Why are gambling and alchohol socially acceptable

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.