Professor Mark J. Perry's Blog for Economics and Finance
According to Angus Reid Public Opinion:
Dr. Mark J. Perry is a professor of economics and finance in the School of Management at the Flint campus of the University of Michigan. Perry holds two graduate degrees in economics (M.A. and Ph.D.) from George Mason University near Washington, D.C. In addition, he holds an MBA degree in finance from the Curtis L. Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota. In addition to a faculty appointment at the University of Michigan-Flint, Perry is also a visiting scholar at The American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C.
21 Comments:
Milton Friedman on Drugs forum. Listen carefully all 3 parts. He was so smart. The whole War on drugs is a misery:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyystXOfDqo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37-zCyI6rmk&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZNeZUROVM0&NR=1
I have never used marijuana in my life, but the concept of reclassifying it to be like alcoholic beverages makes sense to me. It could then be quality controlled and distributed, just like alcoholic beverages.
And an agricultural product, and a birdseed product, and a medical product, and a tax-revenue producer.
..yep, and you get quality control and consumer protection thrown in as sweetners.
Here in Los Angeles, hundreds of pot clinics have opened up, with no ill effect I can see. There has been the positive effect that empty storefronts now have a tenant (with the recession, empty storefronts are commonplace).
I would prefer pot be sold through liquor stores, with a $10 "pot stamp" on each bag, so tax revenues are generated. One interesting item: If pot were legalized, I am sure many people would just grow their own. No tax revenues, in other words.
I don't smoke pot, and drink rarely.
But I just do not understand the right-wing's obsession with marijuana, private sex lives, sex in movies, commercialized sex, and fantasy as science (creationism).
It makes it hard to cast a vote in America without holding one's nose.
I have never used marijuana in my life, but the concept of reclassifying it to be like alcoholic beverages makes sense to me. It could then be quality controlled and distributed, just like alcoholic beverages.
The major flaw in this logic is that the moment that any legal entity steps forward to supply the demand for pot, they will open themselves up to crippling liability. They, in turn, will have to pass those costs onto the consumer. Factor in the taxes and pot will soon cost far more than users believe.
Of course, people will want to grow it on their own in order to bypass these additional costs, but the government does not like competition and they will continue to pursue, prosecute and jail anyone involved in this activity, this time for tax evasion instead of possession. Meanwhile, the criminal element now involved in trafficking pot will simply move on to harder drugs.
Pot users delude themselves if they believe that using pot is "safe". The fact is that pot has not been examined in the same way that tobacco or alcohol has, but that's changing:
ScienceDaily (Aug. 5, 2009) — In a finding that challenges the increasingly popular belief that smoking marijuana is less harmful to health than smoking tobacco, researchers in Canada are reporting that smoking marijuana, like smoking tobacco, has toxic effects on cells.
Science Daily
Ultra-potent skunk cannabis is seven times more likely to trigger psychotic illnesses such as schizophrenia than traditional hash, a study has warned.
The research, by the highly-respected Institute of Psychiatry in London, will deepen concerns over the safety of cannabis amid political controversy over its criminal status.
UK Daily Mail
The trail lawyers bar is going to have a field day.
It shouldn't be legalized. It should be decriminalized.
When will we get beyond this idea that somehow everything must be taxed and/or controlled by the state?
Anon.,
How many people grow their own tobacco to avoid a bit of excise tax? I'm guessing there aren't thousands of tobacco hobbyists.
I just do not understand the right-wing's obsession with marijuana, private sex lives, sex in movies, commercialized sex, and fantasy as science (creationism).
The right doesn't care about your personal sex life, and they do not care about sex in movies. This is just leftist drivel. What the right objects to is the sexualization of children. We reject the lefts attempt to use the public school system to indoctrinate children with their perverse values. We believe that movies should entertain and not be used as vehicles to undermine parents efforts to inculcate their children with traditional values. Sex in movies should be marketed only to adults. Our problem with the commercialization of sex is that it objectifies and degrades women. Notice how the quick the left is to embrace "artists" who refer to women as "ho's" and "bitches". As for "fantasy" science, it was the left that embraced and promoted eugenics. It was the left that worked to have DDT banned resulting in the death of millions of mostly third world children. It was the left that embraced and promoted "zero population growth" and the idea that we would exhaust the world's resources. And it is the left that is currently pushing the fantasy of "global warming". It's getting harder and harder to be around a leftist without holding one's nose.
How many people grow their own tobacco to avoid a bit of excise tax?
I suggest you read, or watch, "The Botany of Desire" to see just how difficult it has become to grow the hybridized pot that is currently sold on the street.
