If 420 is legalized 100% in november...

[boaz]

... As for the 80% price drop, that's pure speculation meant to scare growers into voting no...

you may be right and it looks like it may have worked for a while (see intrade chart below). I'm not sure when the RAND report came out exactly but I would bet :rastasmoke: it was right about the time the stock price dove on huge volume. I'm kicking myself for not buying at $25. I was going to hold out for $10. :stoned:

[middieman440]

most of the people say no legalize because then they cant make money anymore..im with legalizing it 100%,i dont use the plant for money because i dont like spending money to get it.....and with all the people saying 5x5 isnt enough room,please if you do things right you can get pounds off a plant outdoors in a 5x5 area if you grow the plant correctly,indoors 5x5 would be plenty as well.if you do a rotating harvest,its all crock to me how people say that its unfair to only allow 6 mature plants and all that stuff,stop being GREEDY and make money the real way,not everyone does it to make money but most do...and i know nobody needs more than an ounce of smoke a week,thats even alot to have,people need to stop being greedy,because all they have to do is,is just take it away completely medical and all,then be back to square 1...STOP BEING GREEDY people and you might see that it works out better......

buy who am i to say anything im not smart im just dumb,and think to much before i act....but oh well im not greedy i take what i can get and go on my way stress free...

[OhNoYaDont]

Not just growers either. We should all be scared. Vote no to MORE government control.

And, it has nothing to do with greed. It has to do with FREEDOM and CAPITALISM. You wanna work for free - go right ahead. You have every right to live like a monk and give away your hard work.

And I should have the right to CHARGE whatever the markeplace with bear for MY hard work. That is not greed my friend. That is what BUILT THIS COUNTRY.

Profit is not a dirty word - not yet.

Viva la capitalism. Live long AND PROSPER.

[disoBAYish]

I like it the way it is. For medical use only. I fear that coorperate product will be inferior, and Marijuana usage will loose its rebellious edge.

[OhNoYaDont]

I like it the way it is. For medical use only. I fear that coorperate product will be inferior, and Marijuana usage will loose its rebellious edge.

Sure it will. Right now is JUST like when prohibition ended a hundred or so years ago - and liquor became legal. Same thing. Things will change - they always do.

BUT, that being said, there will still be mom n pop growers, just like there are small wineries all up and down the Napa Valley. There will always be people who are willing and able to pay for quality. Sure, you can buy a gallon of Dago Red for $3.00 - or you can spend $100 on a fifth of 1992 Pinot from Beauliu Vineyards. Yum. A crisp cold Liebfrau Milch, with all the apple scents on a warm afternoon. Makes my mouth water.

Unless, of course, this new law passes and is enforced just exactly the way it is written. In that case, the most anyone can grow will be 25 sq ft and the gov't will have a monopoly. Imagine if only the feds could make Jack Daniels. Ugh.

It's a brave new world.
Is anyone here old enough to remember when the US was a free country?

[blowin]

If legalization does happen.... Will it affect the patients who follow prop 415 an d sb420. And yea everyone will grow crap

[boaz]

If legalization does happen.... Will it affect the patients who follow prop 215 and sb420. ...

xlent question. No, Prop 215 is the law of the land and will remain that way irrespective of Prop 19. It is important to point out that the right to have a 25 sf garden space that will be given to all adult Californian's if Prop 19 passes has NO effect on the size of your garden you are allowed to grow for medical reason. As the California Supreme Court recently ruled, THE ONLY thing that can limit the size of a medical garden is the patient's medical need.

But that said, I have a suggestion for the Cal Legislature if Prop 19 does pass . . . immediately amend it to read about 200 sf or more. This would much better reflect the true spirit and goals of this peoples prop. :twocents:

[OhNoYaDont]

I went to a City Council meeting yesterday in Redding, CA. They discussed this initiative at length.

One of the things that struck me was the Chief of Police, Chief Hansen, making the statement that "This is a very poorly written law. Just like the medical use law, it will take a decade of arrests and lawsuits until it is clearly defined. Who here wants to be the first to test this law? Who here has $50,000 for their defense? I have no problem complying with the law, but your interpretation (pointing to the pot activists in the audience) and HIS interpretation (pointing to the city attorney) may be quite different - and we (the city and the citizen) are going to spend a lot of money to get a judge to say what is what. After this law passes, someone here plant a 5 by 5 garden without a doctors recommendation and we will give it a go. Who's first?"

He went on to explain that, yes, no matter what this law does, it does NOT affect the medical use laws. It is in ADDITION to them.

BTW: in Chief Hansens favor, I will say that he is a very honorable person. He treats dispensories and their operators, and the patients with the greatest of respect. His is helpful in assisting them, and growers, to comply with the law. Anyone can call his office with a question and they will give their assistance to help with compliance. Chief Hansen is not interested in busting anyones chops, he is just trying to do his job.


