Soft Drugs vs Alcohol

[khazadman]

do they tax cigarettes lavindathar?i see fields of tobacco all the time here in north carolina.and i'm sure that your government taxes them.i know that mine does.

Originally posted by Lavindathar: Regin you old dopehead, I knew you'd be here!!!! Ok, I've said this before, but: The Government will NEVER make money off of weed. They cannot tax natural substances. Hence why alchohol is legal, and weed is not. That's the be all and end all, nothing to do with harming youself or others. (hard drugs is about this but...) So if weed was man-made, it WOULD be illegal, ORheavily taxed! And I'd rather have "soft drugs" legalised and drink banned...just mine (and regin's) opinions! hehe

Actually the government makes quite a few billion taxing tobaco...how is weed any different?

Originally posted by Smeagol II: Magik your tough. I wouldn't want to be a young child in your care.

Yep Im tough [img]smile.gif[/img] but I think fair, Im a little libertarian and a little republican, I want people to be free to do as they will (as long as they dont infringe on others) even if it means being free to kill, injure and maim oneself. I really dislike people trying to protect others from themselves...Parents have this right/obligation toward their minor children but as adults we are supposed to become self sufficient..if you arent smart enough to survive..well hey, its one way to clean up the gene pool. (The exceptions here are mental illness or disability)

but in practice I can't say in honesty Im as hard as I sound, I do have compassion and kindness in me too.

[Lavindathar]

I believe that they tax cigarettes. Tobacco is natural. Cigarettes are not. Cigarettes are made in a factory. Tobacco is grown in a field. Do you follow?

Hence why tobacco is a hell of a lot cheaper than cigs. It's why people make "rollies". Dnt pay tax.

[Pangur Ban]

Originally posted by MagiK: BUT....if a person injurs themself thru the use of these products I think they should be exempt from collecting any social welfare from the state. I don't want my tax dollars going to support weak willed addicts or supplying medical care for them because they CHOSE to use substances that are harmful

MagiK, in an ideal world I would agree with your comments 100%. Re tax dollars, AFAIK, much more money in Australia is spent on the effects of smoking - health costs, etc, than the money gained from taxes on tobacco.

The trouble is, people are far from 'ideal'. I don't think there is a single human activity or activity that is not subject to misuse or abuse in some way.

If you were to take your line of reasoning to the next step, would you deny government funded health benefits to persons who became ill because they had an "unhealthy" lifestyle, if they CHOSE to eat the wrong foods in excess?

Its just too hard to decide where the dividing line should be, as to what is acceptable, and what is not.

[fable]

Legalize them and tax the heck out of them like they do alcohol...BUT....if a person injurs themself thru the use of these products I think they should be exempt from collecting any social welfare from the state.

Gods, that's twice now I've agreed with Magik. I need to see a good physician, or maybe an exorcist.

Right now, the main reason the soft stuff isn't legal in the US is that the underworld's legal operations lobby hard, long, and with plenty of dollars to prevent it from happening. Being able to grow marajuana for home use would simply kill a very profitable black market, just as it did when the US re-legalized alcohol in the 1930s.

[Sir ReGiN]

Marijuana is healthier than alcohol. That has been proved several times. And many scientists carry on research about cannabis-sativa's positive effects. Of course excessive smoking of marijuana is more damaging than a glass of wine a day, but if you compare the effects of a glass of rum and a weed-cigarette you'll see that the alcohol does more damage.
And the governemnt only care about money, if they didn't why do they legalize liqour that has killed more people than there guns?
It's all ridicolous, and the fact that so many people don't think that hasch/marijuana should be legalizd just shows that the goverment have been succesful in their propaganda..

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Lavindathar: I believe that they tax cigarettes. Tobacco is natural. Cigarettes are not. Cigarettes are made in a factory. Tobacco is grown in a field. Do you follow? Hence why tobacco is a hell of a lot cheaper than cigs. It's why people make "rollies". Dnt pay tax.

Actually they could tax marijuana, and they do tax tobacco. They also tax "natural" fruits, vegetables, grains, lumber, straw, etc.

Maybe you mean, they couldn't tax what you could grow in your backyard? That's probably true as long as you don't grow enough to sell. That's what they tax. The sale of naturally grown products. They tax the grower when he sells to the wholesaler, and they tax the wholesaler when he sells to the retailer, and they tax the retailer when he sells to the consumer.

The government could make huge amounts of money taxing marijuana sales. BTW, the majority of people who make "rollies" buy the tobacco. I'm from the North Carolina, the tobacco growing capital of the world, and I'm from a county were tobacco is the number one agricultural product, and I don't know one person under the age of 60 who "rolls" their own.

[Black Knight]

Originally posted by Downunda: In other words... it's all about money!

That's easy, though, make the goverment product better and cheaper and under cut the current sellers - all the money that comes in is going straight to the government and you dig into the drug culture's soft money at the time...

(why does everyone feel the need to put a disclaimer on this topic ie not that *I* do this stuff, but...) hehe interesting topic, Rikard.

err..well, not that I've done it - there I disclaimed myself...(whew)

[img]smile.gif[/img]

BK

[Nydlari]

Originally posted by MagiK: Legalize them and tax the heck out of them like they do alcohol... I agree 100%. BUT....if a person injurs themself thru the use of these products I think they should be exempt from collecting any social welfare from the state. I don't want my tax dollars going to support weak willed addicts or supplying medical care for them because they CHOSE to use substances that are harmful.

In principle a good idea, in practice it oversimplifies the problem and opens up a pandora's box of other problems.

One, trying to determine beyond a reasonable doubt, which would become the inevitable standard for denial of treatment, wether a certain affliction was caused by drug use would be virtually impossible.
Two, what about other choices people make that have harmfull effects, such as overworking and and an unhealthy diet?
Three, what about the loss to productivety in the econamy when all these people get sick and are refused treatment?

I would take the other end of MagiK's approach:
Legalize and tax, then use the revenue from these taxes to fund universal health care for everyone so that the people using the majority of the health care resources pay the health care bill.

...There is still one thing that I'd say would have be illegal though: Any drug distribution system that requires smoking. For all the other methods of drug use a strong argument can be made that you are only harming yourself. But when you have to smoke something to use it, you're harming yourself and everyone else in the room with you. That needs to be made illegal.