Adult-use cannabis delivers $15B in tax revenues
greenmarketreport.com
greenmarketreport.com
Better takeaway is actually:
> For the first time in the U.S., adult-use cannabis tax revenue declined across legal states in 2022.
The headline number is also a cumulative total since legalization started. The annual tax revenue is around $4 billion:
> According to a new report from the Marijuana Policy Project, cannabis sales tax generated a healthy $3.77 billion in 2022, but that was slightly below 2021’s tax revenue of $3.86 billion.
The article doesn't speculate why revenues are declining. I wonder why. Maybe past high revenues were an artifact of people staying home during COVID? Or is it a result of decreasing prices? I'm not a consumer, so I don't really know what's going on in the market.
As another mentioned increasing costs in a questionable economy doesn't help either. I've personally experienced shrinkflation to the greatest extent of any consumer product in weed and weed accessories.
The recreational sales in Missouri is being described as booming.
https://www.kcur.org/news/2023-03-05/legal-weed-missouri-rec...
It's weird how most of the discussion I hear about weed is how it just makes movies funny and you get hungry. But then most people I've talked to about it one-on-one don't have nearly as good of an experience, myself included. It makes me paranoid and depressed, and if I try watching a movie I can't remember what happened a scene ago so I can't follow the story. My passage of time gets screwed up, adding to the paranoia/fear, and I occasionally realize I'm clenching my jaw, and I've experienced jaw pain the next day from it. Not to mention how it saps all your energy/motivation. At least talking to your friend when you're drunk can lead to some funny conversations. Conversations/socialization between people who smoked weed is just nothing.
FWIW, high CBD, low THC if I am smoking flower and for edibles I know my limit is a measly 5mg, and I usually start at 2.5mg.
I know a number of people in the same boat as you who don't enjoy it and that's perfectly normal. Biochemistry is super complex and even well tested and regulated prescription drugs hit people differently.
I also think we grossly overstate how "universal" the high from alcohol is and as a society often overlook or blame problem drinkers rather than the substance itself. Alcohol intoxication can have wildly different impacts based on lots of factors. If you go to a bar and someone spends the night crying after getting drunk, no one goes, "well, par for the course alcohol is a depressant after all". We just chalk it up to a bad night. Personally, my experiences with alcohol overall are as negative as yours with THC.
There's also a ton of variance in between type of plants, delivery methods, concentrations, etc when starting with THC. You might be grabbing something off the shelf that's the equivalent of drinking 2/3 a bottle of cheap tequila for your first experiment.
>"At least talking to your friend when you're drunk can lead to some funny conversations. Conversations/socialization between people who smoked weed is just nothing."
This is a very individual experience which I don't think can be applied to everyone. I've listened to some pretty funny and interesting weed fueled conversations. I would much rather be the sober guy with some stoners than the sober guy with a bunch of drunk people. Like with any drug tho, there's often a line between happy and functional and wrecked.
At the end of the day tho, we can all choose which substance we want to partake in based on what we individual want or need. The danger is in using ones individual experience as the measuring bar for everyone else.
If you are seeking some general advice:
From my experience context is important. Alcohol is more technically a depressant given what we know of how the chemical interacts with the brain and most people greatly underestimate its depressive qualities, in part because culturally we've built a lot of contexts in which it is safe (for mental health at least) to drink and easier to engage with the fun sides of alcohol and avoid many (but not all) of the triggers/traps that lead to bad (mental health) outcomes.
THC from all the years it has been illegal has nowhere near as much shared cultural context. A lot of "best practices" have been quiet word-of-mouth things rather than background "everyone knows" "common sense". Legalized states are just now starting to find the sorts of contexts that work best for people and how to spread those not just as covert word-of-mouth but as overtly well documented best practices and built-safe environments. (And yeah, there's clearly a lot of bad first impressions which would lead to a noticeable "boom" cycle.)
I've found (because I can be prone to the paranoia myself), some of counter-balancing the paranoia/fear is about support structures. Use a buddy system if you need it. (I think even plush animals sometimes count.) Stick to places that are "safe" or "home" with lots of layers of trust built up already in your sober life. (I've found it is best to avoid liminal spaces like airports or train stations.) One of my fears is apparently that my heart feels like it is racing because of that weird sense of time passage, and wearing a fitness watch helps. I can check the metrics and see things are just fine, very quickly. Eventually you may find you can trust just wearing the watch and don't need to check much/at all.
> if I try watching a movie I can't remember what happened a scene ago so I can't follow the story
There are some old stereotypes about the sort of media that stoners enjoy, and many of them exist for this reason. Following the story of a movie or TV can be tough indeed. Things that don't need that sort of focus to recent past events where you can focus on "the endless feeling present" can be a blast though because every next scene feels like a wild surprise: nature documentaries, kids shows, absurdist comedies, events with lots of "spectacle" (fireworks shows, awards shows, magic shows).
> Conversations/socialization between people who smoked weed is just nothing.
Some of my best conversations have been with stoned friends (while I was sober). There's a stereotype of "stoner wisdom" and it comes from an interesting place. Drunk is often associated with "dumb" and "makes stupid decisions" in the way it plays with the brain and stoned has a "wisdom" to it. It's not always "smart", but it often makes surprise leaps and leads to real, interesting advice. (Some of the best advice in my life has come from stoned friends.)
