Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

How will a one man operation compete with marlboro suddenly importing cheaply made marijuana from tijuana?

Pretty easily since importing is still criminal and crossing state boarders is still illegal federally.

You do realize that states that have passed medicinal laws grow that medicinal weed in state right?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
How will a one man operation compete with marlboro suddenly importing cheaply made marijuana from tijuana?

if it is being grown for personal use then there is no competition for the grower.

I know, I just wanted to ryhme Marijuana with tijuana
But in reality, if big companies are able to grow marijuana, When/if it is 100% legal like cigarettes, it will force those small farms out of business or require them to sell even lower.

 Hulksmash wrote:
Pretty easily since importing is still criminal and crossing state boarders is still illegal federally.

You do realize that states that have passed medicinal laws grow that medicinal weed in state right?

I wqonder if the Zeta Cartel could sue under GATT violations for free trade...

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I'm moving home and opening up a monster truck food cart. It'll be called Monster Munchies and we'll do everything for your late night munchies. Cookies, Tacos, Pizza, breakfast cereal.

You know that was my idea...

Still great idea... try to live close to Boulder... aka, hippy town.

Nah, then I'd have to run those fethers over with my monster truck.

No. open a late night delivery service of chips, sooda and jelepenoo poppers

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

But in reality, if big companies are able to grow marijuana, When/if it is 100% legal like cigarettes, it will force those small farms out of business or require them to sell even lower.

There are still plenty of people paying more money for vegetables at local farmer's markets. There are still plenty of local family operated farms out there that are surviving despite Big Farm operations. Some people want to support a local business and know where their stuff comes from.

I wouldn't be surprised if there is a certain crossover between folks who smoke weed and folks who want locally farmed organic whatnots.

 CptJake wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
But the overall effect will still hammer illegal dealers. It may take a decade but your average pot smoker now might (i stress might) know where to find pot from someone other than their "local" guy. And they might, when the tax is high enough, go to their local guy to help them find a cheaper way of getting their stash. But 10 years from now when the next batch of kids that didn't grow up having to find dealers comes of age they won't turn anywhere but their local walmart (or equivelant) that sells weed.

It also depends on where you live in the US. Tobacco and Booze without a tax stamp in say Virginia is a heck of a lot more common than New York or California.

If there is still a huge market for untaxed cigarettes (and there is, there are estimates that half the cigarettes sold in NYC are bootlegged), which even taxed are a fraction of the cost of pot, how can you not expect the market for untaxed pot to flourish?

It would depend on the level of tax. If the tax is set at the right level, it will be more convenient to sell and buy legally taxed cannabis than bootleg stuff.

I suspect also that people smoke more cigarettes than would ever smoke joints because you can do it all day without getting bombed. Thus there is more of an incentive to save money on cigarettes.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I'm moving home and opening up a monster truck food cart. It'll be called Monster Munchies and we'll do everything for your late night munchies. Cookies, Tacos, Pizza, breakfast cereal.

You, sir, will be rich.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
But the overall effect will still hammer illegal dealers. It may take a decade but your average pot smoker now might (i stress might) know where to find pot from someone other than their "local" guy. And they might, when the tax is high enough, go to their local guy to help them find a cheaper way of getting their stash. But 10 years from now when the next batch of kids that didn't grow up having to find dealers comes of age they won't turn anywhere but their local walmart (or equivelant) that sells weed.

It also depends on where you live in the US. Tobacco and Booze without a tax stamp in say Virginia is a heck of a lot more common than New York or California.

If there is still a huge market for untaxed cigarettes (and there is, there are estimates that half the cigarettes sold in NYC are bootlegged), which even taxed are a fraction of the cost of pot, how can you not expect the market for untaxed pot to flourish?

It would depend on the level of tax. If the tax is set at the right level, it will be more convenient to sell and buy legally taxed cannabis than bootleg stuff.

I suspect also that people smoke more cigarettes than would ever smoke joints because you can do it all day without getting bombed. Thus there is more of an incentive to save money on cigarettes.

Your logic is flawed. If a carton of smokes costs me $50 and folks are willing to buy untaxed to save 5-10 bucks, but a ounce of good legal weed is $300 including a 25% tax, the quantity used makes no difference compared to the money saved by buying it on the black market. To save part of that 25% on the higher dollar amount (probably able to save 25-50 bucks per ounce) will be a big incentive.

Yes, a lot of folks will buy legal weed. Just as a lot of folks buy legal booze and cigs. The high tax rate ensures a booming black market though.

 Corpsesarefun wrote:
Weird that it wasn't taxed as soon as it was legalised.

As the article said, in order to levy new, or raise tax rates, the State Constitution requires all of those measures to go to public vote, so there would have been no way to write in a provision for the tax rates. My guess is that it was written in such a way to where it said that taxes would be raised against Marijuana, but that the rate would be decided at a later time.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I know, I just wanted to ryhme Marijuana with tijuana
But in reality, if big companies are able to grow marijuana, When/if it is 100% legal like cigarettes, it will force those small farms out of business or require them to sell even lower.