I don't buy for a moment that we are going to become a nation of backyard pot farmers. Even if this were true, it doesn't negate the liability involved. No homeowners insurance company will cover the risk of your pot habbit.
Anonymous said...
..I don't buy for a moment that we are going to become a nation of backyard pot farmers. Even if this were true, it doesn't negate the liability involved. No homeowners insurance company will cover the risk of your pot habbit.
Does insurance not cover people home brewing beer? This would be a great hobby plant actually. Grow for personal use than sell to friends and neighbors if you have excess. Plenty of people run small home businesses without their insurers knowing about it.
Unlike tobacco where it would be hard to grow a month's worth of usage, that's within reach with pot.
I think the biggest roadblock to legalization the chronic nature (pun sort of intended) of marijuana's effect on the body. From everything I understand it is extremely difficult to test and evaluate whether someone has just used marijuana or whether they used it the previous night. For marijuana to become as acceptable as alcohol you have to be able to control when people can use it. Alcohol is legal, but that doesn't mean I can drink at work or while driving. If I do I can be tested and the result of the test is reliable. Marijuana doesn't allow that to happen, the current tests don't do a good job of keying in on immediate usage. Until that can happen I don't see it being legalized.
From Rasmussen Reports:
63% Say Doctor-Prescribed Pot Is Okay
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Sixty-three percent (63%) of Americans believe patients should be allowed to smoke marijuana if it is prescribed by a doctor.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only 24% of adults say patients should not be allowed to smoke pot in cases like that. Thirteen percent (13%) are undecided.
The survey was taken following the announcement Monday by Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. that the federal government will no longer prosecute those who use marijuana for medical purposes or those who sell the drug to them. (there's a bit more)...
Patrick,
That's an excellent point.
The legal profession has also raised this problem. Since marijuana stays in your system longer, it becomes difficult to prove impairment or confirm when the drug was taken. Additionally, alcohol has very clear signs of impairment such as slurred speech and loss of coordination which are not present with marijuana.
Anon.,
The insurance company should not cover the liability of your pot habit. Is this any different from insurance companies who will not pay for damages when the driver is impaired.
It's like Tiger Woods...no one protects you from your own idiocy.
Patrick the answer is the law will say that if you have any signs you are guilty of DUI. Today with a video camera in each patrol car you video the person and then the jury can see the state of the person. We had dui before there were alcohol tests. Plus I suspect that if Pot were legal some enterprising person would figure out a good test for it.
The main issue is that some think people should not be able to mask the desperation of their lives that suffering is good and makes one stronger. People given the chance will medicate to make the pain go duller at a minimum.
Benny "Tell It Like It Is" Man said...
"...I just do not understand the right-wing's obsession with marijuana..."
Look at the survey. This isn't a right-wing versus left-wing issue. Democrats have been strong backers of the "War on Drugs." This is a control issue: some of the religious right want to criminalize all use of mind-altering substances (to help keep us from temptation). Some of the nanny state lefties want to control everything we consume (for our own benefit, of course).
I noticed that some of the commenters who support marijuana legalization favor heavy taxation (as with alcohol and tobacco). I believe that all "sin" taxes should be abolished. These products should only be subjected to standard sales taxes.
Patrick said...
"I think the biggest roadblock to legalization the chronic nature (pun sort of intended) of marijuana's effect on the body...."
What? Ethanol and tobacco don't have long-term bad effects on the body? For typical users, the adverse effects of tobacco greatly exceed the adverse effects of marijuana. The media love to overstate the bad effects of marijuana, but the examples they choose are the equivalent of a five pack-per-day smoker or a two-liters-per-day whiskey drinker.
This debate isn't about "medical" marijuana. And no reasonable person believes that someone should suffer the pain of disease so that they can be made "stronger". In fact, I am much more suspicious of the drive to legalize pot as a medical treatment. First, we have much better pain medications than pot. Second, given the modus operandi of the left, if pot is accepted as therapy, it will not be long before we are all taxed so that pot users can get their "meds".
"Sufferers" line up for medical marijuana. Notice, they all have treatment cards. What a cruel world.
Benny,
Perhaps, it is time to consider the other side of the coin.
Not only has "medical" marijuana sales in LA not lead to more crime, the murder rate in the city has gone down 40% in the last few years. I suspect a lot of the gangs who previously dealt in marijuana are being defunded.
(I'm sure there are some actual patients in need of MJ here in LA, but I suspect 80% of the people with MJ doctor notes are mainly interested in recreation.)
Post a Comment
<< Home