduction of their market in just 2 years is a good thing is it not? As for the problems with the missing taxes, I guess we ALL forgot about the fun the Feds had implementing the GST. The first couple of years it was crazy abused with disreputable businesses owners claiming they paid far, far more in GST than they actually did.
One guy even scammed a $1 million GST refund and the only reason he got caught was he got stupid. He blew most of it on strippers and went back for a second crack the following year. That's when the GST office found out he was scamming them. They even admitted that with all confusion of implementing the new tax system he would have gotten away with the first million if he hadn't tried for the second million.
Colorado was having trouble producing enough legal supply. If enough suppliers/sellers come on line, competition will drive prices down. Pot is very cheap to produce, and the legal guys don't have the expenses of the illegal guys. With time, the legal market should grow, the black market shrink, as long as police don't give up on going after the black market. Cheaper prices might reduce tax revenues per ounce, but if more legal pot is sold, tax revenues should stay healthy.
The other thing is legal home growing. Did they determine how many people have taken that up? That could cut into tax revenues, but is a good thing because it will also cut into the black market.
WA may have big problems here because their taxes are much higher than in CO, and I believe they don't' allow growing for private use (stupid).
Why anyone thought that trusting criminals to run businesses in a legal manner was going to work escapes me.
Why anyone thought that trusting criminals to run businesses in a legal manner was going to work escapes me.
It's called "capitalism."
But anyway. I saw this on the Seattle news last night and found it interesting that the tax revenue predictions were off by a mile, the black market still thrives which likely means gangs still thrive and like was predicted on here by certain people, the only way the Gov't can compete in the marijuana marketplace is to basically give the stuff away because people aren't going to pay high taxes on a substance they can easily grow or buy for alot less money.
Per the article:
The black market has taken 60% hit in 2 years. That far outpaces any known legal measures (War on Drugs), and in the legal marketplace, obtaining a 60% market share over 2 years is unheard of unless you are the sole source provider.
Long story short, legalization has done more good to the War on Drugs in 2 years than the actual War on Drugs has done in 44....while making money!
And, that is supposed to be a bad thing?
They can spin this any way they want, the only is the disparity between federal law and state law, which is causing tax collection problems.
The black market has taken 60% hit in 2 years. That far outpaces any known legal measures (War on Drugs), and in the legal marketplace, obtaining a 60% market share over 2 years is unheard of unless you are the sole source provider.
Long story short, legalization has done more good to the War on Drugs in 2 years than the actual War on Drugs has done in 44....while making money!
And, that is supposed to be a bad thing?
They can spin this any way they want, the only is the disparity between federal law and state law, which is causing tax collection problems.
Another way to look at it is that the illegal users are still illegally buying only now to bypass taxes. And only new users are buying legal. So their has been no reduction in usage, and in fact a huge raise.
Not that their is any good evidence for the numbers of legal buyers.
But even if it was like you said, how is 60% buying legal a reduction or a positive?
But even if it was like you said, how is 60% buying legal a reduction or a positive?
Is this a serious question?
Where do you think they would buy if they didn't buy from the legal market? The black market.
60% of something is infinitely better than 100% of nothing.
The black market has taken 60% hit in 2 years. That far outpaces any known legal measures (War on Drugs), and in the legal marketplace, obtaining a 60% market share over 2 years is unheard of unless you are the sole source provider.
Long story short, legalization has done more good to the War on Drugs in 2 years than the actual War on Drugs has done in 44....while making money!
And, that is supposed to be a bad thing?
They can spin this any way they want, the only is the disparity between federal law and state law, which is causing tax collection problems.
Assuming of course, that those 60% of users were all existing users that suddenly decided to purchase legally and pay more for the same stuff. Or is it new users looking to use the now-legal product?
Per the article:
The black market has taken 60% hit in 2 years. That far outpaces any known legal measures (War on Drugs), and in the legal marketplace, obtaining a 60% market share over 2 years is unheard of unless you are the sole source provider.
Long story short, legalization has done more good to the War on Drugs in 2 years than the actual War on Drugs has done in 44....while making money!
And, that is supposed to be a bad thing?
They can spin this any way they want, the only is the disparity between federal law and state law, which is causing tax collection problems.
Sure there spinning it
You visit a doctor, but the hurdle isn’t high nor is the cost. A medical marijuana card costs $15. About 23% of the estimated marijuana users in Colorado have medical cards, according to the Marijuana Policy Group. It isn’t clear whether medical marijuana cards spiked when recreational pot was legalized.
Sounds like black market activity to me?
So the question remains. Why would anyone in their right mind pay 27% more for something they can a. Grow themselves or b. buy alot cheaper from a "sick" drug dealer.
So the wild ass claims are still wild ass claims no matter who makes them and the black market still exists and one segment may have even grown since legalization, especially considering the Gov't, by allowing people to grow 6 plants or get medical marijuana licenses pretty much at will never make selling marijuana a profitable business for themselves and statements like this are the spinning of the truth, not the articles posted.
