Some news about legalize marijuana sales

a reply to: ketsuko

Same as my home brew. Yet people still buy lots of beer..

It's not an all or nothing situation.

But yes getting too greedy with a tax is going to create more of that situation.

Vermont I taking the libertarian approach. We will see how it goes.

a reply to: luthier

No - my point is medical marijuana can be regulated and tracked because of the hoops you have to jump through to get it and be in lawful possession of it. Recreational laws have none of those safeguards built in because there is no way for the government to track who is growing what and who, other than the person growing it, they are giving it / selling it to.

There is no way to tax recreational use since it completely decriminalizes it by making the law unenforceable and byy extension, the tax.

ETA - Fox News just discussed this on air a few minutes ago and their expert made the same argument. Legalizing recreational use and then taxing it to death only increases the black market for the drug.

a reply to: Xcathdra

So you can't tax alcohold and it's not regulated?

Your argument is silly. What percentage of the population of consumers home brews?

If you buy a product at a store and put it in your body you can regulate that...your argument doesn't make sense.

If you brew beer at home its on you. Of you but in a store it's regulated. Why is that so hard to undersrand..

a reply to: luthier

I think our point is that all this small stuff undercuts the market, undercuts the government's taxing and regulating efforts.

The higher the tax, the harsher the regulations, the closer the government comes to killing its hoped for Golden Goose/Cash Cow (take your pick) because they make the effort of the small time operations more attractive and worth the effort to carry out.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Sales tax is a tax, if you add 1 to 5 percent it's not going to kill the market. It will increase the black market slightly but it's not all or nothing.

In alcohol tax states they still bring in revenue correct?

The point would be to tax just enough to pay for the regulation and adverse effects. Not to create new revenue.

a reply to: ketsuko

Yet alcohol gets sold in mass everyday undercut by home brewers?

The arguments as I understand you both are making are literal fallacy. You don't need to tax every Marijuana nugget. Just the ones sold and regulated. Same as alcohol.

a reply to: luthier

Oh, but that's not the argument being made.

If you are taxing just that much, then marijuana is not a new revenue source for the government because you're only breaking even to liberate a new source of vice for the people. Those who argue for its legalization always talk about the new revenue from taxes, so clearly, it's viewed as a money maker.

No one talks about money freed up in other areas from legalizing it, so that argument isn't on the table here.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: ketsuko

Yet alcohol gets sold in mass everyday undercut by home brewers?

The arguments as I understand you both are making are literal fallacy. You don't need to tax every Marijuana nugget. Just the ones sold and regulated. Same as alcohol.

That's not what I said.

It is easier to go to the store and buy beer than to home brew it, but if the government gets too punitive with it's taxing and regulation, then the effort needed to home brew makes that avenue more attractive than simply going to the store and buying.

That's the argument we're making.

Tax and regulate marijuana too much, make it too expensive, and it becomes easier to go to the effort to simply grow your own or hook up with someone who has for your supply.

The more that happens, the more it undercuts the taxed and regulated market.

a reply to: ketsuko

It is on the table in some states..look at Vermont.

The revenue hungry politics is one the few bipartisan things left but I am not in favor.

It is also not a new vice. It's widely used. Like alcohol was during prohibition

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Xcathdra

So you can't tax alcohold and it's not regulated?

Your argument is silly. What percentage of the population of consumers home brews?

If you buy a product at a store and put it in your body you can regulate that...your argument doesn't make sense.

If you brew beer at home its on you. Of you but in a store it's regulated. Why is that so hard to undersrand..

Are you even bothering to read and understand what I am saying because the evidence thus far says no and that your only seeing what you want.

Alcohol is regulated and can only be sold by businesses with a liqueur license. Those laws allow inspections of the production facilities for health and safety in addition to allowing law enforcement to check compliance with the law by those who sell it. Home Brew kits are regulated and sold in stores / online companies.

Recreational marijuana laws have no enforceable portions of the law in practice. Why buy from a licensed dealer when you can just get the seeds from someone else and grow your own? Why buy from a licensed dealer when you can get it from your neighbor / drug dealer at half the price? Why restrict yourself to government approved varieties when you can get what you want from someone else?

Possession of marijuana is legal.
Growing marijuana in your home is legal.