Also, as a post script ... WHY WASN'T THERE TWO THOUSAND PEOPLE at the council meeting? WTF is UP with you bunch of babbling pot heads? You want your RIGHTS, but you are too stoned to get up off the couch and go to a public hearing about it? Shame on you. Everyone in Shasta County that reads these words should be ashamed of themselves.

Twist another one up and bitch about how the gov't is treading on you. They do it because YOU LET THEM. And, you deserve it.

[VapedG13]

makes you wonder bros....:wtf: Its all about the $$$$

Oakland's pot dreams could burst
By Cecily Burt
Oakland Tribune
Posted: 08/01/2010 12:01:00 AM PDT
Updated: 08/02/2010 10:44:55 AM PDT


OAKLAND â?? Oakland rushed last week to raise medical cannabis business taxes and to be the first city in the nation to legitimize industrial-sized pot production. The cash-starved city is hoping to reap millions of dollars in tax revenues from medical cannabis businesses while positioning itself to capitalize on the explosion of recreational pot sales should state voters go that way in November.

But is it just a pipe dream? No one really knows whether Oakland will find that pot of gold in the cannabis industry. Growers and dispensaries are making money, to be sure, and the city wants its share. But competition, legal risks and the unknown economic effects from potential legalization make the sure bet anything but.

California voters in 1996 overwhelmingly passed Proposition 215, the so-called Compassionate Use Act, which decriminalized medicinal use of marijuana. Dispensaries popped up almost overnight, supplied by a cottage industry of growers selling pounds of pot for $2,500 to $3,500, tax-free. Retail prices are double that, but not enough to stop the flood of patients willing to spend more than $300 an ounce for high-grade marijuana.

The estimated value of California's pot crop is $13.8 billion, according to an analysis for California NORML, a nonprofit organization devoted to marijuana reform. About 3 million people in the state use marijuana, medical and recreational, and consume an estimated 1 million pounds a year.

Oakland's


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
four medical marijuana dispensaries do their share, supplying patients with 6,000 pounds of pot worth $28 million last year. The city is asking voters to raise business taxes on medical marijuana sales to 5 percent, a rate that dispensaries, patients and small growers warn will drive them out of Oakland and into neighboring communities with lower tax rates or no taxes at all.

The four new industrial-sized farms the city plans to license in January should do well, given the growing demand for medical marijuana across the state. But the ventures are not without risk. State law allows medical marijuana cultivation by collectives of patients and caregivers, with no profiteering.

Although the Obama administration has pledged a hands-off approach to honor states' laws, several experts warn that the federal government may not be able to ignore commercial-sized growing and manufacturing plants, which are not allowed under current state law.

That is a concern expressed by Oakland Councilmember Nancy Nadel, who sees pros and cons in the plan and worries about excluding small growers. "I was willing to go along with some large growers, but is this an invitation to federal attention? It puts a lot of product in one space, so if there is a fire, or theft, or mold, you could impact the availability of product to the patients," Nadel said.

New tax revenue

Still, it's easy to see why the City Council majority backs the concept of large indoor farms. Regulating medical marijuana production in modern facilities located in industrial areas should ensure a reliable, consistent supply of high-grade marijuana. It conceivably should cut down on the hundreds of dangerous, illegal grow houses spread around Oakland, especially if the huge growers can offer lower wholesale prices. It also makes it easier for the city to track the money.

Perhaps the most convincing argument arrived in a report commissioned by Jeff Wilcox, a retired contractor who first approached city leaders about the commercial grow idea. His proposal for a 100,000-square-foot AgraMed cultivation facility would produce 21,000 pounds of pot with a wholesale value of $60 million. That translates into $3 million in new tax revenue for the city and 300 to 400 jobs for Bay Area residents â?? from just one business.

That's on top of the revenue the city will get from its four dispensaries. If sales remain static, the city stands to gain another $1.4 million.

Dale Gieringer, director of California NORML, says Oakland is smart to get ahead of the curve, and it could gain millions in new tax revenue if the city's sales and production estimates pan out. But setting too high of a tax rate could backfire initially, and he thinks that establishing the large-scale production facilities will be neither quick nor problem-free.

"I think there is a risk here on jumping ahead on this tax on medical marijuana," Gieringer said. "San Francisco doesn't have a tax. At 5 percent, this gives other places an advantage. Oakland could be in danger of killing the goose that lays the golden egg. Patients will not go to Oakland if they can go to San Francisco and get it cheaper."

Oakland might have been the first to realize the revenue benefits of taxing medical marijuana businesses, but several other economically strapped municipalities are following its lead. San Jose, Richmond and others are scrambling to place similar tax measures on the November ballot. Berkeley is asking voters to raise cannabis tax rates as well as allow up to six commercial cultivation facilities.

