Why is Marijuana a hot button issue and BigPharma lab experimental drugs are not?

Commercial after commercial of all kinds of BigPharma lab drugs promote to cure everything from hair loss to depression splashed across our TV's daily for us to support and buy and use, which actually kill us and cause more problems than good.

...BUT YET, a little wild plant that has been tried and true to be known to cure illness, create textiles like rope and shoe strings to clothing is BANNED IN THE USA!

And think about this for few quips, Wouldn't mairjuana HELP the US Economy more(exports) than BORROWING from China and the like to buy our debt???


sound off


4Horsemen for President!

 

If it were legal more white woman would be smoking with black men... Can't have "tainted" children being born into the world.

/sarcasm

It's a threat to a lot of companies if a product is superior in a number of ways and the best ways to deal with it are to adopt it or destroy it. Considering that all of the companies would be forced to switch to an alternative resource which would change the equipment/land it was cheaper to ban it.

 

hemp is no longer used in the real world for rope. It hasn't been since the advent of nylon, which pretty much beat hemp out in every characteristic you would want in a rope, with the exception of biodegradability. Hemp is a generalist crop. It's not very useful in a specialist economy. It is not the best plant to produce anything (except for pot).

 

This is nonsense. You should really study up on all the Hemp tree. "Pot" is merely ONE byproduct of this dynamic tree..

The stalks of the Hemp plant are just as strong as any wood on your kitchen floor or fence around your yard. AND it grows faster than an Oak tree or Brazilian tree or Maple tree which are all currently being used heavily in construction around the world.

 

the Green Energy crowd will have no choice but to face the Hemp tree in the future IF they ever plan to make that industry take off.

 

High profit, big pharma, owns the "market" on peddling high profit chemical creations, and, drug peddlers don't like anybody cutting in on their action and, did I mention, that it's highly profitable?

 

The problem is that there are those that feel they have he moral authority force their beliefs on others. (aka the religious right)

Once it became illegal the police and other institutions such as the DEA sprang up with combined budgets in the tens of billions. These folks do not want to give up these billions so they embellish, put out propaganda, make the most ridiculous and fallacious arguments, and outright lie in order to keep pot illegal.

These two factors are why pot is illegal.

 

There aren't any valid economic arguments for the legalization of marijuana. Tax revenues will not cover the social costs.

The better question is why aren't people educated about the dangers of addictive drugs?

 

I see that, but the same billions are on the other end of the spectrum when Doctors write outrageous prescriptions for some of the most dangerous lab-created drugs on earth, causing all manner of NEW diseases, but Congress and the rest of the Government doesn't seem to care about that.

a tug of war over money? I think so. and who are the real losers, the people. that's who

 

I disagree. If Mary Jane is legalized and every household is allowed to grow it. the potential for forerign customers becomes a Bohemoth. With that money being pumped into our economy, we wil be able to pay off the debt and defcit completely in 10-15 years.

This is borrowing from China and selling them our debt is crazy. What if the dollar crashes on all that debt? China will want some land in return, which a lot of it they already own, they will want more land...and that would ultimately mean War on our soil.

Do you want that?

 

Your not making a good economic case for legalizing the drug since your ignoring the social costs.

Your also making a false dilemma fallacy in your discussion of debt.

 

The social costs would be minimal because:

1. The decriminalization(huge surplus of tax dollars) of it, would reduce it to that of a cigarette purchase criminally. While at the same time saving billions on falsely housing people for a victimless crime. It would be legal.
2. There is no addiction principles in marijuana so addicts will be non-existent bringing rehab centers(another racket for people hooked on more violent drugs) to their knees, creating a larger surplus of dollars of liquidity.
3. Promote it just like Beer commercials that would increase interest in sales. Creating a pool of dollars that have yet to leave the Local/State/National Economy. Getting the most of out each dollar.

That's just 3 off the top of my head..the list is much longer.

And there's no need for a "false dilemma" when there's a REAL economic one looming on the horizon.

 

Cuz Big Pharma doesn't cut into logging company profits.

 

Marijuana is a hot button issue for some because they want our society to be like this:

All Drug Warriors and their families can fnck off and go to hell.

 

Did you even read the link about social costs?

Example: we collect 25 billion dollars worth of revenue from Tobacco. We spend 200 billion dollars on social costs resulting from tobacco usage.

How is Marijuana going to be different?

And how is marijuana usage victimless when social costs are considered?

0.o do you understand what a fallacy is? It's a form of argumentation that is always wrong.

 

About 9% of people that smoke pot become addicted to it. Not necessarily because pot is addictive, but because they have addictive personalities. There is not one documented death from pot and yet it is listed by the federal government as the most dangerous drug in America. There aren't any valid economic arguments for it to be illegal.

Here is Colorado where it has been decriminalized for years and know legal to grow nothing has changed. The sun comes up everyday and sets every evening. People just have a little more freedom.

 

Hemp isn't a tree. And the amount of THC in Hemp is starkly less than that contained in your garden variety mary jane source.

 

There are valid arguments for the criminalization of these drugs:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/ondcp-fact-sheets/marijuana-legalization

 

Hemp can't be used for construction by itself. Yes, it contains lignin, but it isn't a good structural material unless combined with something else. Hemp furniture is not going to replace maple furniture.

As I said, hemp is a great generalist crop. It was a great crop in the 1700s. The thing is, it's not the best crop for ANYTHING. After doing some more research on it, it was even supplanted for ropes, as manila makes better rope (and all natural ropes are pretty much supplanted by nylon and other synthetics like Spectra). I have researched hemp for various arguments on the forums. That is my conclusion. Yours may vary, but i think the marketplace in countries that allow hemp products supports my view.

 

Interestingly, the people that would be most hurt by industrial hemp would be pot farmers who grow outside nearby. Industrial hemp cross-pollinates with pot, and reduces it's potency.

Hemp is an overrated product. There is nothing it does better than another plant/product.

 

It's a plant that anyone anywhere in the US can grow so it's not really an "economical product" except when prohibitions against growing are included under the law.

If marijuana was completely decriminalized, including growing for personal use, it would virtually eliminate draconian taxation (like we have under current "legalization" in WA) because if the tax is more than the hassle of growing the plant people will just grow the plant.

 

Doctor Sanjay Gupta "Weed" documentary airs on Sunday night CNN. Should be pretty informative being that Gupta has taken a 180 degree turn with his position after researching marijuana.

People like smoking pot just as they like to drink alcohol.


This cat is out of the bag there is no putting it back.

 

Shiva we still have Feds busting stills. You should recall that the government gets really upset when you don't want to pay the taxes due on the product you grow.

 

bandwagon fallacy....

Do advocates have any justification what-so-ever for the social costs of legalizing the drug?

 

How about supporters of the status quo start acknowledging the social costs of their approach?