Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

but prostitution and marijuana are not?

Seems to me they're all in the same class...they are vices.

I don't consider any of them vices if they're kept under control.

Personally I wish they would legalize marijuana, just so potheads would need to find something knew to talk about. The only group of people in the world as sanctimonious and annoying as vegans.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't consider any of them vices if they're kept under control.

Well, neither do I really but why society's totally different attitudes towards them?

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Well, neither do I really but why society's totally different attitudes towards them?
prostitution has a long history, and i don't really know it in much detail.

Marijuana is easy; preferred drug of anti-government types, while alcohol = preferred drug of conservative "red blooded americans". Obviously no lobby wants to distance themselves from the later perception.

They're not acceptable or legal because no one wants to be the one to start that shitstorm. But give us about 30 years to kill off the remaining Boomers, and then we'll talk.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Personally I wish they would legalize marijuana, just so potheads would need to find something knew to talk about. The only group of people in the world as sanctimonious and annoying as vegans. why do potheads find it necessary to talk about smoking 24/7?
its annoying & very boring conversation

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Personally I wish they would legalize marijuana, just so potheads would need to find something knew to talk about. The only group of people in the world as sanctimonious and annoying as vegans.



I dont think it's boring

I actually asked Obama on Youtube about it, but he never answered.

Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
why do potheads find it necessary to talk about smoking 24/7?
its annoying & very boring conversation

Because they want it legalized, obviously. I very much doubt they care that you find it boring. Persistence is a virtue. Jesus practised it.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't consider any of them vices if they're kept under control.

up

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Well, neither do I really but why society's totally different attitudes towards them?

It's due to the perpetuation of social norms in a social species which grew from self-interested people seeking multiple forms of control.




Also, potheads want to talk about legalizing MJ for the same reason that a sculptor talks about art a lot: that's their main interest/hobby/pastime.

Originally posted by Super Marie 64
Persistence is a virtue. Jesus practised it.


As do all good stalkers.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
As do all good stalkers.

It was a satire of "patience is a virtue", but you're right, not that I see your point. I can sense a fallacy sneaking up though. My point was, though, that Jesus don't do vices.

Onto the topic: There's no real logic in the listed being allowed when the other listed aren't. I would reverse the list anyday. Yes to prostitution and marijuana (but not at work, like with alcohole) and no to alcohol and gambling. I think society would be far healthier.

They are not really acceptable there are alot of people who send those kinds to rehaps and such.And if we did not have any beer or places to Gamble we would not have the promblems we have now.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
but prostitution and marijuana are not?

Seems to me they're all in the same class...they are vices.

Cause people are stupid.

Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
why do potheads find it necessary to talk about smoking 24/7?
its annoying & very boring conversation
I don't drink and I find people comparing beer/wine annoying and boring. I don't spend my time bitching about it and calling them alcoholics though.

Originally posted by King Kandy
prostitution has a long history, and i don't really know it in much detail.

Marijuana is easy; preferred drug of anti-government types, while alcohol = preferred drug of conservative "red blooded americans". Obviously no lobby wants to distance themselves from the later perception.
It's actually an incredibly rich story. There are some good programs on the History Channel that at least partially center on it.

My favorite Prostitution footnote is the account of the Roman Empress Valeria Messilana who challenged one of the most illustrious prostitutes in Rome to a for lack of a better word Whoreoff and won.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't drink and I find people comparing beer/wine annoying and boring. I don't spend my time bitching about it and calling them alcoholics though. you implying im bitching & name calling?

Govenment makes lots of money on the tax of alchohol and gambling

Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
you implying im bitching & name calling?

Yes, that's one interpretation. Technically, you insulted him first. He could also just mean that that is not something he gripes about and that's it.

Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
you implying im bitching & name calling?
Um, yes, that's exactly what you were doing.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Um, yes, that's exactly what you were doing. what im my post seems like im bitching? and name calling? LOL WTF are you reading?

Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
why do potheads
Namecalling.

Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
find it necessary to talk about smoking 24/7?
its annoying & very boring conversation
Bitching.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Namecalling.


Bitching. well im sorry you feel that way

1. if you smoke i call you a pothead nothing insulating about it...

2. im asking.

i have friends who open conversations about weed, work it into the conversation ,no matter the subject, & close the conversation with how they plan on getting high later... to me thats annoying

now the real question is why you being a sore bytch on her period over simple stuff?

Didn't they TRY to outlaw alcohol a while ago? Then everyone got all weepy about it, and then they got violent about it, and the government rolled over and it's legal again.

I don't know if that's actually how it happened, but I think it's something like that.

The difference is people who smoke pot don't have enough motivation or energy to start riots and burn crap down. The opposite is true of people who drink alcohol.