Oakland's four proposed cultivation permits are intended for medicinal production only â?? for now. The proposal also lays the framework should Proposition 19 pass in November, legalizing recreational use of pot for adults 21 and older. The city is asking voters in November to set the business tax rate for recreational sales at a whopping 10 percent.

But will it be a bonanza or bust?

Legalized pot

According to a RAND Corp. study released this month, legalization could boost the number of pot smokers and drive down the pretax price of an ounce of pot by as much as 80 percent. The authors warn that it potentially could fuel problems with smuggling as dealers from other states rush to buy low-cost cannabis in California.

"Legalization would drive the price so low that even if taxes are high, marijuana coming from California would still be cheaper than a lot of places in the country," said Beau Kilmer, lead author of the study and co-director of the Drug Policy Research Center. "If dealers come here to buy several pounds, pay the taxes and then smuggle it out, they would still make money."

Even with hefty state or local taxes added on, consumers likely would pay hundreds of dollars less than they do now. That's good news for patients who rely on the herb to ease their pain, control their nausea or boost their appetite, but it could put a huge dent in the amount of tax revenue the city collects from its medical marijuana dispensaries.

If the wholesale price of medical marijuana drops to $800 a pound, a scenario Wilcox said could happen, the city's cut would drop to $1.35 million.

"Right now there's an 85 percent profit margin (enjoyed by the growers and dispensaries), and that's too high, in my opinion," Wilcox said. "If you can grow for $400 and sell it $800 wholesale, people will be doing just hunky-dory."

Oakland Councilmember Desley Brooks said she's not pinning all her expectations on legalization, especially when there is plenty of revenue to be had from the medical cannabis industry.

"There's a lot of money in that industry and not a lot of regulation," she said.

Kilmer said his work focused on what might happen if marijuana were legalized in California. The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act 2010 ballot initiative would allow people 21 and older to possess, grow or transport small amounts of pot for personal use. Cities and counties could choose whether to regulate and tax the commercial cultivation and sales of marijuana or to keep such activities illegal.

"The impacts of legalization on medical marijuana is unknown," Kilmer said. "But it will be interesting to see what happens in Oakland because it's unclear what the feds will do" about the commercial growers.

Mark Kleiman, a UCLA professor of public policy who has written extensively on the topic, believes cities such as Oakland that are hoping to cash in on medical marijuana, and legalization if it happens, should try to see through the dollar signs to the possible pitfalls.

"Yes, (Oakland is) in for a big letdown," he said. "Competition among growers and among jurisdictions would drive legal prices through the floor, leaving California with a large (illegal) export trade to the rest of the country and not much revenue. The feds wouldn't hold still for it and would crack down."

BALLOT INITIATIVES
Oakland: 5 percent tax on medical cannabis dispensaries and cultivation facilities, 10 percent for recreational production and sales.
Berkeley: 2.5 percent for medical marijuana,
10 percent recreational.
Sacramento: 4 percent medical marijuana, 10 percent recreational.
Richmond: 5 percent medical marijuana,
5 percent recreational.
San Jose: 10 percent medical marijuana.*
Long beach: 5 percent medical marijuana, 10 percent recreational.
Stockton: 2.5 percent medical marijuana, 10 percent recreational
* Proposed

[OhNoYaDont]

OF COURSE it's about the money! It has ALWAYS been about the money. I'm surprized that you are surprized.

There is a HUGE industry built around the "war on drugs". There has been BILLIONS spent on that "war". Think about who makes money from that war: cops, pilots, jailers, lawyers, judges, balliffs, court reporters. The company that maintains the helicopters, fuels the helicopters, the cooks that cook for the crews that do raids, on and on and on. The guy that mops the floors in the jails, on and on and on. BILLION$.

Now, that money is looking for another home. That home is in the production and supply side. Viva la capitalism. If the heli pilot can't fly cops around, he will fly product out for the legal producers. If the guard doesn't have people to guard who got caught with an oz - he will guard the 25,000 plant grow that RJ Reynolds just started up in the mountains.

Is that wrong? Should EVERYONE be sucking on the government tit? Or is it ok if I work hard and make lots of money and pay my taxes so that OTHERS can suck on the government tit?

And, we have a Politbreau Councilwoman from the Peoples Republic of Berkeley who thinks that there is "too much profit" in the business. Who gives a shit what she thinks. I think that SHE makes too much - so what? So, the gov't will see to it that private business isn't TOO profitable. Because we all know that PROFIT IS EVIL, right Comrade Councilwoman?

Someone much smarter than me once said: "A people gets the government they deserve." We deserve what we are about to get. When things really go to hell and the Berkeley Gestapo is kicking in your door because you don't have a quarter million dollar permit to grow, remember - you let it happen. You deserve it.