WSJ had an article last week about California and NY screwing up legalization but some numbers from California:
$5.4 billion in licensed sales last year vs $8.1 billion in unlicensed sales. Licensed sales have 10% city cannabis tax, 15% state excise tax, and 9.5% state sales tax. With taxes, licensing, etc etc licensed weed is twice as expensive.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/marijuana-legalization-dispensa...
The reason why is obvious to anyone who's attended a party in the last few years: weed isn't cool anymore. Partly by being illegal, it used to be cool, but now it's accessible to anyone. A lot of people had that realization when they heard "oh, I'm into weed now" from their uncool middle-aged uncle whose previous hobbies had included LARPing and painting miniatures. It's not even just about the legality though: smoking a joint is a hell of a lot cooler than sucking on a USB stick that smells like candy grapes, and vapes, being far more convenient, have now been tied to weed's image. Something being cool is far better marketing than any ad ever designed.
[0] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QTAXT09QTAXCAT1USYES
[1] https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/dataportal/charts.htm?url=CannabisT...
1) The police are still supposed to arrest people who are caught with cannabis (It's a class B drug - in the same group as codeine, ketamine, and ‘spice’ - whatever the hell that is).
In reality they typically let people off with a warning but it's still a drain on our already hamstrung police force
2) Drug dealers who sell weed tend not to declare and pay tax on their earnings. Depriving UK Gov of some seriously needed income per this article's headline.
3) Drug dealers tend to sell other drugs, usually harder drugs. Thus exposing people who want to get stoned to a plethora of other drugs that they might otherwise not have come in to contact with.
4) Those people who are hooked on weed (or any other non-prescribed drug) are criminals...and cannot seek help from anybody including their doctor. This keeps them trapped, and over a long enough period of time will do mental and potentially physical damage to them that our NHS will incur costs to fix. And when I say NHS, I mean the tax payers, and when I say tax payers - I mean me.
All of that is to say - fuck UK drug policy. I remain hopeful that it will change though...
And UK policy on (potentially) crypted data.
"oh - this is CBD weed, but I did just get back from America where I was smoking a ton"
Thats to say - police are generally fine with it. At least in big cities, expect some some random redneck chest thumping far out in the woods/alps.
And if you cause problems, expect no end of stuff cops can pull out on ya, just like anywhere else.
Laws that are overbroad and allow abuse any time the police are mad at you are bad anywhere.
Also other parts of SE Asia will demand an on the spot piss test.
I am not joking. In the Netherlands a druglord has ordered the assassination of one of its most famous journalists, and has blackmailed one of the most renowned lawyers to break the law. The netherlands exports $20bn (!!!) worth of MDMA and XTC per year. Where do you think these criminal instutions come from?
As far as being synonyms, people generally differentiate between "ecstasy"/"E" as MDMA in pill form and "molly" as MDMA in powder form.
But maybe that's because I grew up in a time where you can send stuff to a lab to confirm what it is.
XTC aka ecstacy is MDMA + additives like speed or caffeine/whatever.
I doubt cannabis legalization would have much impact on this - the big organized crime control things like the cocaine & opioid trade.
Looking up the assassination you mentioned, it looks like it was perpetuated by cocaine-dealing organized crime.
Also, what is XTC?
My understanding had always been the two were synonymous.
This is a common misconception. MDMA is often presented as "pure" (often by the people selling it), but in reality, almost all MDMA outside of a pharmaceutical setting is impure. Most MDMA contains some amount of methamphetamine[0], but not necessarily enough to be subjectively identifiable by a user as "meth".
Also, the half-life of MDMA is longer than cocaine, but shorter than methamphetamine.
[0] MDMA is actually a methamphetamine, but it's not the one that people are referring to when they say "meth" colloquially.
Source https://www.drugsinfo.nl/xtc/wat-je-moet-weten-over-xtc
Am very happy to hear this kind of thing is more rare. Not that street users have too much more assurance either way the MDMA they are getting is in fact MDMA, but hopefully thar whatever analogues there are now are a little better than meth or heroin.
Almost all Ecstasy/MDMA outside a pharmaceutical setting is adulterated, usually with other amphetamines. The degree of adulteration varies, and in some cases it may not be very noticeable by the user, but it's incredibly rare to find pure MDMA outside of a pharmaceutical setting.
Methamphetamine is one of the most common adulterants. (This is a bit of a misnomer, because MDMA is itself actually a methamphetamine, but it's not the one most people are referring to when they say "meth").
Ecstasy is almost never pure. While the degree of contamination varies and may not be subjectively noticeable by the user, the vast majority of ecstasy has some degree of adulterants in it, often other amphetamines, and sometimes other substances altogether.
Lol, like it weren't the case pretty much everywhere else... Anywhere there is a significant amount of humans, there is "intense organized crime" too; any difference in outcomes is largely due to how authorities decide to address it.
By contrast, there are parts of Italy where 75%+ of businesses are reported paying protection payments to organized crime.
