Comments on: Oakland Almost Stumbles Upon California’s Budget Fix

By: Deneil Merritt

Deneil Merritt — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 21:52:19 +0000

You have to great points. It would bring in more tax dollars and allow the police to focus on real crimes like rape and murder.

Every state should do it because the US economy can really use those tax dollars.

By: 1 Serial Entrepreneur

1 Serial Entrepreneur — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 02:51:11 +0000

Yes, it is imazing that marijuana stays on the list of illegal drugs, yet cigarettes, which are just as harmful are perfecfly legit.

They should learn from the tobacco industry. Tax marijuana nationwide, and help the deficit.

By: Bret

Bret — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 18:57:31 +0000

I’m not for encouraging anyone to smoke pot, but it’s status as an illegal substance is probably the biggest problem related to it.

In America, we have forgotten the lessons we should have learned from the phohibition of alcohol. This created a huge underground criminal empire that culminated in lots of related crimes and murders. And, this is exactly what is happening in Mexico and South America right now.

My opinion is that law enforcement should ignore marijuana and instead concentrate on fighting meth and heroine. These are the drugs that are really ruining people’s lives.

By: Brian

Brian — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:21:57 +0000

Sure, go ahead and tax it, but as with anything the Gov’t does it will lead to subsidies as soon as the poor start crying about “affordability”

By: Roger

Roger — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 07:01:32 +0000

I’ll second Rich Credit Debt Loan; we could easily legalize pot, tax it some absurd amount (say, 1000%), and it would still be much cheaper than it is currently, when it’s illegal and on the street. Yes, you will have people who try to buy and sell it under the table to avoid the taxes, but you deal with them the same way you deal with people trying to dodge taxes on cigarettes. Frankly, if the only thing stopping everyone from taxing pot is that the only legal use is ‘medicinal’, expect non-medicinal pot to be sold soon.

I wouldn’t be surprised if pot is just the start and some other ‘soft’ illegal drugs begin to be legalized and have the snot taxed out of them, particularly if pot turns out to be a decent cash cow. And to my mind, that’s not a bad thing; if we take the same precautions with do with alcohol to limit use by minors and punish things like driving under the influence and otherwise putting others at risk, why continue to spend huge amounts of money to keep these drugs illegal?

By: Rich Credit Debt Loan

Rich Credit Debt Loan — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 19:02:35 +0000

Would you say that we currently “tax the [exrement] out of” alcohol or cigarettes? I think we do.

With a pack of cigarettes costing $9 in NYC. It costs less than $0.25 to procude. And less than a $2 per pack wholesale even with advertising and distribution.

Pot on the other hand costs ~$100 on the street for enough post to make a packs worth of cigarettes.

Underground? It already is. That is what makes it so profitable for criminals to distribute.

It seems to me that legalizing and taxing the “excrement” out of would reduce the cost by 50%. Remove the criminal element of distribution. Free up lots of prison space by letting the nonviolent pot only prisoners go. Protect our national park lands. Etc etc etc

Seems like a no brainer. Legalize and tax.

By: Jermaine Holmes

Jermaine Holmes — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 23:10:36 +0000

Sooner or later we’re gonna have to face the prospect of taxes. I think taxing the [exrement] out of pot will drive it more underground, but I do support taxing gambling. I don’t think taxes will hurt gambling because it’s a speculative sport; people will play it anyway. But perhaps more attention needs to be paid to legislative perks. And yes, CA is a precursor of what’s coming for the U.S. Federal Govt….we are the world’s 8th largest economy (but weren’t we the 5th several years back? Hmmm).

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:46:21 +0000

Legalize pot, prostitution, and gambling. If you think doing so will ruin society, what makes you think it already isn’t? I jest…but pot is a natural resource, just like oil off the coast, that we could be exploiting. It doesn’t have to be a permanent tax, either. Just to get us a little tax relief.

Plus, it’s very debatable whether pot is any worse than alcohol or tobacco. Many would suggest it’s much safer.

By: Ron

Ron — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 04:29:26 +0000

As a Libertarian, you can probably figure out where I stand. I’ve never tried it either and cannot stand the smell, but I think we could divert the billions we’re spending on the “war on drugs” to other things … like the deficit.

Are YOU a Libertarian? You might be surprised.
http://www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html

By: Lazy Man

Lazy Man — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:59:50 +0000

The CNN article that I linked to said that there was no formal opposition though Paul Chabot questioned if it was the right thing. It sounds like he doesn’t agree, but didn’t take to campaigning against it. That’s just my guess though.

That’s still a great article on Taxgirl though

By: My Journey

My Journey — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 19:50:16 +0000

Lazy Man,

“I found it interesting that there was almost no formal opposition to this.”

Actually, the people against it are those AGAINST legalization for the exact same reasons you mentioned:
http://www.taxgirl.com/oakland-votes-to-tax-marijuana/

By: Corporate Barbarian

Corporate Barbarian — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 18:16:55 +0000

I would have no problem with legalizing pot and taxing it. I don’t partake, and it’s probably not the best thing to put into your body, but it seems hypocritical to allow another drug (alcohol) that causes highway deaths to sponsor sporting events simply because it’s socially acceptable. It’s another paradigm in need of a shift.

By: Jessica

Jessica — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:59:18 +0000

California has decriminalized possession in many places, but those who are legal purchasers don’t have a prescription like any other medicine. They actually must obtain and carry an ID card from a doctor’s office to purchase and carry the substance. I think since “dispensaries” are separate businesses from pharmacies (CVS has no pot), and there is no prescribed amount to be legally dispensed like there would another medication, Oakland has found a loophole.

By: Lazy Man

Lazy Man — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:34:24 +0000

Massachusetts has decriminalized small amount of pot. I don’t know if California has or not. I know there was a proposition to decriminalize prostitution for freeing up police resources.

Nothing wrong with casinos, that’s always in the budget talks as well.

By: Kosmo @ The Casual Observer

Kosmo @ The Casual Observer — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:18:41 +0000

Are other prescription drugs (antibiotics and such) taxed? If not, then this would seem to be a bit of a double standard. After all, the stance of California is that it is a legitimate prescription medicine, correct? No different than anything else you would pick up at the pharmacy? I’m not saying whether or not that stance is correct, but if that IS the stance, why not treat all meds in a consistent manner?

I thought California (or at least some areas) had already decriminalized possession of small amounts of pot (it’s still technically a crime, but police wouldn’t actively pursue violators). Or perhaps this was just one of the many referendums on the ballot at some point (you folks do seem to enjoy voting on things). The logic was that it would free up police to catch killers and such.

I still suggest big string of casinos. There’s nothing better than a voluntary tax :) I’m kidding – mostly.