Now - tell me how you track the sale, grow operations and possession to tax it.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Xcathdra

Sales tax is a tax, if you add 1 to 5 percent it's not going to kill the market. It will increase the black market slightly but it's not all or nothing.

In alcohol tax states they still bring in revenue correct?

The point would be to tax just enough to pay for the regulation and adverse effects. Not to create new revenue.

Because there is an established industry for alcohol production, distribution and sale in addition to enforcement laws that allow for inspection of the manufacturing process and compliance with sales.

The same cant be done for marijuana for recreational use when home grow operations are legal.

I asked this question in my other post.

How do you tax recreational marijuana when there are no compliance requirements or inspection requirements under the law.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: ketsuko

Yet alcohol gets sold in mass everyday undercut by home brewers?

The arguments as I understand you both are making are literal fallacy. You don't need to tax every Marijuana nugget. Just the ones sold and regulated. Same as alcohol.

That's not what I said.

It is easier to go to the store and buy beer than to home brew it, but if the government gets too punitive with it's taxing and regulation, then the effort needed to home brew makes that avenue more attractive than simply going to the store and buying.

That's the argument we're making.

Tax and regulate marijuana too much, make it too expensive, and it becomes easier to go to the effort to simply grow your own or hook up with someone who has for your supply.

The more that happens, the more it undercuts the taxed and regulated market.

Exactly and since there are no safeguards built into the marijuana laws for manufacturing or compliance checks how does the government know you legally purchased the marijuana? How do they know you legally grow the marijuana. How do they know you arent selling the marijuana?

More people drink alcohol than smoke.

Without defining the points being made in the law in question the law is nothing more than a failed attempt to tax something where the law in question creates the very conditions for the black market they are trying to legalize to tax.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Your again using a fallacy. If those who were opposed to Marijuana legalization stopped their absurd approach and became part of the regulation these laws would happen.

And again lots of revenue is coming from sales and there is regulation in place to require sellers to test Marijuana.

Look at Vermont approach for instance. Look at what the governor is doing.

People growing 6 plants can not provide enough product to supply the consumer base and surely you know this.

a reply to: Xcathdra

There are compliance laws...

a reply to: Xcathdra

Dude you tax the sale at distributors. Your test the product at distributors. Same as alcohol..

Same as post prohibition. Nice try with the catch 22 but it's a fallacy.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Xcathdra

There are compliance laws...

Not for personal use / personal growing. There is a massive fundamental difference between a entity making something for public sale (business) and a person growing something in their home for personal use (not a business). While compliance laws work with businesses they would be unconstitutional for personal use as it would violate the 4th amendment.

So no, there are no compliance laws that can be enforced for recreational use.

When you can obtain seeds from non licensed individuals you arent paying a tax. Since its not illegal to possess or grow you cant determine if the possession / growing is even legal let alone if the person paid taxes by buying it from a licensed re-seller.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Again dumb argument. Same can be said for alcohol. I literally have 5 gallons I just made. Nobody tests it..

The point is for the majority of the sales not for the black market or home use. People make moonshine as well at home and sell it. But it's a fractional part of the market.

Yes if you get greedy and over tax the black market grows. Probably why MA doesn't do anything but tax alcohol with sales tax.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Xcathdra

There are compliance laws...

I alluded to it a while ago.

People view marijuana as a plant that can easily be grown in their own homes like a houseplant because it can be.

This sets up the same kind of legal situation we have with firearms that the leftists endlessly complain about now -- citizens who have legally bought and purchased their firearms, who own them privately, arrange for their private sale and transfer all the time as private property and the government cannot track those sales or transfers.

The same situation can and does and will exist with those marijuana houseplants. They are private property and can be sold or transferred in the same way, and ironically enough, I see marijuana proponents feeling the same way about it as gun rights advocates do about their legally owned firearms.

Although marijuana advocates don't have a direct amendment to help them out.

a reply to: luthier

and if you were to bottle and sell that 5 gallons it can be tested to determine its alcohol content (proof) and see that it is not a manufactured product by a business.

The same cant be said for marijuana.

Since you cant seem to grasp the conversation and are only seeing what you want there is no point in trying to have this conversation with you.

Recreational use laws have unenforceable sections because the law itself is flawed.

a reply to: ketsuko

Again has not worked out that way in legal stayes where large majorities buy retail.

As far as I know you don't ingest firearms. So the regulation isn't remotely similar.