The Netherlands is an interesting case. Despite amphetamine, MDMA, etc. being illegal, The Hague has turned a blind eye to massive industrial production farms in the south. At one point, the Netherlands almost held a monopoly on the world's MDMA production. Rumors of conspiracy suggest it's intentional, but the end result is the same. Many of these drugs are de facto legal, if not de jure. Of course, this was the landscape some decades ago. It's been changing. Mexican cartels are starting to elbow in, and it's been causing "problems". Watching how the government reacts to the evolving ecosystem is going to be intriguing.
Previous PM Theresa May’s husband Philip’s Capital Group is the largest investor in GW Pharmaceuticals, which mass produces it here for a foreign market. Previous GW chairman Geoffrey Guy is a major Tory donor. Our previous drug minister Victoria Atkins is married to Paul Kenward for fucks sake; boss of British Sugar, another medical cannabis supplier (now part of Associated British Foods). Funny enough, current CEO George Weston of ABF, member of one of Britain’s richest families, was found guilty of breaching charity law over donations of almost £1 million to the Conservative Party. I could keep going but it always makes me a little ill when I go too deep down these rabbit holes.
A government of ministers who insist the drug has “no medical value”, but still allows their chums to produce it under a special license. Doesn't sound suspicious at all, right?
'spice' is a synthesized drug meant to be an analogue for weed. i don't think it is though, a lot of people have had ODs or very erratic behavior on spice.
Drug policies are a perfect example of good intentions paving road to hell and then some more, if you look at ie Mexico. Not that Nixon had any good intentions there whatsoever, but he certainly sold it to the public as such.
So yeah, bad drug (probably also bad person)
Why did I do this? I was forced to do drug tests for cannabis more or less against my will(under duress). And I was a stupid kid who wanted to get high, and these horrible drugs were easily available, advertised as not showing up on tests, etc.
I have the chief responsibility for my own actions of course, but it's hard to ignore the fact that none of it would've happened if not for an extremely draconian and outmoded approach to drugs.
Seriously though that's awful, sorry to hear that and glad you came out the other side (relatively) unharmed.
Cannabis concentrates, e.g. dabs, rosin, BHO are stronger versions of cannabis.
But that's about where the overlap ends. There are many reasons for this. The main one is that synthetic cannabinoids tend to be full agonists at both the CB1 and CB2 receptors, whereas THC is a partial agonist. This means that there are effects that synthetics can do that THC simply can't. In addition, they're much, much more potent; some such compounds have active doses in the 100mcg range. Cannabis also contains other compounds that counteract some downstream effects of THC most notably CBD, but also CBG.
Weed is not going to box your kidneys. CB2 is heavily expressed in kidney tissues, and extremely potent full agonist activity at CB2 is probably why they're so nephrotoxic. THC simply just isn't potent enough in doses that can be reasonably consumed.
Synth noids are also extremely vasoconstrictive and this is how they can cause strokes. They have vasoconstriction comparable to meth, moreishness comparable to crack, and immobilising effcts comparable to heroin. So what ends up happening is you binge. Hard. Maybe for weeks, all while remaining mostly immobile between doses. All while pumping your system full of vasoconstrictors. Weed on the other hand can be vasoconstrictive or vasodilating, depending on the relative content of the various plant cannabinoids. And it's nowhere near as vasoconstrictive as synth noids.
It is probably the case that extremely heavy cannabis use can cause enough immobility over time to increase risk of stroke. But it would take years and years, not days.
Drugs are illegal for a good reason. What did you expect?
Your friend lost his mind, you narrowly escaped death and you blame the government for making this substance illegal? Correct?
These drugs were legal at the time. I blame myself for my own actions(but it was almost a decade ago and I have moved on, which is why I'm comfortable being open about it), but blame is not always singular. The state is also partially to blame because they banned all the good drugs, leading to grey markets with dangerous, untested, experimental drugs.
As for my friend, I had nothing to do with what happened to him, I only met him after the fact.
Californias experiment with decriminalization was after five years revealed for its true intent: unchecked greed at the hand of a 70% tax rate.
https://www.npr.org/2021/11/07/1053387426/5-years-after-cali...
And canabisclub who is doing the growing for/with you.
This should allow for more grow culture.
Isn't that only for personal use though (i.e. you can't sell it)?
Yet they do this crappy in-between, which excludes most people (no, I dont want to have growing aparatus at home and tinker with setup, worry for vacations fire hazards etc), excludes completely access to more advanced and healthier forms (vapes are by far the best and healthiest way for me, dont force me to smoke stuff, I actually care about my health and state should appreciate that).
The problem is, what Germany pushes for sets the tone in rest of EU, and they did set the bar very low. They could have been champions of personal freedom, but they decide to drag this, I guess to please (clueless) conservatives.
And the cat is out of the bag. Creating a canabisclub should be easy enough.
The CA tax rate is closer to 25% (15% excise tax + whatever sales tax is applicable at your address). Where are you getting that hyperbolic number from?
> The inconsistency between state and federal law is causing enormous problems in the cannabis industry everywhere. [...] And almost more significantly, you end up having to pay a 70% effective tax rate because you're not able to take deductions on your federal taxes. So most businesses might pay 35%. You're paying 70%. That can be a huge cost for a small business.
