What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
271 Comments
- Chris_F, on 03/13/2009, -9/+105How is this interesting unless you suffer from extreme nausea or glaucoma?
Big whoop. Tell me when they legalize it for recreational use. - uknowwhoibe, on 03/13/2009, -3/+84$98 per ounce tax? Yikes.
- Trifold, on 03/13/2009, -4/+69Here's an idea: sell/tax/regulate it like tobacco and alcohol. Enough with this "medical" nonsense.
- Shiftgood, on 03/13/2009, -1/+48because its a step in the right direction towards legalizing for rec use.
When the state is proven to successfully grow and tax.. and they have hard evidence of the financial benefits.. the fight becomes easier.
Three little birds, each by my door step. - FXNGLAS, on 03/13/2009, -4/+42"Many patients have no assurance that their marijuana is not laced with pesticides or other toxic chemicals," Rep. Jim Thompson (R-Dallas), told The Oregonian. "If passed into law, this legislation will implement safe standards to dispense the drug through a tightly-controlled system."
So after all these years of being against it, the best excuse they come up with now is that they want to make sure you aren't smoking pesticides? Definitely a sign of the times. - Maddoktor2, on 03/13/2009, -3/+40This essentially will recriminalize pot grown by individuals for private medical use, and will only hurt those that won't be able to afford to pay the government extortion for their needed medication. At $98 tax per ounce, it's the newly minted illegal growers that will get the business, and the government knows it full well.
It's nothing more than a very shady atempt to recriminalize pot in the interest of making a fast buck off of those that can least afford it.
It's a very bad idea, and it should be rejected again like it was in 2004.
If you're going to tax it, legalize it completely for full public use, carry it in liquor stores, and sell licenses to growers. - DirtyVicar, on 03/13/2009, -2/+39Hell, I'd pay $98/oz, no sweat. I consider it a convenience fee for not having to worry about a criminal record or going to jail.
- Nosferotu, on 03/13/2009, -1/+37Because finding weed in Portland is already like finding sand on a beach?
- Nosferotu, on 03/13/2009, -8/+39Woo! I love this state.
Portland diggers, HOLLAH! - papastout, on 03/13/2009, -8/+39Oregon/California WILL set the trend, RE-legalize it!
(posted from humboldt County) - magik12, on 03/13/2009, -3/+34Are you implying that caffeine, alcohol and tobacco aren't drugs?
As a country, we've been dealing these for a while. - drmobutu, on 03/13/2009, -2/+32And grown by the government? Yikes.
- smegthelight, on 03/13/2009, -2/+29So people who have good medical weed from a grower they trust, will now be forced to get their weed from either a Government grow-op run by the lowest bidder, or by a bunch of civil servants who know nothing about growing pot.
Then they will force the insurance companies to pay for it until they rewrite their policies so they don't have to pay for it.
Also, somehow it will cost the Government $178 per ounce to grow it. - Shiftgood, on 03/13/2009, -3/+28Country goes broke because its broken.
This is a way to fix it.
are you afraid? - Lesli, on 03/13/2009, -3/+27FTA: "The state would control potency and pharmacy distribution."
I don't really see that as being a good thing. - snookky, on 03/13/2009, -1/+19i would rather see cannabis be grown by the open market. it would create a lot of new jobs at this time of high unemployment.
- deadlyhaiku, on 03/13/2009, -11/+29Finally.
- CHthirteen, on 03/13/2009, -1/+15during the great depression the US ended prohibition of alcohol because the only people it benefitted were gangsters and bootleggers. So there is a precident.
- jitterbits, on 03/13/2009, -0/+14An oz in Oregon is usually just under $300, not $100!
- danj484, on 03/13/2009, -0/+14On a side note, Jim Thompson evidently is unaware of the use of pesticides in the growing of food.
