Hippies have overrun Digg.com, Reddit.com and Internet town forums! in Off Topic

Page: 1 2
ID:56091
 
Mar 27 2009, 7:26 pm
God help us all, in the midst of an Economic Crisis that has been precipitated by the collapse of the housing economy, collapse of many banks, collapse of insurance giants, and has resulted in horrifically high unemployment and a global decline in GDP and the god-forsaken internet only cares about legalizing Pot.

To all the retards who make blog posts on the internet about the brilliant idea of legalizing and taxing pot to solve THE ENTIRE WORLD'S PROBLEMS, go shoot yourself in the face. There is a time and a place for this discussion and it is NOT now, you little retards actually think legalizing pot is going to balance the budget? REALLY?! what are you daft? yes it can be taxed I get your brilliant idea, however it is not without negative consequences and it really is a trivial thing to be promoting so heavily now.

I am talking about of course, this: http://www.salem-news.com/articles/december122008/ barack_cannabis_12-12-08.php
Thank you internet, thank you for discrediting democracy as it pertains to the medium of the internet. Now we all lose the credibility of our opinions through this medium, because instead of asking important questions on unemployment, the cost of government running in deep deficits and health care you chose to flood the internet and the polls with pot legalization questions.

Okay, let me just remind you all that this argument has some merit, pot should be decriminalized as for as holding small quantities go because it is a harmless drug that's only real problem is it makes people gain weight, facilitates being lazy and smells like garbage wrapped in skunk diarrhea. It is certainly less damaging than alcohol to society.

The problem here, is that the Pot argument is an argument of personal liberties, NOT a solution to the economic crisis. Obama responded to these retarded questions with this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M6orSr5QvA&eurl=
And I respect him for it! Laughing at the question of whether or not Pot legalization will create jobs and help grow the economy and making it the top freaking question is the least to be expected. It does say bad things about the online community, it says that we dont care about the big picture, it says that we care more about adding another recreational drug to the legal list of ways to burn your free time more than we care about having a job or maintaining national security or keeping the markets from collapsing.

To all the morons who have decided to use this crisis as an opportunity to flood the political conversation with drug talk, screw you, there are way more important, tough questions to be debating than this. Obama is a good president but his decisions need to be criticized and analyzed and the fact that the democratic public has decided to focus on another trivial and certainly not pressing issue is just asinine.

Im glad Obama stood up to this childishness, Im glad that he isnt the hyper left-wing candidate you thought he was. He has always been a moderate, he has always said moderate things, I'm increasingly annoyed at some of the comments made by bloggers whose minds have been blown by Obama's response to this, they really thought he would take this question seriously, because they really have convinced themselves that this question is pressing.

Newsflash, it isn't.

Weed being sold like it is in Amsterdam has come with consequences, I talked to my Dutch friend about it and she made it quite clear that it isn't that great of a thing, she personally has never smoked it, but apparently the people it attracts (she mentioned German tourists) are absolutely a problem. I am a big fan of Canada's take on this, crack down on dealers and grow ops but dont even criminalize possession of small quantities. Regardless, the merits and flaws of the discussion being posed by the internet at large isnt the point, the point is that this is not the time and place.

The world should have learned its lesson when it ignored the actions the Bush administration was taking during 2003 and instead tuning in to hear about Paris Hilton and other arbitrary bull, so no more, as the nation is in a critical and emergency state the people have to be interested in the big and real issues and pay attention for gods sake. You cannot ignore the trillions of dollars being spent, you need to pay attention and be sure your government is doing things well, dont look back in 5 years of hindsight and blame the rest of society for not being watchful of your government, you start taking this economic collapse seriously internet or face the inevitable decline into obscurity as the executive branch becomes more and more hesitant towards using the internet as a medium because of the shear level of retarded that exists here.

/rant.
#1 Mar 27 2009, 7:28 pm
#2 Mar 27 2009, 7:45 pm (Edited on Mar 27 2009, 7:52 pm)
Mexican drug cartels are becoming a problem, with violence spilling into our shared border. Legalizing drugs so that they can be grow legally within the United States would remove their primary source of income.

You haven't listed any real downsides. America is a large place, and any increase in international druggies* would be far outweighed by decreases in gang violence (again, funded primarily by drugs) and the like.

I think it's worth considering. And no, I don't take drugs, nor do I plan to drink or smoke.

The taxes are just icing on the cake. The truth of the matter is, any time you prohibit something people want, you create openings for organized crime. And if we aren't going to deal with it now, it's only going to get worse. As unemployment increases, you can bet drug use is going to skyrocket.

*(from where? Canada? Europeans aren't going to fly overseas for it! The only reason Amsterdam is seeing such traffic is because people can just hike on over**)

**An exaggeration, I suppose. It's more like a weekend trip.

(Also, sorry for all the edits. I kept coming up with new points..)
#3 Mar 27 2009, 7:52 pm
Thats not the point, Mexico has violence from drug cartels because their government decided to start a drug war. Saying that America should decriminalize drugs because of drug-war activity in Mexico is simply a conflict of principle. You dont legalize a controlled substance because of drug cartel violence, changes in civil liberties through removing prohibition should be done with consideration for the relevant and enduring factors such as the pros/cons to the economy and to the standard of living for America, not the current event factors, the problem is Mexico has a strong organized crime underbelly, not that weed prohibition is the root of all evil.

