StonerTaz

O.K. who here thinks that if they do legal Marijuana that they should make it 21 and over? also how much tax should they add to sales of marijuana cigarettes? Yes I'm talking about AB 390. . . . . Now true I do support the thought of legalizing it but I think the goverment should step in and regulate just how much tax they can add to the sell of legal marijuana.....As introduced, Ammiano’s measure would allow for the licensed production and sale of cannabis to consumers age 21 and over. Licensed cultivators would pay an excise tax of $50 per ounce of cannabis. In addition, the proposal would impose a sales tax on commercial sales. (Ammiano’s proposal would not affect the state’s medical marijuana law, allowing patients and caregivers to grow their own medicine.)

come on let's be reasonable here that along would drive up prices higher then normal he Is talking about the growers that sell medicinal marijuana so patients have the medicine they need
Currently, tens of millions of dollars are paid annually in state and local taxes by licensed distributors of medical marijuana. However, these sales only represent a fraction of the overall statewide marijuana market. “The millions of dollars raised each on the sales of medicinal cannabis is only the tip of the iceberg,” Gieringer said. “Kudos to Assemblyman Ammiano for proposing a path-breaking bill that would benefit our economy, safety and freedom by making marijuana a winning proposition for California.”

True the whole nation is feeling the economical crunch and Marijuana is the cash crop in california as well as alot of other states but I would think that california could think of what else they can tax and lower the tax rate for marijuana.

troublemaker_42

It costs less than 20 bucks,on average to produce an oz of marijuana from some estimates. The ONLY reason people pay up to and beyond 400 bucks an oz is because of marijuana's illegal status. Even a tax of $50 an oz wouldn't drive prices higher than the current market. Even at a price of $150 per oz, the grower would be able to make a profit of 80 dollars an oz. Considering thats 4x what it cost to produce it, I think thats fair, and we would STILL be getting high qaulity weed for $250 LESS than current market conditions dictate. I have no problem paying the taxes on my weed if it were legal, because I'd still be saving money in the long run, not only on marijuana itself, but likley on legal fees and whatnot as well, as it seems if you smoke long enough, you're bound to get busted eventually. I disagree with you on almost all counts here.

__________________
Ted Nugent: "To my mind it is wholly irresponsible to go into the world incapable of preventing violence, injury, crime, and death. How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic."


If total government control equals safety, why are prisons so dangerous?

Buzzby

I do.

$50/ounce sounds about right.

Huh? Doesn't the government always set the tax rates on various things?

If marijuana were to be sold at a reasonable profit with a $50 tax on each ounce it would cost less than half what it does today on the black market and dispensaries. He is specifically not talking about growers of medical marijuana, which would be excluded from the tax.

Considering that raising taxes for the deficit-strapped state of California would be a prime motivator to get legislators to vote for the bill, lowering the taxes would just make it that less likely to pass.

__________________

StonerTaz

OK point proven buzzby I see booth ur view point and troublemakers point I was just concerned about the licensed growers for medicinal marijuana because the way the law reads it is a little ambigious about growers of medicinal marijuana which is why I started this thread now if ur average joe blow was the grower then yeah but a 50 dollar tax on every oz he produces but for the lic. growers of medical I think they should get a break is all I'm saying

Zocalo

Has the U.S not learned from the multiple death of teens that having shit over 21 does NOT work? Make it 18, and legalize drinking at 18 too, it's better this way, plus, I know it won't happen but I'll be in the US nxt year and I'll be 19 at most, so...not cool..

__________________

DroJuggalo

listen. im under 21. I think it should be that way, 21 and over. to many stupid people have slow developing brains.
and the tax. i would STILL agree if it was more than 50$ p / oz because I'm not going to prison. and "if" MJ does become legal, and i think we have a little while before it does, prices will be down by the time your 21 n hopefully most of the bullshit legal issues would be worked through. prices too. n stains.mmmm.

StonerTaz

lowering the age is not the best way to help the cause because unfortunetly it has been scienetificly proven that the male brain is not fully devoloped until they reach low to mid 20's so there fore is the age is lowered we would see a higher death rate then we do now.

hopefully if what Howard says is true I think that within the next 2-3 years all 50 states will have pot legal I just think they should lower the tax to 40 rather then 50 is all

LowRider

i can only pray the bible belt would open its eye and smell the sweet goddess

Wickedshot

Legal Ages for things is an imperfect system. Not saying removing them is necessarily wise though.

But if children were able to learn to drink alcohol or drive at a young age under supervision they might learn to do both responsibly.
Instead they turn 16 or 21 and do them in excess because they have been waiting for such and feel entitled to it even in excess. Or do it before then and have to hide it since they shouldn't be doing it.
But everyone wants their kids to be the governments responsibilities heh. It's a complicated issue, but I think parents should be responsible for such.

As for the legal age for marijuana, hey I'm over 21 so who cares?! Ultimately I don't see a need to smoke before you're 21, but I don't see the harm either. Chocolate, sugar, and Caffeine affect the brain too, lack of smoking at a young age might make them miss out on a key developmental stage for all we know. Marijuana has been around for ages, whos to say its not supposed to be an integral part of our mental development? Maybe teenage angst is caused by a lack of the calming effects of marijuana heh. Maybe we have so much war because everyone is pissed off because they lacked marijuana to calm them down heh.

SleepyJohn

I've said it before. They give heavy drugs,and, pain modifiers, on babies, with Leukeamea,children with cancer. The age limit on pharmasuticals is quite precise about this. Age limitation for critical,or fatal deseases, are worked out by weigh of patient,and known indications of the chemical/substance that is to be taken. Too bad the researchers,scientists,and pharmacologists don't get enough marijuana, of decent stability of streagth. They Must be allowed to study. Think what they could find!