Originally posted by TacDavey
Didn't they TRY to outlaw alcohol a while ago? Then everyone got all weepy about it, and then they got violent about it, and the government rolled over and it's legal again.

I don't know if that's actually how it happened, but I think it's something like that.

The difference is people who smoke pot don't have enough motivation or energy to start riots and burn crap down. The opposite is true of people who drink alcohol.
Since the government makes lots of money off of it, now its ok to be a workable person that happens to gamble and drink like a fish..has long as you dont drink and drive and own your own car while doing so..dam lawyers make money too!

Originally posted by TacDavey
Didn't they TRY to outlaw alcohol a while ago? Then everyone got all weepy about it, and then they got violent about it, and the government rolled over and it's legal again.

I don't know if that's actually how it happened, but I think it's something like that.

Gov't outlaws alcohol. Alcohol use doesn't change but organized crime becomes responsible for distribution. Gov't forced to wage "war" in order to keep things under control. Combination of expense and negative public opinion collapse the whole thing. Taxation on legal alcohol brings in funds to the gov't.

Right now with most drugs we're at the "organized crime funds itself using the stuff and kills countless people while gov't wastes money trying to bring things under control and public opinion gradually heads in favor of legalization".

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Gov't outlaws alcohol. Alcohol use doesn't change but organized crime becomes responsible for distribution. Gov't forced to wage "war" in order to keep things under control. Combination of expense and negative public opinion collapse the whole thing. Taxation on legal alcohol brings in funds to the gov't.

Right now with most drugs we're at the "organized crime funds itself using the stuff and kills countless people while gov't wastes money trying to bring things under control and public opinion gradually heads in favor of legalization".

I don't see any problem with legalizing marijuana. Not every drug should be legalized, though.

Originally posted by skekUng
Should pot become legal, it will be taxed. The real problem they're having with legalizing it, is that unlike tobbacco, pot requires much less curing and processing before it can be consumed. This is why they've tiptoed around in most cases and made medical marijuana legal or legalizing small amounts of pot. It's an experiment to see how well the substance can be controlled.

by this logic, the farm lobby would have outlawed backyard gardens years ago

Originally posted by inimalist
by this logic, the farm lobby would have outlawed backyard gardens years ago

However, what is taxed higher? Food, or cigarettes and alcohol? It is certainly directly related to the motivation for the OPs topic. There are on the books what are called vice taxes.

Well, come on now. Most people eat vegetables, but most vegetable eaters can't or won't go out and build a garden that can sustain their vegetable needs, be it laziness, lack of space and/or knowledge.

Marijuana on the other hand is easy to grow; I've seen marijuana-smokers supply themselves(and others) with just a couple hundred dollars worth of hydroponics and a few plants in a closet. Marijuans becomes legal, set-ups like these will spring up in many househoulds and buying from your neighbors will be better than buying marijuana cigarettes at the store, no taxes and probably higher quality.

There's some company that converts large portable storage units (about large enough to store two cars) into self-contained-solar -powered-marijuana-growing units.

Originally posted by skekUng
However, what is taxed higher? Food, or cigarettes and alcohol? It is certainly directly related to the motivation for the OPs topic. There are on the books what are called vice taxes.

thats all fine, I'm more pointing out that if the ability for someone to produce something at home cheaper and easier than buying the finished product at the store were grounds for it to be made illegal, than there would be far less things you would be able to grow in your home garden anyways.

However, I can't imagine the number of people who grow pot for personal use is going to increase if it is made legal, and most consumers are probably still just going to want to grab their own already bagged drugs. Growing pot would become no easier or cheaper if weed were legalized, and the risk for people growing small quantities is incredibly low already. I know people who don't grow because of lack of know-how or resources, I don't know anyone who doesn't grow because it is illegal...

Additionally, corporations will be able to hire the best growers, provide the best growing conditions, and mass produce the product to drive down the prices, such that only a very select few would be able to compete with the quality and price of the product they were creating. Home-grown might be more popular than moonshining, but frankly, there is still a ridiculously huge market of people who have no interest in gardening that still want to get high.

Originally posted by Robtard
Well, come on now. Most people eat vegetables, but most vegetable eaters can't or won't go out and build a garden that can sustain their vegetable needs, be it laziness, lack of space and/or knowledge.

Marijuana on the other hand is easy to grow; I've seen marijuana-smokers supply themselves(and others) with just a couple hundred dollars worth of hydroponics and a few plants in a closet. Marijuans becomes legal, set-ups like these will spring up in many househoulds and buying from your neighbors will be better than buying marijuana cigarettes at the store, no taxes and probably higher quality.

There's some company that converts large portable storage units (about large enough to store two cars) into self-contained-solar -powered-marijuana-growing units.

marijuana requires a fair bit of know-how and care to grow properly...

how many garden variety vegetables do you need to sex to prevent ruining the crop? what kind of nutrient cycles do you need to grow tomatoes? true, you probably cant provide your entire vegetable diet with a home garden, but most people don't even have a garden in the first place.