Certainly unreasonable to attribute all of the 70% tax rate to California's "unchecked greed".
That idea was killed off here in Quebec, where cannabis is otherwise legal (albeit with monopolized sales). Federal regulations allowed for up to four plants, but Quebec and Manitoba decided to ban that. This ban was challenged all the way to the Supreme Court, which upheld the ban.
Do you understand that it is impossible to ingest a marijuana plant and become intoxicated?
Do you recommend we ban cars from garages, BECAUSE THE CHILDREN COULD SUCK THE GAS RIGHT OUT THE TAILPIPE???
Right now I can go buy out an entire store's worth of cured and highly potent marijuana, and put that inside my home. Where there are kids. Yet if i grow 4 plants, somehow a toddler is going to eat it and die?
It's just the cons playing to their heartland constituents who live outside of Winnipeg. Where it's wrong to be gay and the only reason you'd smoke drugs is because you're defective. Their understanding of the issue is shallow at best.
Don't keep your edibles within reach of your children, because they like candy and at least one infant has died from consuming weed candy. But that's no different than keep your sugar coated advil out of reach of kids.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/supreme-court-cannab...
THC is potentiated by other cannabinoids (meaning that pure THC has a much weaker effect than THC blended with the other chemicals that typically occur in the cannabis plant). Now, in the US, we're seeing a new paradigm in the cannabis extracts space. Companies are breeding cannabis for extremely high THC content, extracting the THC, and then mixing it with cannabinoids from other sources. My concern here is that, now that the production process is totally decoupled from the challenges of selective breeding, there will be a huge potential for companies to push the potency further and further. You might see new chemicals developed to potentiate cannabis - the tobacco industry did exactly this for THC.
I think a lot of people agree that cannabis offers a very favorable ratio of drawbacks and benefits compared to other drugs, including alcohol. Will this still be the case as new formulations are developed?
I always recommend people stick with flower and home made edibles for safety sake. I dabbled in the stronger stuff, and it's nothing like how weed should feel. Insanely anxiety inducing.
Most of people's worst experiences I've been witness to have been with homemade edibles.
Edibles are a lot more work and deliberation, and can give much more varied experiences due to digestion and personal metabolism (there are suggestions of enzyme differences that can make a major difference too). I never suggest it without a full rundown full of details and warnings. I only bring it up because I can't in good conscience simply recommend smoking anything to somebody who might care about their lung health.
That said, I've seen and had some really bad experiences on some badly-dosed edibles, but it doesn't compare to the worst I've seen messing around with real concentrates. Overdoses aside, I've had friends graduate from flower to edibles to tinctures to BHOs and just end up imbibing hundreds of milligrams of THC a day, and the results are often chronic anxiety, hyperemesis, inability to sleep, paranoia, and intense withdrawal when you quit. People who say "it's just a plant, it's harmless" haven't seen the effects of extreme abuse, and that's coming from somebody who generally likes using cannabis.
In my state, every package of THC product must contain a label with test results for that batch, including percentage of THC. There are rumors from internet folk from other states saying test cheating is rampant, but I've never experienced an unexpectedly hot or weak batch.
I have never seen any reliable evidence for this. CBD, the second most prevalent cannabinoid, acts as a negative allosteric modulator at CB2. There's a weak case that this may decrease cannabis-associated anxiety (because the synthetic JWH-018 was a strong CB2 ligand and caused severe anxiety). CBD is at high doses a DRD2 partial antagonist (antipsychotic effect), but it's very unlikely to reach this level with recreational use. The third-most common cannabinoid is THCV, which acts as an antagonist at the cannabinoid receptors. Beta-caryophyllene, not a cannabinoid, is a very low potency CB2 agonist; it is present in cannabis but also in rosemary, oregano and basil, herbs widely known for their pernicious addictive properties.
THC is a potent CB1 and CB2 partial agonist. It is predominantly responsible for the effects of cannabis. The minor cannabinoids appear, if anything, to reduce the effect of THC.
>I think a lot of people agree that cannabis offers a very favorable ratio of drawbacks and benefits compared to other drugs, including alcohol. Will this still be the case as new formulations are developed?
My only real concern is that dab pens seem to be to joints what smartphones were to the laptop. You used to have to think about what you were doing for a few minutes before inhaling.
I think what people should be more concerned about is the race to find the most potent cannabinoids possible. AFAIK THCp and HHCp hold the crown currently and they’re ~20-30 times more potent than THC (exact experienced potency is different for everyone). While you can buy it straight from a lab or bulk marketplace most products that hit store shelves only contain 2.5-5% because manufacturers are concerned about negative publicity and triggering panic attacks.
The current status quo is that no one knows what they are getting until it's used, at which point its too late. If you could know exactly what you are getting (plus the means to seek help without fear of legal repercussions), then this would be a non-issue.
You could also have made a similar case with alcohol, but at some point the potency makes the product worse. For example, how many people do you see drinking everclear?
Everclear has existed forever, and even dumb college kids understand drinking an entire bottle would be stupid. We still haven't had teens or adults dying from cannabis overdose, even though you can go find stupid videos of people with nothing better to do smoking a whole gram of extract in a couple minutes. There has been at least one infant dying from cannabis exposure though. In babies it seems it can depress breathing to the point of suffocation.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/doctors-debate-wh...