Wanting to avoid returning money collected from retail marijuana sales, lawmakers made "rosier" projections, state lawmaker Jonathan Singer said recently. To be fair, Colorado is in uncharted territory as the first state to legalize the drug for recreational purposes, and it's only been six months.
While lawmakers are examining the the tax structure, "it's too early to be worried," said state Rep. Dan Pabon.
So they can legalize it, keep it illegal or just plain ignore it but the fact remains that marijuana reform isn't likely to be the magic bullet financially or criminally that the marijuana lobby is trying to portray.
Assuming of course, that those 60% of users were all existing users that suddenly decided to purchase legally and pay more for the same stuff. Or is it new users looking to use the now-legal product?
If we assume that they are all new users, than legalization is as big as the internet!
It would be rivaling it in growth.
As much as that is technically possible, I find it highly unlikely. Most likely is that new user growth is fairly in line with typical new product releases...5-10%.
Than why employ police?
Or doctors?
Or the military?
Since they are not 100% effective immediately, what is the point?
By the way, the Mexican government disagrees with you and is estimating that the cartels will be taking billions in financial hits over this.
They are already seeing Cartels move into...wait for it...legitimate resource extraction (ironically, because the very same cartels have saturated the illegal resource extraction market) to supplement revenue loses.
If we assume that they are all new users, than legalization is as big as the internet!
It would be rivaling it in growth.
Or it's smugglers buying legal and reselling out of state. I know if I was a drug dealer and I had a legal source I'd buy from that and sell at a markup.
As much as that is technically possible, I find it highly unlikely. Most likely is that new user growth is fairly in line with typical new product releases...5-10%.
How does a new product, have a percentage growth? Wouldn't it be infinite, from zero to something?
I think what we are seeing is a lowering of cost because illegal producers are under less legal pressure, so their costs have fallen in terms of security. The old users are still going to their old hook ups but buying more. Some people with questionable medical conditions are getting around the tax and reselling and in general everyone is acting just like you would expect from criminal drug users. Still acting in a criminal manner.
Overall use is up on two fronts, first from high use of old users and second because the government has said it's safe, acceptable and legal to use this product. Leading to a huge net gain in use.
That's what happens when you smoke a lot of dope. You end up forgetting to do important stuff like collecting the taxes.
Freakinoldguy.
Than why employ police?
Or doctors?
Or the military?
Since they are not 100% effective immediately, what is the point?
By the way, the Mexican government disagrees with you and is estimating that the cartels will be taking billions in financial hits over this.
They are already seeing Cartels move into...wait for it...legitimate resource extraction (ironically, because the very same cartels have saturated the illegal resource extraction market) to supplement revenue loses.
None of them are 100% period so it doesn't matter but, then again they don't make claims that they can't keep like those Colorado legislators and the pro marijuana crowd.
So the Cartels are going to suffer? Is the Mexican Gov't using the same psychic accountant that the Colorado Politicians used or do they have actual proof it's gonna hurt the cartels and not just conjecture?
The Colorado people should have just kept their mouths shut and let the chips fall where they may but, by announcing to the world the amount of tax money it was going to raise and the crime it was going to stop it just made their bullshit lies all the more glaring when it didn't happen.
Legalizing marijuana isn't going to bring in the big money nor stop crime so why don't we all just start acting like grownups and call a spade a spade. Most people champion marijuana much like they did alcohol because they use and like it nothing more nothing less.
So, if the Gov't want to legalize it fine but, they'd better be alot more realistic when explaining the benefits and hazards to Canadians than the twits in Colorado who are just now finding out that the promises they made are unattainable under their current system.
Freakinoldguy.
Than why employ police?
Or doctors?
Or the military?
Since they are not 100% effective immediately, what is the point?
By the way, the Mexican government disagrees with you and is estimating that the cartels will be taking billions in financial hits over this.
They are already seeing Cartels move into...wait for it...legitimate resource extraction (ironically, because the very same cartels have saturated the illegal resource extraction market) to supplement revenue loses.
I'm glad that the Cartels are going to suffer but the fact remains that the projections and predictions that it was going stop crime and raise tons of revenue seem to be a bit of a misnomer.
No one said it would stop crime, but a significant reduction of their market in just 2 years is a good thing is it not? As for the problems with the missing taxes, I guess we ALL forgot about the fun the Feds had implementing the GST. The first couple of years it was crazy abused with disreputable businesses owners claiming they paid far, far more in GST than they actually did.
One guy even scammed a $1 million GST refund and the only reason he got caught was he got stupid. He blew most of it on strippers and went back for a second crack the following year. That's when the GST office found out he was scamming them. They even admitted that with all confusion of implementing the new tax system he would have gotten away with the first million if he hadn't tried for the second million.
The other thing is legal home growing. Did they determine how many people have taken that up? That could cut into tax revenues, but is a good thing because it will also cut into the black market.
WA may have big problems here because their taxes are much higher than in CO, and I believe they don't' allow growing for private use (stupid).