Originally posted by inimalist
thats all fine, I'm more pointing out that if the ability for someone to produce something at home cheaper and easier than buying the finished product at the store were grounds for it to be made illegal, than there would be far less things you would be able to grow in your home garden anyways.

However, I can't imagine the number of people who grow pot for personal use is going to increase if it is made legal, and most consumers are probably still just going to want to grab their own already bagged drugs. Growing pot would become no easier or cheaper if weed were legalized, and the risk for people growing small quantities is incredibly low already. I know people who don't grow because of lack of know-how or resources, I don't know anyone who doesn't grow because it is illegal...

Additionally, corporations will be able to hire the best growers, provide the best growing conditions, and mass produce the product to drive down the prices, such that only a very select few would be able to compete with the quality and price of the product they were creating. Home-grown might be more popular than moonshining, but frankly, there is still a ridiculously huge market of people who have no interest in gardening that still want to get high.

As a pot smoker, I can assure you I would grow my own. However, I understand that I do not speak for everyone. The free market maximized output and quality issue the corporate alternative would supply is easy to subvert given examples like Robtards. A single well-maintained plant could yeild enough pot for an entire season, depending on the rate at which a person consumed it. There are people in Humboldt County, California, that are doing exactly what Robtard mentioned, right now. For that quality to be acheived so easily and without the taxes slapped on it, it's a no brainer. The biggest issues with growing your own pot is getting caught. You have to keep the plants hidden or watch your electricity consumption and the smell of budding plants, etc. This is much different than growing your own vegetable, which don't yeild as much and are consumed at a higher rate (assumption -given that most people in America would smoke pot before they eat a vegetable)

I don't argue that there are a lot of people interested less in gardening than they are in just getting high. It is one reason there's so much success in mass tobbacco farming, aside from just the curing and taxes. This is why illegal pot is expensive, because you're basically applying the rule of supply and demand on a product that isn't mass produced to meet that demand, relatively.

I absolutely yeild to your point when it comes to rolling a joint, though. That is the biggest pain in the ass. But, if you apply your idea that people don't grow their own vegetables to the pot situation, then it would also be true in buying taxed, mass-produced pot. If you don't smoke cigarettes, then you likely won't be buying them from an independant farmer or a corporate farmer.

Originally posted by skekUng
As a pot smoker, I can assure you I would grow my own.

how is the law preventing you?

Originally posted by inimalist
marijuana requires a fair bit of know-how and care to grow properly..

When I was younger, I grew it. Pot-planted the seeds, took the seedlings and replanted them in different places and let nature do the rest. I don't profess to be a wizard with hydroponics, but the old fashiooned way worked fine for me. It was just as good as the stuff I bought off the streets, and actually tasted better.

Perhaps you are making this more scientific than it needs to be.

Originally posted by inimalist
how is the law preventing you?

I have a significant other than is terrified of it because it is illegal. Besides, having it in your posession is much different than growing it when it is illegal, as under the law it represents two different levels of intent. Plain and simple. We grow vegetable, though. But, given our limited space and the needed amount of vegetables over the course of the year, it is more for fun than to save money or going organic.

Originally posted by inimalist
marijuana requires a fair bit of know-how and care to grow properly...

how many garden variety vegetables do you need to sex to prevent ruining the crop? what kind of nutrient cycles do you need to grow tomatoes? true, you probably cant provide your entire vegetable diet with a home garden, but most people don't even have a garden in the first place.

These guys I knew were far from being geniuses and this was before the days of Google and Youtube. As I said, closet+lights, they did well for their own needs.

Originally posted by skekUng
When I was younger, I grew it. Pot-planted the seeds, took the seedlings and replanted them in different places and let nature do the rest. I don't profess to be a wizard with hydroponics, but the old fashiooned way worked fine for me. It was just as good as the stuff I bought off the streets, and actually tasted better.

Perhaps you are making this more scientific than it needs to be.

ya, but the quality of the stuff that corporations would be able to produce, for fairly cheap, would be far above what is generally available on the street, and I would assume they can provide it for much less than 1000 a qp

I don't think it is "over-sciencing" something to say pot requires more care than tomatoes. Especially the people who freak out over this stuff. The top grade pot is grown with fairly specific nutrient cycles and lighting, etc, that I have never heard of in relation to vegetables.

Originally posted by skekUng
I have a significant other than is terrified of it because it is illegal. Besides, having it in your posession is much different than growing it when it is illegal, as under the law it represents two different levels of intent. Plain and simple. We grow vegetable, though. But, given our limited space and the needed amount of vegetables over the course of the year, it is more for fun than to save money or going organic.

fair enough.

you would agree that, for personal consumption, growing is a very low risk operation?

