You really spent some time on this one. I have ton's to say in response to it..... be back tonight with a spot light to shine on it.
Not a great deal, actually. Most of it was spent in
removing portions of my post before submitting it. I fear that I got "fired up" and my original unedited post simply would not have done.
the reduction in price is exactly what is expected and wanted after going through the legalization process. the prices will not plummet (already @ $200 per medical ounce) below current prices imho.
the best of weed will ALWAYS get the best dollar & because it won't be sold as medical cannabis the stipulation of "Not for Profit" goes right out the window; add taxation into the equation and you might actually see a very slight rise in price for your 'recreational cannabis' purchases.
Add in the ZERO risk of being arrested (unless you get fed
attn) and the cost/risk/reward/profit makes it a big winner.
in short if you're complaining about legalization then you're
no bro of mine, get off your lazy butt and get a real job.
I will assume that when you stated this you did so not out of a desire to insult a fellow member, but because you actually believe what you stated. So... Which part of his post (I quoted it in its entirety) exactly makes him come across as being a thug?
It's just that I find myself agreeing with that post in many ways and on the chance that it is coloring my perception of it I ask that you point out the thug-like part in case I just happened to miss it.
who has no idea what it is or like to run a business. It takes money and smarts to insure it runs smoothly and legally. You have no idea why people get into this business. For some it is not about making tons of money.... for some it is what puts food on the table and keeps the lights on and you want big corporate to come in and take that away. It is not about lazyness... what about those who can not work because of injury and for them... this is a new way of life.
I know first-hand what it takes to run a business - but not a cannabis-related one. It seems (to me) that the biggest difference is that there is still a chance that the cannabusinessman will at some point go to jail - although it just occurred to me that if one is pulling in higher profits than the "average" business owner does and justifies it by stating that it is because of the legal risk, then one cannot in all fairness make a point about that legal risk (since it is accounted for already at that point) but I digress. What I was going to state was that if the legal aspects (for all practical purposes) are removed from the profession then it would then be more-or-less on an even footing with other businesses. I can't see any problem with that.
I also cannot see one's ability to work (or not) due to an injury or any other reason as having any merit in this argument whatsoever. I mean I can understand why you personally might wish to have a job/profession that you can fully and completely do with whatever physical and mental abilities you happen to have. And don't get me wrong, I wish you continued success in having employment (or self-employment if you are the boss) if you are willing to work. Many people who are physically- and (arguably) mentally-fit do not try to work for a living and instead are willingly making of themselves a burden to the rest of us. So if you are doing the best you can with
whatever you've got, you are to be commended for it.
But you are in no way owed a guaranteed position for life as a cannabis collective/dispensary owner. That's just not how life works, lol.
Incidentally, a very good friend of mine finally had to take "early retirement," that is, go on disability because she got to the point where she was having trouble guiding the fork to her mouth even while using both hands to do it, let alone getting herself to work and back five days a week. However, up to that point she had worked the past 21 years from a wheelchair. For the past few years she could not even transfer to/from her 'chair by herself.
So please forgive me if I get a little irate when people use the phrase "can't work because of injury" without going into at least some detail. Because I've seen some real (physical) trainwrecks put in 40+ hour weeks, week after week, year after year.
Your right you are not my brother... my brother would understand.
This is not meant to single you out, but your statement is one that I feel should be addressed. It is at this point that I realize that perhaps all of us have something worthy to state in this discussion. And we might just possibly be misunderstanding the other person's worthy points (some unwillingly, some willingly - that is probably best left to each individual to figure out). And yes, I must include myself in that statement as well; I'm not going to say that I understand everyone's points - although I'm making the effort.
But we are all brothers and sisters so to speak. And like your brother "who would understand," we really need to do the best that we can to understand each other's viewpoints - and if we feel that it is possible that we do not, to ask for clarification. Understanding does not require agreeing with, simply... understanding.
I know collectives that give all they can for the homeless and other charities as well as give free marijuana to those who need it.
That
should describe 100% of them. Unfortunately, it does not. I am generally opposed to government regulation on principle. But yet again I am reminded that in this particular industry a strong regulating agency is needed. For that to truly work, the government doing the regulating must not be diametrically opposed to the entire process. Legalization would allow for that to happen; if cannabis in general becomes legal then it becomes quite unlikely that any agency tasked with regulating the medical aspects of it will be operating from the position that medical cannabis should not be.
And if your collectives are operating "legitimately," if they are ran with compassion and a philanthropic pattern of behavior, and if they are scrupulously honest and above-board in all their dealings... Then regulation should not pose any undue hardship.
So again you are right... you are not my brother. You want to be greedy and give it to the corporate world and the government to take all that away. I sure do not see them caring about charities or the homeless.
I do not see his statements as having greed as their motivation. I also do not see them as meaning that he wishes the cannabis industry to become 100% the purvey of "the corporate world."
But I admit that I could of course be mistaken. Therefore, I'll ask for clarification on these points.
cinzanoooo, would you be kind enough to address (or readdress?) your post in regards to
GanjaAL2's response? I do not wish to misunderstand anyone's points - and I assume that both of you feel the same.
BtW, as far as caring about charities or the homeless... Well, you've certainly got a point there since "government" is not a person per se and therefore cannot be said to
have feelings.