Also, I already said I agreed that the American stance to Pot is excessive and that I agree with bringing this issue to the table eventually, the main point of my article is that the Internet is being retarded to bring this issue up now as the most pressing thing on the agenda when far more important problems exist.

Trust me, I live in Canada, I know at least half the people my age have tried the stuff and about a half of that group continue using it on a casual occasion, I know it isnt dangerous and I know its not deadly, but it isnt by any means a priority for a world in crisis.

This is so ridiculous, it is like bringing up the issue of Gay Marriage during World War II and focusing on it instead of the War. Come on people, prioritize.


What is next guys, decriminilizing Heroin so that we can win the War in Afghanistan? We all know the Taliban makes a lot of money from producing that drug in Afghanistan. Creating Heroin in America might just end the war on terror, but again, you dont make decisions about civil liberties based on international pressures.
#4 Mar 27 2009, 7:53 pm
We know that it became illegal to keep the colored people down
#5 Mar 27 2009, 7:56 pm
Again, Im not anti-legalization, Im anti exaggerating the importance of this issue especially during a time of international economic crisis.
#6 Mar 27 2009, 8:05 pm
step 1: list anti-pot article on digg
step 2: watch it get dug down about 40,000 times in 5 minutes
step 3: ???
step 4: profit!
#7 Mar 27 2009, 8:09 pm
But America is funding and supplying the cartels, so how is it a conflict of principle?

"About 90 per cent of all the cocaine consumed in [America] transits through Mexico. The drug trade generates for the cartels an estimated 13 to 15 billion dollars earning per year." (Huffington Post)

Our second-amendment touting gun stores are also supplying the cartels with firepower that far surpasses that of Mexico's police forces (NYTimes)

So, we can either legalize "safe" drugs, removing their income as well as that of 90% of gangs while making some $$$ on the side, or we can let it continue to escalate until we have a narco-terrorist state on our borders, and keep letting school kids get shot up in urban schools. You keep talking about the economy, but this is clearly the cheapest solution. But it doesn't matter, because congress would never pass a bill that legalizes drugs, so it would just be a waste of more money to bring one to them.

"you dont make decisions about civil liberties based on international pressures"

No, of course not. That would be silly, considering the effects of our legislation on the world? Psh.

Oh wait, isn't that what got us into this economic mess? :P
#8 Mar 27 2009, 10:56 pm
I really like how Canada handles it. But, I will say that complete legalization is a retarded idea. Everyone could just grow their own dope, and then the government doesn't make a cent of profit.

I would suggest that it be treated in the same way that hard liquor is. You need a permit to grow and/or distribute, then the sales of that were also taxed. As long as the taxes themselves weren't high enough to make doing it illegally worth the risk, it should solve the issue.

Also, I'd like to point out I don't smoke, just drink.
#9 Mar 27 2009, 11:35 pm
If we legalized very small quantities that'd help out a lot of people...but then the government wouldn't be able to make money off of us.

I agree with disturbed puppy, complete legalization is retarded...If they did that I'd have an acre of marijuana seeds planted by tomorrow morning. They should set the age for it to be around 18, and start selling it.
#10 Mar 28 2009, 7:30 am
Disturbed Puppy wrote:
I really like how Canada handles it. But, I will say that complete legalization is a retarded idea. Everyone could just grow their own dope, and then the government doesn't make a cent of profit.

Yeah, which is why agriculture is failing- everyone can grow their own food, so every single American has 5 miles of beans and corn in their backyard that they grow for themselves, and the government isn't making a cent.

wait what
#11 Mar 28 2009, 11:38 am
Zaole wrote:
Disturbed Puppy wrote:
I really like how Canada handles it. But, I will say that complete legalization is a retarded idea. Everyone could just grow their own dope, and then the government doesn't make a cent of profit.

Yeah, which is why agriculture is failing- everyone can grow their own food, so every single American has 5 miles of beans and corn in their backyard that they grow for themselves, and the government isn't making a cent.

wait what
Pot is VERY easy to grow. My friend grew his own pot in his goddamn closet.
#12 Mar 28 2009, 12:14 pm
IcewarriorX wrote:
If we legalized very small quantities that'd help out a lot of people...but then the government wouldn't be able to make money off of us.

I agree with disturbed puppy, complete legalization is retarded...If they did that I'd have an acre of marijuana seeds planted by tomorrow morning. They should set the age for it to be around 18, and start selling it.


You do realize that if they legalized it they would regulate it so growing it would be illegal right? So no, you wouldn't have an acre of marijuana plants in your backyard.

This is not to say people still won't grow it illegally, but honestly, why would you want to once it is legal? When it is legal, it would be so much cheaper, and you can choose which type of weed you want, rather than hoping your dealer has some good stuff.