- Phughu, on 03/13/2009, -2/+16I can think of nothing more horrifying than state workers producing cannabis. Check my profile -- you'll see I'm vehemently pro-pot -- but it shouldn't be the government producing it. Can you imagine laid-off DMV workers farming pot? What a gray, gray world that would be. The state can tax it (hell, what don't they tax)? But produce it? Hell no.
- Panoptes, on 03/13/2009, -0/+13Bad idea.
We already have a voter written and approved ( twice ) medical cannabis law.
Why are they singling out patients to pay an unfair tax? $98 an oz?
Come on.... you can grow it for 1/4 that much money.
The Federal government grows near-ditchweed as medical marijuana.
Patients would find those strains medically useless.
Can someone explain to me why the Federal government has a medical marijuana program, but it remains a schedule 1 drug? - inactive, on 03/13/2009, -1/+13I'm all for legalization or decriminalization, however it isn't something that will solve all our problems. Nothing will solve our problems currently except just putting our head down and getting through it without ***** panicking like we are now.
- Nosferotu, on 03/13/2009, -1/+13How is working on ending a prohibition that is overcrowding our prisons, costing us millions of dollars in a "Drug War" and starving us from millions of additional dollars in taxes not 'sound policy'?
- SnakeEyes420, on 03/13/2009, -3/+15"Many patients have no assurance that their marijuana is not laced with pesticides or other toxic chemicals," -Rep. Jim Thompson (R-Dallas)
This doesn't seem like a good reason for the state to grow and sell marijuana themselves. The state doesn't currently manufacture other pharmaceutical drugs, why should marijuana be any different? I assume there are already regulations currently in place to protect consumers from getting "laced" prescription drugs. Those laws should apply to marijuana just like any other prescription drug. - kingofinternet, on 03/13/2009, -6/+18socialized legal pot smoking?
LIBRULS! - malex, on 03/13/2009, -0/+11A; neither does pot (in any dosage that a human could physically consume)
B; you seem to have intentionally omitted one of the drugs listed by Magik12, thereby invalidating your own argument. - darkintheglow, on 03/13/2009, -1/+12It helps the people who are seriously ill. Be happy you're not.
- inactive, on 03/13/2009, -3/+14When a supposed free country tries to tell you what you can/cannot put in your body to begin with. Does this seem right to anyone who isn't an idiot?
- ngmcs8203, on 03/13/2009, -1/+12It's been a while, but that's, what, an additional $4 per gram? That's not too bad IMO.
- o76923, on 03/13/2009, -3/+14you're right, those crazy liberals think that personal decisions should be personal and decisions that affect society as a whole should be in the hands of leaders chosen by the members of society. That's the stupidest nonsense I've ever heard.
- CopsSayLegalize, on 03/13/2009, -2/+12The ban on medical marijuana is just one of the more absurd travesties perpetrated under the "war on drugs."
- drmobutu, on 03/13/2009, -1/+11Hell, your already paying $300, for something you could grow, for free, so what's another $98, right?
- enantiodromia, on 03/13/2009, -0/+10why would anyone want mexican pot?
- Wornstrom, on 03/13/2009, -1/+11how many joints are in a lid?
uhhh... TWO.
Two?
Yeah, I roll big joints, man.
Lets go to our judges... two is correct our judges roll big joints too! - PopcornDave, on 03/13/2009, -2/+12Go back and read the article.
FTA: Their solution is to bankroll the bud on the public dime and charge a weighty tax -- $98 per ounce -- every time an approved patient makes a purchase.
Why does it make sense to put a $98 per ounce tax on something that the end user isn't paying? All they're doing is taxing the people more unless these patients don't have insurance and then wouldn't the state or the feds be taking care of them so it's still coming out of the pockets of people not using it. - fuelcell, on 03/13/2009, -0/+9Exactly. Overcharge for pot and you provide the incentive for a blackmarket for selling and buying pot. Trust legislators of any stripe to screw it up.
- Deguello, on 03/13/2009, -2/+11This is dumb....it ultimately hurts who it is supposed to help...the patient in need of weed.