Originally posted by Robtard
These guys I knew were far from being geniuses and this was before the days of Google and Youtube. As I said, closet+lights, they did well for their own needs.

yes, and the difference would be the same as between crap you brewed in some barrel in your basement and professionally brewed beer

sure, there might be the odd person who can grow at the same quality as the corporations, but I have trouble believing most people would go with closet buds when high grade varieties are available for reasonable prices

Originally posted by inimalist
ya, but the quality of the stuff that corporations would be able to produce, for fairly cheap, would be far above what is generally available on the street, and I would assume they can provide it for much less than 1000 a qp

I don't think it is "over-sciencing" something to say pot requires more care than tomatoes. Especially the people who freak out over this stuff. The top grade pot is grown with fairly specific nutrient cycles and lighting, etc, that I have never heard of in relation to vegetables.



fair enough.

you would agree that, for personal consumption, growing is a very low risk operation?

Quality is subjective, and I don't think most people who smoke pot can afford the prices you mentioned, unless they were rich -and many are- in which case they just grow their own a lot of the time. In that sense, I'm sure it's a lot like a fine wine. Most people can't afford it, so they never develop a sophisticated appreciation for it. I have tried some very expensive reefer in the past, but the price always seemed to outweigh the benefits. Point being, I think people would certainly be just as happy with the same quality marijuana they are already buying off the street. Enough, in fact, to make the entire proposal of feasibly taxing it a questionable one.

As for the ease of growing it, I never really had any problems with it. I don't say that to poopoo your perspective, it is simply my experience with the plant. I have a hell of a lot more trouble with tomatoes than I did with pot.

For personal consumption I think it is feasible. Low risk is also not a word I would use, though. The potential risk is great. I think it all depends on your geography. The potential risk is far less for those in more rural areas than it would be for those in urban areas, certainly.

Originally posted by skekUng
Quality is subjective, and I don't think most people who smoke pot can afford the prices you mentioned, unless they were rich -and many are- in which case they just grow their own a lot of the time. In that sense, I'm sure it's a lot like a fine wine. Most people can't afford it, so they never develop a sophisticated appreciation for it. I have tried some very expensive reefer in the past, but the price always seemed to outweigh the benefits. Point being, I think people would certainly be just as happy with the same quality marijuana they are already buying off the street. Enough, in fact, to make the entire proposal of feasibly taxing it a questionable one.


fair enough, it must be a difference between our circles, as most people I know would pay more for quality, and none of us are rich.

EDIT: like, I would grow my own, but its a financial thing for me. I can't afford the proper grow boxes and things that provide proper nutrient, light and stress cycles. I honestly think it would be a waste of time to grow low quality stuff in my closet... /shrug

Originally posted by inimalist
when high grade varieties are available for reasonable prices

And that is where I'm saying the taxation issue would come into play.

Also, I forgot to address your statement about nutrient cycles and lighting. There was a recent issue of National Geographic that had an article on how that is becoming more and more prevelent in standard vegetable farming. I wish I could recall the issue, but I'm worried that, given the amount of them I own, I may have only recently read one that I've had for years.

Originally posted by skekUng
And that is where I'm saying the taxation issue would come into play.

Also, I forgot to address your statement about nutrient cycles and lighting. There was a recent issue of National Geographic that had an article on how that is becoming more and more prevelent in standard vegetable farming. I wish I could recall the issue, but I'm worried that, given the amount of them I own, I may have only recently read one that I've had for years.

oh, totally, I'm sure it would be the same, and I tend to think such growing methods favor corporate farming in terms of who can do it best for less.

Originally posted by inimalist
fair enough, it must be a difference between our circles, as most people I know would pay more for quality, and none of us are rich.

EDIT: like, I would grow my own, but its a financial thing for me. I can't afford the proper grow boxes and things that provide proper nutrient, light and stress cycles. I honestly think it would be a waste of time to grow low quality stuff in my closet... /shrug

I understand that, entirely. I think my point is that just because it wasn't grown under that scrutiny, doesn't mean it is low-quality. I certainly saw the differences in some of the plants I grew back then, but it was almost always better than the stuff I got from a dealer. Apparently going blind from bad moonshine didn't stop people from buying it off the black market.

I'm certainly not saying that you have no points, only that legalization of the substance has serveral unavoidable issues at the heart of it.

Originally posted by inimalist
oh, totally, I'm sure it would be the same, and I tend to think such growing methods favor corporate farming in terms of who can do it best for less.

Best for less, before the taxes are levied. It certainly doesn't cost 6 buck to produce one pack of cigarettes.

It would certainly be nice to walk into a gas station and ask for a pack of Bohemian Blends, 100s, red label.