That doesn't seem clear cut enough to say "There has been at least one infant dying from cannabis exposure". I'm not saying there's no danger, it's just that I'm pro-legalization so that the health effects can be studied, and I'm interested in hearing about this sort of thing. It is a good reminder to make sure infants can't access things they shouldn't.
A legal market is, in theory at least, going to have much more opportunities to do science out in the open, more opportunities to track breeding experiments and not just over-select one direction or another, more available research not just on the one notable desirable ingredient, but the larger ecology of them.
Also, you definitely just pulled that 70% number out of your ass
For reference; Alcohol generates roughly $10B per year (https://www.statista.com/statistics/248952/revenues-from-alc...). Tobacco as well (https://www.statista.com/statistics/248964/revenues-from-tob...)
I was not able to find reputable sources for Cannabis; the numbers in the article are coming from "Marijuana Policy Project", which makes them highly suspicious since the stated goal of the organisation is: (form their own website): "The Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) is the number one organization in the U.S. dedicated to legalizing cannabis". So they would likely use any calculations methods that would paint cannabis in a good way.
I know a lot of people who sell hard drugs and get caught selling said drugs. They spend a night in jail, bail out and go on probation where they can time the ankle monitor to know exactly when they have to stop drinking at parties
I’ve seen people drive kilos of coke across the country for years without being caught or having any worry
I’m all for weed but the idea that we’re locking people up in prisons for smoking a joint is very misguided compared to what the legal system really behaves like
Drug convictions or even arrests make you ineligible to enter many other countries, make it very difficult to travel, and make it difficult to get a job.
You don't have to end up in prison to waste the state's money and to materially impact your life and productivity.
>"The Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) is the number one organization in the U.S. dedicated to legalizing cannabis". So they would likely use any calculations methods that would paint cannabis in a good way.
You can find similar numbers with details from the Motley Fool:
https://www.fool.com/research/marijuana-tax-revenue-by-state...
Also, it's questionable whether high usage rates would paint the most optimistic picture of cannabis legalization. If sales are low, then that makes the case for legalization stronger, not weaker, I would think.
Relative to what? If weed was still illegal and untaxed, there are additional policing costs not taken into account here. If you mean relative to a world where nobody wanted to do drugs, then sure, but that's fantasy.
Revenues dipped between 2021 and 2022 and were rising before that.
Also it's only from 14 states, other states will start collecting taxes this or in following years.
It is not hyperbolic to say that in many states, the cannabis industry is drowning. Far too much regulation, far too many taxes, and no access to capital yields an environment for cannabis SMBs that is effectively impossible to thrive in. The largest multi-state operators are the only businesses that are positioned to survive this downturn.
Contrast this with federal agricultural policy for the past 100 years, in which entire agencies are dedicated to ensuring the health of American agriculture through loans, subsidies, and economic policy. Even though cannabis is the 6th largest cash crop in the US - roughly the same size as cotton, and larger than rice or potatoes, it is being actively crushed underfoot.
Federal legalization is not close, and SAFE banking is not close. The industry as a whole is sliding into an enduring period of stagnation, and legislators are far too slow to act. For people who have been closely following the industry, all of this is completely unsurprising.
It's not clear that the government should be terribly interested in helping cannabis. We can see why we want a regular food supply (and yes, that includes for animals) but it doesn't seem to be a government interest to make sure everyone can get high.
If states are going to legalize and tax, then they're obligated to treat these businesses as legitimate - especially with respect to social equity programs that give priority to minority license applicants. If you're sending these licensees into a meat grinder, that's not social equity.
Just because New York runs an unconstitutional licensing scheme doesn't require the federal government to do anything. New York can bail out the people they gave a raw deal to.
As far as I can tell keeping alcohol legalized is simply having the moderate 59%[1] of drinkers use tyranny of the majority to enforce their freedom at deep detriment to both the hazardous/heavy drinkers (but also to everyone because the negative effects of drinking distribute to moderate/non-drinkers. I presume that this is also heavily lobbied by Alcohol industry in the US because more than 2/3rds of revenue come from heavy drinkers. And grabbing the first headline that matches my theory it seems like tax revenue doesnt cover the societal costs [2]
Related to the topic at hand it seems the societal costs of alcohol abuse is greater than drug use[3] (all drugs combine). So again, if Alcohol is Legal, then THC should be too, though I maintain it'd be even more societally beneficial to prohibit both.
[1]: https://www.recoveryanswers.org/research-post/alcohol-sales-...
[2]: https://www.bu.edu/sph/news/articles/2019/alcohol-taxes-only...
[3]: https://landmarkrecovery.com/the-cost-of-alcohol-use-disorde....
What a strange title to mask the actual first line: " 2022 tax collection dipped from 2021."
My personal anecdote is I've replaced social drinking with social cannabis use now that it's legal. It feels good and I don't have to worry about the hang over. The cost is fairly similar for a night of drinking or a few joints.
Hope you're sharing Cheech.
In OR, the rules went from "who can produce the cheapest?" (Regenerative soil.) to "who can do clean room hydroponics with money gained from operating dispensaries" overnight.