But if you think about it for a second, you'll realize that "government" (taking state, local, and federal and lumping them all together under the one blanket term) IS the largest single supporter of charities and the homeless in the country. Countless billions of dollars are disbursed every year under one government program or the other to pay for education, health care, food, shelter, clothing, arts & humanities, et cetera.
p.s remember it is not the corporate world that makes the USA float but the small businesses that do... again... you want to take that away and give it to the government and the corprorate world... hear what your saying loud and clear!
I'm still not sure that that is what he meant. In the event that it is not, see what I posted above about all of us making sure that we fully understand the other person's points.
Incidentally: Alcohol. Several billion dollar a year industry, I believe. Regulated by government. Corporate... Well, I cannot state "corporate America" because it's a world-wide industry and there are "giants" in the field that are owned by citizens of many different countries. But many of the real "heavy hitters" are corporations that are either chiefly or at least tangentially concerned with some facet of the alcohol industry. Legal in this country for everyone who is 21 years of age or older. Considered both a drug and a recreational/social item. And...
As of Decemer 31st, 2009 there were 1,551 breweries in the United States (the US is ranked first in the world) - and only 20 of those are considered "large non-craft" breweries.
The point I'm trying to make is that just because an industry is government-related and is one in which there are (very) large corporations operating - and reaping astronomical profits - does not mean that there will be no possibility of smaller - even down to "Mom & Pop" sized - businesses.
Let me tell you a little story... there once was a man who worked hard his whole life. One time in his life he was homeless but fought real hard and got back on his feet. Joined the military and served his country well. When he got out he did construction for about 10 years and suffered a back injury... No one would help. On unemployment no one would hire him because of his injury and to top it off... he make 35.00 above the cut off for social assistance. So him and his wife go back to school and are living on finacial aid and trying to ride out the economy. In the midst of all this he and some friends put a collective together to try and put food on the table for there families and help others in there community that need work... especially since the government and the corporate world do nothing for them. He does all he can to insure everyone is treated fairly and is paid well for the work that they do. They give to the homeless, provide for needy children and pay their taxes. His fear... that it will all be taken away once it is legal. He wants it to be legal but he does not want the government or corporate to destroy it for his collective. Why??? not because he is greedy... but because this is all he can do at this time and he is what is helping the people he knows and his community.
This is my brother... the average joe who served his country and is doing the best he can to make the world a better place around him!
As I stated earlier in this post, I would wish good things for everyone that tries to work (and doubly-so for those who try to help others). However, it is not the obligation of the cannabis industry to support and/or provide a livelihood for any one person - or, indeed, for
any person. I just do not feel that this particular argument of yours is meritorious in this discussion. While I hope that "a man," be he you, your friend, relative, or someone you just happened to read about can do well in this industry since it is the one that he has chosen, if he does do well then great; if he cannot continue to survive as a business in the cannabis industry then he should switch to a different industry/field. That's the way that life works, lol. I have changed fields several times in my life because that's what you do if you wish to eat and your current profession no longer supports you. While certain types of learning - for example, learning new languages - are much harder for older adults than they are for young adults and children, learning in general is NOT something that can only be accomplished by the young. It is never too late to learn something new and that includes a new profession. When some of the plants around here that have been closing left and right went under, their former employees were able to qualify for training due to the fact that their professions no longer existed in this area. Most of them took advantage of the opportunity and many of them are gainfully-employed (in different fields) today.
As for the second part of that which I quoted (the part about helping the people in his community), if there is still a need for his business to help after cannabis becomes legal (assuming for the sake of discussion that it does) then he should be able to maintain a healthy business model. If, OTOH, prices drop so much that his help is no longer needed - well, that's a GOOD thing. Isn't it?
Perhaps the collective/dispensary owners, those who grow to sell to them, the doctors who make a profit from the patients that see them in order to "get a card," those businesses that make LOTS of money by "selling" those patients (and their paperwork) to collective/dispensary owners - a practice that I find absolutely reprehensible, BTW - and the traditional illegal growers and dealers... Perhaps all of the aforementioned people should not be allowed to vote on the legalization issue at all. I know that this goes against the tenants of this nation and that it couldn't happen and therefore I'm just "speaking" my thoughts rather than making an attempt to change our entire voting method, lol. But it is obvious from reading this and other threads of this nature that people tend to become very vocal and vote for whichever way pads their personal income/bank account/lifestyle/etc. rather than to vote for whichever way is most likely to allow for and provide the greater good of the society that they live in. So perhaps to help provide at least some semblance of objectivity in the voting arena in general (not speaking of cannabis in particular), might we be better off as a whole if any issue that does not directly involve a majority of the voting public that the principals - on either side - of the issue have to sit that vote out? There are things that I feel strongly about that affect me personally, and while I would LIKE to believe that I at all times would vote for the greater good, how can I say with 100% certainty that my own involvement would not be coloring my judgment?
Once again, I'd like to remind everyone to keep this and all other discussions here at
420Magazine civil and to do the utmost to understand the other person's point of view. Topics like this are going to raise strong feelings on both sides - that is a given. We have an excellent staff here and I'm sure that they are monitoring this thread (along with the other 50,000 threads, lol) to make sure that it doesn't cross the line and require closing so as to maintain order. I thank them for NOT having closed it and hope that it does not have to happen.
(And as always, if anyone comes to feel that I cross that line in this or any other thread, please either let me know or ask a moderator to examine my posts - for I am just as "only human" (on a good day
) as everyone else.)