You now tax this thing out of reach for the average joe, and insurance will not pick it up because it is still illegal federally. If this was to make it legal and open access for adult to purchase, then I could get behind it, because then you could have a different pricing structure for med marijuana patients. But this isn't that at all....is smells of *****! - Nosferotu, on 03/13/2009, -2/+11It's a step in the right direction. It becomes okay in medical fashion, then slowly work toward total legalization.
- twiztidsinz, on 03/13/2009, -1/+10Someone SHOULD be thinking of the children.
Prohibiting marijuana creates a black market for pot.
Black market dealers don't care what age you are. - Nosferotu, on 03/13/2009, -1/+10State grows it and sells it on the market?
- woofers07, on 03/13/2009, -4/+13I live in Portland, how come this is the first I've heard of this?
- inactive, on 03/13/2009, -1/+9"who is going to pay for it?"
He does. We don't have a national health care system.
And even if we did, that same courtesy would be extended to the same preventative care that you could also be doing (eg: are you overweight? I don't wanna pay for your out-of-shape consequences. Do you ski? I don't wanna pay for your broken ankle. Etc.).
Can't discriminate because none of us are in any position to judge unless we want the same stupid limitations imposed upon us. Goes back to the basic concept of people just minding their own business. Live and let live. - a1532b, on 03/14/2009, -1/+9@drmobutu
You pay 300 bucks for an oz? Is your bud like, magic or something? Does it have ground up unicorn or something. I've smoked some REALLY pretty stuff in my time but have never paid more than 150 for an oz. Your dealer must hate you :( - MexiNig, on 03/13/2009, -4/+12Okay as a reference point for non smokers, Oregon pot costs around $230-280 an ounce depending.... Street value of that pot is $320 if you sell for $40 an 1/8th. If they try and throw a $98 dollar tax on the street value, no one will buy it, and people will continue to grow. Ever tried to grow weed? Its really flipping easy, just like growing weeds in your yard... Viva La Oregon! The Greenest State on Earth!
- porkins21, on 03/13/2009, -4/+12'Socialize' it my ass. So the government can monopolize the price and not let business competition have any say? ***** that.
Legalize it or I am just going to keep getting it illegally. - Demand911Truth, on 03/13/2009, -3/+11Americans are witnessing the slow march towards ending the War on Drugs. Keep up the support.
- jitterbits, on 03/13/2009, -0/+8As a Portlander, I'm hollahing, but I don't think this is a great idea. I would think it might give the police more room to bust small grow ops. We just need to decriminalize it already. Half the state smokes weed anyway.
- Eurynom0s, on 03/13/2009, -2/+9This is ridiculous. If this passes I bet it doesn't do too much to kill black-market demand and drug warriors will try to claim a victory, all the while not acknowledging that the failure to dent the black market was due to a ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS AN OUNCE TAX. On the black market, depending on the quality of the pot you buy, $100 could be the cost of an ounce, or a significant percentage of the cost of an ounce (1/2 or 1/3, say). People are not stupid, and unless someone has a bunch of extra money slushing around and can afford to essentially pay a premium for your pot, people are going to still buy their pot on the black market under such a scheme.
Because, that WOULD be the free market at work: if private growers are offering untaxed pot, and that pot is significantly cheaper than taxed pot, who are you going to buy from? It's not like with booze, unless you're drinking really expensive beer or Scotch or wine or whatever, you are probably not saving all that much money by, for example, making moonshine instead of buying Jim Beam, because alcohol taxes in America are stupid, but not $100/oz stupid. - Metavised, on 03/13/2009, -1/+8@exploringfox
The study that links cannabis use to psychosis was done as a questionnaire where roughly 7% said they suffered 1-3 psychotic SYMPTOMS in the length of three years.
"Cannabis use appears to be neither a sufficient nor a necessary cause for psychosis. It is a component cause, part of a complex constellation of factors leading to psychosis."
Causal association between cannabis and psychosis: examination of the evidence (2004)
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/abstract/184/2/ ... -
Show 51 - 100 of 284 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is