The entire organic movement is struggling to find a solution since our entire premise is to cultivate good "fauna" and not allow the bad stuff to gain large colony size. We cull weak plants, introduce predatory insects, utilize myco to innoculate soil and overall avoid the headaches general to monocropping.
These are Arxiv-reading plant hackers, struggling with a sudden change, and it's chemicals all the way down...
I've worked throughout the industry since legal, retail, production, field sampling / analytical lab tech, etoh extraction, and gMP manuf. / distro. I've seen a lot of solutions, and the industry has overcome a lot on the legal side.
But I'd like to speak for all Oregonians in stating that if we don't have safety testing that matches what's really possible, producers will route around the problem by shopping labs for those who will assure greater possibility of passing these now much more strict myco/microbial testing.
They did it with potency...
Any thoughts for solutions that are more immediate and actionable, like how we can organically pass testing than gaming the test itself?
I've watched it personally affect solid facilities and programs, tens of millions in losses during a razor thin market. People get desperate and do weird unsafe things to product, like spray vinegar, peroxide, physan, late-flower synth treatments, antifungals for ornamentals (think pgrs are bad?), and I'm sure worse.
Any simple treatments techniques or procedure advice is very humbly appreciated. I'll pass it on to the communities it affects.
That's what I used to pay for an eighth.
My life is so much healthier and better in every possible way and I directly attribute cannabis to being a major part of addressing severe trauma, PTSD, MDD, and anxiety (after 20 years of federal affiliation prevented it).
Also, note that the recreational (and medical) market has enough options of tinctures, oils infusions etc... that it's trivial to avoid combustion smoking.
I am unaware of any long term studies that show medical risks to consuming THC, CBN, CBD in a non-combustion way.
I don’t need to or want to.
That has to scare somebody.
I also enjoy cooking with it. Deglazing a pan with some red wine after you seared a big piece of beef is a great way to start a sauce.
There have also been a lot of stories in the couple of years or so regarding massive cartel growing operations[1] blending in with the legal grows, flooding the market with cheaper cannabis. These are usually staffed by people who are the victims of human trafficking[2] working off their "debt." A lot of people are going back to black market cannabis because there are no taxes, so it's about 20% cheaper right off the top.
[1] https://www.bizjournals.com/portland/news/2022/09/06/oregon-...
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/12/oregon-marij...
[3] https://abcnews.go.com/US/narco-slaves-migrant-workers-face-...
I've seen things online about illegal grow operations in CA with a surprisingly bad impact on the environment since apparently the individuals managing these rural greenhouses don't care about litter or pollution, just like they probably don't care about their laborers. The law has given their mules protection to move products, and their customers a financial incentive to go with the risky illegal pot.
Imagine if parsley, basil, and thyme were controlled by commercial interests and regulator regimes.
https://www.mpp.org/issues/legalization/cannabis-tax-revenue...
I worked with MANY growers from mendo, and had to work out the tax implications from plant to extraction - which gets really weird when a Co-OP of growers each brought in their harvest, to combine together so they could exrtract from their total combined batch - but each grower needed to know what their tax burdon was on the final product.
That was a nightmare to figure out (at the time, we basically came out with ~$1.75 in taxes per gram of 99% pure oil)
My friend, and immediate next door neighbor is the District Attorney (DA) to the DCC (department of cannibis control) we have talked about this a lot - and he knows what a shit-show the california tax code is on weed...
So much so that many small growers had to sell, and some larger growers/extractors are also selling because they lost all margins.
Dont even get me started on METRC
but at the end of the day - this all boils down to big agra and big capital squeezing out all the small players through political lobbying and corrupt politicians, and large industry such as Constellation Brands (alcohol) making huge strides into the cannabis market.
Constellation was coming in and trying to low ball small ops to sell their ops and licenses, and then paying off/lobbying politicians to make the process of getting your cultivation, distribution, etc licenses extremely hard for a typicla tradition weed farmer who has been growing for decades but now he has to follow big agra style red-tape he is not used to.
Then, on top of that - when co-op growers would combine material for extraction, or pre-rolls - they still had to be tested AFTER the extraction and if the oil came back 'dirty' (had pesticides in it) the batch was useless and had to be sold on the BM (black market) at a much reduced price and these guys would lose all of their annual revenue in that one extraction -- I saw a guy get so infuriated, I wouldnt be surprised if he killed himself when he got home.
It was a wild ride.
But I think reports that only focus on tax income are underselling the results of cannabis legalization policy slightly.
What I would be much more interested in would be the whole picture, ie. added to the tax income we should also be able to see the taxpayer money saved by relieving the police, corrective and judicial systems of cannabis related processes.
The more smoking, the more healthcare costs related to lungs etc. so it is good to have tax revenue to support the societal impact.
People will disagree with how much people should be allowed to harm themselves when society picks up the mess. Our compromise is taxes :)
Last year smoking marijuana surpassed smoking cigarettes: https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/addiction/news/20220831/....
I know that there are many factors here - legal vs illegal (where any tax is better than no tax) clean vs dirty (where I presume the higher the legality the more likely it is safe), the social advantages and alternatives (where people who have an active social life are more productive), etc.