I would love to walk into my local Wal-Mart and buy some bud.

Also, we would make all the debt we owe back in less than a year if weed were legalized. I don't know what the hell Masterdan is going on about.
#13 Mar 28 2009, 1:22 pm
Cavern wrote:

Also, we would make all the debt we owe back in less than a year if weed were legalized. I don't know what the hell Masterdan is going on about.

What? What you mean the deficit? you think you could recover the deficit with a YEAR of taxing weed? Really?! did you do the math for this while you were high? Honestly? do you know how much money several Trillion dollars is? See these baseless arguments are exactly why Barack Obama lols in the face of this argument.
#14 Mar 28 2009, 1:28 pm
Lol, why do I get the feeling nobody read the second part of my comment? I'll say it again:

"I would suggest that it be treated in the same way that hard liquor is. You need a permit to grow and/or distribute, then the sales of that were also taxed. As long as the taxes themselves weren't high enough to make doing it illegally worth the risk, it should solve the issue."

When I said "complete legalization", I meant COMPLETE LEGALIZATION. When I said "regulation", I meant REGULATION. I don't get how people were confused with that paragraph, I thought it was pretty clear.

Also, Masterdan's right about this not being an economic issue, although it is a blatant violation of our civil liberties. Having that said, Marijuana is not safe or healthy. It's a drug, and is unhealthy for the human body to inhale. This isn't corn; it's a drug, and at the end of the day it needs to be treated as such.

EDIT: By "issue" I meant the civil liberties violation, not the fact that it will fix the economy.
#15 Mar 28 2009, 1:43 pm
Good, Im glad, that is the point of the post is that im mad at people pretending this isnt a civil liberties issue and pretending it is an economic solution. People like Cavern, who I am dumbfounded that they actually believe legalizing weed would have a significant impact on the economy.

This site : http://economics.about.com/od/incometaxestaxcuts/a/ marijuana.htm Claims Canada could gain 2 billion a year off tax on Marijuana and I assume those estimates are pretty gracious, lets say America scaled the same way (even though it wouldnt), America is something to the order of 10 times bigger. 20 billion dollars a year in theoretical optomistic tax revenue a year from weed? I doubt the government would get that much though, the site that I referenced assumed the government would take in the entire profit margin on weed sales, which isnt the case. The real reality of it would be something to the order of a small business tax rate, which could be depending on operations something more reasonably set at 15-35% of profit. Then there is the assumption of a punitive tax like cigarettes have, however these taxes would definately reduce demand so it becomes anybodys guess how much the government could get away with. Regardless your looking at something like maybe 5-10 billion in tax revenue a year if you give a nice estimate of realizable punitive and small business income taxes for weed per year in America. Then you talk about trillions of dollars of deficit in the budget, be real, a TRILLION, thats 1000 billion dollars per trillion of cummulative deficit. You think tax revenue from weed is anything but a drop in the bucket? Its not. The real impacting effect is increasing the marginal tax rate for the very wealthy which Obama plans to do, or you know restructure the health care industry.

Thats why those issues are taken seriously, because they are the big things that matter. The weed legalization and taxation people are simply arguing for civil liberty which I agree with, but when you lie and pretend your argument is about something else, people with a brain will just laugh at you.
#16 Mar 28 2009, 2:38 pm (Edited on Mar 29 2009, 10:03 am)
The deficit inherited at the start of this year was $1 300 000 000 000. It is expected to grow to $1 500 000 000 000 after Obama's attempts to fight the economic recession.

With the purely optimistic projection that government revenue generated from taxes on legalized drugs will match that of tobacco, these new taxes would generate about $16 000 000 000. That is less than 1.067% of the expected United States deficit. So yes, I agree that drugs cannot solve our economic problem.


However, I wasn't arguing that it would. I was arguing that the ban is funding crime, and that any moral degradation caused by legalizing drugs would be far outweighed by the lives saved.


(Edit: Testing comments for bugs :o)
#17 Mar 28 2009, 2:58 pm
Disturbed Puppy wrote:
Marijuana is not safe or healthy. It's a drug, and is unhealthy for the human body to inhale. This isn't corn; it's a drug, and at the end of the day it needs to be treated as such.


To be completely honest with you, I think stuffing your face with doughnuts or going to McDonald's is a lot more unhealthy than smoking marijuana.
#18 Mar 28 2009, 5:08 pm
Just a heads up, but allowing people to make their own drugs on their own property would hemorrhage every drug cartel in the world, causing drug related violence to hit nearly 0.
#19 Mar 28 2009, 6:04 pm
Cavern wrote:
To be completely honest with you, I think stuffing your face with doughnuts or going to McDonald's is a lot more unhealthy than smoking marijuana.

Ah, but is eating one doughnut more unhealthy than smoking a joint? When compared with even moderate amounts, it's obvious which is more unhealthy. America's Hubris regarding fatty foods doesn't play into that at all.
Page: 1 2