Probably not best to compare to cigarettes, because as a consumer product cigarettes are just freaking weird. Intense customer loyalty, over what are basically identical products.

Better to compare to booze, which maintains an industry with both major players and a large number of smaller operations. This is largely because consumers come in two types - the drink to get pissed variety (and so low cost, familiar brands are preferred) and connoisseurs who like to drink a wide range of different tasting beers (and so new brands and distinct flavours are preferred). This also sums up pot smokers in my experience, there's guys who just want to get baked, and there's guys who go in to incredible detail about different varieties.

So I suspect the same kind of industry will form. Large growers who sell the same steady product, at a competitive price, and a large number of boutique growers who offer a product that's a little bit different.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CptJake wrote:
Yes, a lot of folks will buy legal weed. Just as a lot of folks buy legal booze and cigs. The high tax rate ensures a booming black market though.

No, it ensures a black market. Whether that market is booming or not depends on the price, on the likelihood of getting caught, and on the culture of the industry. The price is hard to predict medium term - legalisation depresses prices but exactly how much for any specific product is anyone's guess. The likelihood of getting caught depends on the resources put in to catching black market operators and how effective those resources are - which again is anyone's guess. And the culture of the industry, having just been outlawed, is obviously going to be anti-establishment, but how much that changes and how quickly is, again, anyone's guess.

Anyone that can look at all those unknowns and just declare they know how large the blackmarket is going to be is just making wild eyed guesses.

Wow, are you stating 'booming' is an actual quantifier?

Seeing as it actually means flourishing or strong, and the basis/infrastructure for it already exist, coupled with the way similar commodities and tax rates have encouraged well, booming black markets, I would be willing to bet my statement is accurate.

 d-usa wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if there is a certain crossover between folks who smoke weed and folks who want locally farmed organic whatnots.

I think that demographic is called "Hippies"

Aka "the population of Boulder, CO"

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Aka "the population of Boulder, CO"

Yep...

At least they've got hot chicks there...

Meh. Not really. You want Aspen and the ski towns for cute girls in CO.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Meh. Not really. You want Aspen and the ski towns for cute girls in CO.

You are absolutely correct there.

It's just that I was recently at Boulder during the 4th of July... I was bumming around town and noticed that there's a party by the creek (forgot the name). SO. MANY. SCANTILY. CLAD. CHICKS.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if there is a certain crossover between folks who smoke weed and folks who want locally farmed organic whatnots.

I think that demographic is called "Hippies"

I didn't want to call people names

But I think it is fair to say that there is definitely a population there that is willing to pay more for "local" and "organic" weed.

Is organic weed made up 40% of spiders and insects?

 whembly wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Meh. Not really. You want Aspen and the ski towns for cute girls in CO.

You are absolutely correct there.

It's just that I was recently at Boulder during the 4th of July... I was bumming around town and noticed that there's a party by the creek (forgot the name). SO. MANY. SCANTILY. CLAD. CHICKS.

Probably the "Snow Bunnies" coming down of the mountain for a bit

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Nah, then I'd have to run those fethers over with my monster truck.

Just say that they brake checked you first They'll be too stoned to remember anyway

 d-usa wrote:
I didn't want to call people names

But I think it is fair to say that there is definitely a population there that is willing to pay more for "local" and "organic" weed.

I was just calling a spade a spade
But yeah, I can see a cross over in that market, and like the author of that article they can still pretend to be anti-establishment

 CptJake wrote:
Wow, are you stating 'booming' is an actual quantifier?

Seeing as it actually means flourishing or strong, and the basis/infrastructure for it already exist, coupled with the way similar commodities and tax rates have encouraged well, booming black markets, I would be willing to bet my statement is accurate.

Booming, or flourishing or strong, means growing. An expanding market, not one in decline. And whether the black market for tax dodging marijuana will grow or decline is dependant on a lot of things, most of which are close to completely unknown, which means we have to consider your statement as guesswork.

 sebster wrote:

Probably not best to compare to cigarettes, because as a consumer product cigarettes are just freaking weird. Intense customer loyalty, over what are basically identical products.

Lies ,all lies Sebster.

As an idiot who still smokes after trying to quit several times, I can tell you cigarettes are not identical. Think of them more as brands of tea , they are the same product yes but they all taste slightly different. Lipton has a dash of vanilla in it's tea making it taste totally different to other brands. Cigarettes are the same , that dash may be of formaldehyde , more salt peter or some other bizarre chemical combination but they do taste differently.

Now before you say this is brand loyalty changing my taste perception, I smoke roll your own cigarettes , occasionally when i smoke taylor made cigarettes (brands of which i am not "buying " in to) they do taste different to each other, this fact coupled with brands tasting different between countries ( Ie marlborough lights tasting different in asia) means the product is not identical.