Cannabis is really not what you think it is.
But I do work with teenagers, and have heard from many that blame their lack of class or job stability on marijuana, who complain that they have lost years of their life in a cloud, or that have done stupid stuff because they were either high, or bec. they were stressed out when not high.
I know a kid who is a lost cause, and his friends claim he took contaminated drugs; are they wrong?
I cannot imagine that it isn't a gateway - its not catchy like LSD, but someone who makes out with friends is surely more likely to try LSD, Meth or Coke, no?!
Would love to hear more - I know lots of people who encourage me to try a joint or two!
BTW, I saw once a similar comparison of cigarette taxes vs related costs. Surprisingly worthy comparison.
If anything, the primary function weed has as a gateway drug is because people speak so terribly about it (and with LSD in the same breath) that when you try it and realize - oh this is not really scary/terrible in the way it was described, maybe they've been lying about all drugs the whole time?
Can't find the studies right now, but there has been evidence of positive societal effects from pot consumption because of how it displaces alcohol.
There's no comparison between weed and these other drugs. "Trying a joint or two" has no negative repercussions unless you are prone to paranoia or anxiety.
But you are describing teens who are regular users. Teens make bad decisions. Smoking marijuana every day will (can) definitely do the things they told you. Make you slow, only care about smoking, etc. The person who lost their mind either was very sensitive to some mental illness and should not have been doing any drugs, or smoked spice (NOT marijuana).
Also "government rehab" would be an absolutely fantastic thing to have for marijuana. There are tons of people with a marijuana habit who are self-medicating (and were before legalization) and one of the points of legalization is to help people NOT abuse the drugs. Unfortunately there is nothing like this where i live, even though cannabis is legal here.
Fwiw, in my experience the first ("gateway") drug that kids get into is alcohol.
Yes, they are wrong. There's no such thing as "contaminated" marijuana, that's an urban myth.
As far as productivity, it depends on how you look at it. You can be much more creative while using marijuana, it can also be great to boost productivity if you're tired or not in the mood to be creative...
It may have you re-examine if you want to overwork, make business your life, climb the corporate ladder... but all of those seem like positive revelations too and a much needed counterbalance to all of the pro-corporate propaganda we all drown in.
Seems like a great deal for the younger generation.
> Earth's climate is on it's last legs.
A well known side-effect of smoking marijuana is that people become way more ecologically aware and in tune with the environment. Downsizing your lifestyle, not commuting and not working for some megacorp churning out junk or ads is definitely going to be better for the environment than the status quo.
Is it a myth? In Germany black market cannabis has been found to be lined with synthetic cannabinoids in many cases. Those substances are not researched well and hundreds of their users (who typically didn't expect any synthetic drugs) required emergency medical care according to this German (sorry) source from two years ago: https://www.vice.com/de/article/m7a533/chemisch-gestrecktes-...
The German minister of health cites this situation as his main motivation for working towards legalization, so people wouldn't have to buy from questionable sources.
Is there actually evidence of LSD being more harmful than beneficial to its consumers? I haven't read Michael Pollan's pop science book yet, but from watching the Netflix rendition of "How to change your mind" I got the impression that it was mainly criminalized because its users opposed conscription during the Vietnam war.
You've framed this question as though cannabis is the same as meth or something so the question is a bit bad-faith. I'd suggest researching a bit on the topic if you're actually curious.
And for those who believe that a annual decline in drug sales supports the idea of legalizing it, don't you think these companies will act with the most sinister of intentions like so many before them have acted? Like Juul, big tobacco, beer, fentanyl, and casinos?
The profit is great. The evil is greater. (Quran 2:19)
Much of the art/music created in the past 100 years was done under the influence of marijuana. In addition to extremely helpful therapeutic benefits (mainly around improving sleep, diet and lowering stress). You can't make the claim that nothing good comes from marijuana. In fact, I think it would be very difficult to claim that it has a net negative effect given that you can't OD on it and people that use it don't tend to start fights, kill people, rob... like they do with alcohol and other various drugs.
Alcohol has provided similar "therapeutics" to overworked people. But in retrospect, disconnecting the brain to stressors is difficult to argue as a positive effect. Stressors cause the body to adjust for tasks. Likewise, inducing hallucinations and mental states of poor mobility yet calling it therapy is like removing a few cells from the brian and saying the effects are good because the existing problems are worse.
Arguments like alcohol is worse because of A,B,C and therefore Marijuana is better, is like saying "the other guy is much worse than me and therefore I am OK." Or "America is better than other countries so we have nothing to improve." You can't use the lack of certain negatives as justifications. It still has other negatives that the former does not have.
For the millions (billions?) of people who have enjoyed this art, I'd say it's pretty positive.
FWIW I also think alcohol should remain legal and would literally never give up a good after-work beer. People are capable of having positive relationships with alcohol.
This is not a conversation about whether something should be legal. Rather, whether it should be celebrated and exploited for monetary benefits. I think no.
And don't quote the Koran at people, no one cares.
Certain words are difficult to argue against, An open challenge the Quran makes to anyone who reads it.
No offense, but judging people and calling them stuck up the way you are doesn't seem chill at all.
The culture between humans and alcohol has evolved over thousands of years, it's complex and has positives and negatives. Same with marijuana, although I'd suggest there are fewer negatives to marijuana.
Relationships of balance are complex and difficult. Any person at any time won't react the same as another. Such wildcards cannot be justified.
That being said, the level of judgement you're laying against people who partake in happy hour would make most people uncomfortable and would be considered stressful and not relaxing.
WFH does not free you of judgement either. And having discussed issues like this before, know I recognize you.
"What if people were happy and content with life but its actually bad" is such a puritan view of the world.
And given how widely and casually cannabis has been consumed for decades, the social policy angle makes no sense as effects should be visible by now.
The civil rights angle is the one where the people being oppressed by selective enforcement of the law is the one that makes sense, somewhat evidenced by the progression of changes in state laws, beginning with states that one would rank more progressive on civil rights than more regressive states, where it still remains highly illegal.
I don't believe we have yet experienced -pervasive- use of this substance in society. My sense of it is that a sort of social taboo has been lifted. TBD imo.
I can't find the nytimes oped from Giulliani era, but in late 90s early 00s, NYC was arresting people left and right for lousy dime bags. And many 'respectable' types got arrested which prompted the oped I am referring to here. But sure, policing in general has been used as a discrminatory tool, no arguments there.
Soma was legalized - just ask your neighbors
Which to put a fine point on it is 100% taxed because adults buy alcohol for kids via the same avenues as for themselves. Nobody brews their own beer specifically to sell to teenagers.
Think back to Charlottes Web and what a ripple it caused, arguably influential in the passage of hemp reform in the farm bill.
I’d be curious to see data on use vs legalization and the demographics of tax revenue.
We're just swapping burning one herb for another.
Personally I don't smoke but having tried both, nicotine is hands down better. It sharpens the mind, unlike cannabis which always just made me feel like I'd lowered my IQ.
They're both obviously hilariously unhealthy.
[1] https://drugabusestatistics.org/alcohol-abuse-statistics/
[2] https://www.uptodate.com/contents/cannabis-withdrawal?topicR...
Reddit is also not a source for anything, but it does confirm that my anecdotal evidence is not limited to my friend circle: https://www.reddit.com/r/leaves/comments/10vgauo/why_does_no....
You FEEL getting high and when you had enough. If you get too high, you stop. There is no overdose.
I am sure no normal people drink vodka just like beer, thinking they are both similarly alcoholic drinks. Not even accidentally. Of course, if you want to abuse, you can. In both cases. But that is your conscious choice.
Consuming too much of an edible is pretty much the default outside of high quality dining experiences -- quality control from edible to edible is terrible and nobody weighs before they eat. And I'm not sure what dispensary you're going to where they give you dosage advice unasked for, it's abnormal in the extreme.
> You FEEL getting high and when you had enough. If you get too high, you stop. There is no overdose.
No, especially with edibles, the effect is delayed. It's true that you stop when you've had too much, but by then some portion of the population will experience psychosis, anxiety, etc. Not ideal, and very hard to protect against the next time, because again, edible quality control is terrible and everything is dosed at least 10% too high.
> I am sure no normal people drink vodka just like beer, thinking they are both similarly alcoholic drinks. Not even accidentally. Of course, if you want to abuse, you can. In both cases. But that is your conscious choice.
That's the whole point. They don't, because the distinction is clear. With marijuana products, it's not.
But even if it didn’t, I still struggle to understand what is the problem with taking too much THC once. You’ll have a bad time and next time you’ll have less or none. No real harm, no long term damage, no addiction. Getting drunk on vodka once will not make me more likely to have hard drinks when beer is not available. I will simply have less of the stronger product.
This isn’t true. It was a lie peddled by pro legalization groups. Some physical symptoms include cold sweats and diarrhea but there are plenty of others and the psychological symptoms are worse (terrible nightmares and anxiety.)
https://www.healthline.com/health/marijuana-withdrawal#sympt...
Sure, not like some drugs - but if you are dependent it absolutely causes physical withdrawals.
It's not quite caffeine withdrawal, but it's also nothing like alcohol (which can kill you) or nicotine withdrawal.
The medical establishment doesn't like to talk about individual variability much, tho: people tend to start asking how effective the mass market prescription drugs are for them instead of accepting the bland reassurances that all bodies are the same.
And have you ever heard of edibles? No ill affects from the smoking part.
So calling both "obviously hilariously unhealthy" is wildly misleading.
Vaping is especially good, since it's so efficient - a typical smoker will use between 2-4x less flower when vaping! So it's healthier, and much cheaper!
Plus, ~nobody uses weed as a nicotine alternative, because the effects are totally different. It's such a weird comparison to bring up, like comparing alcohol to caffeine and deciding alcohol's a shit replacement for caffeine. Yes, of course it is, nobody thought otherwise.
Now, replacing (at least some) alcohol use with weed? Now that's almost certainly a big win, health-wise, and the effects are at least semi-comparable.
you're obviously hilariously misinformed. I recommend reading up on the general consensus of health affects on both substances. Marijuana isn't harmless, but it's a whole lot safer than tobacco, and also provides many legitimate medical uses.