lyion wrote:That's what it'd take to make that 200 billion in taxes a year, and realistically that 200 billion would become a negative number with the added costs to our infrastructure.
I'm curious as to what added costs you think there would be?
Moderator: Dictators in Training
lyion wrote:That's what it'd take to make that 200 billion in taxes a year, and realistically that 200 billion would become a negative number with the added costs to our infrastructure.
mappatazee wrote:Addiction rehab. Meh, don't need it.
Lost work. That's hard to measure.
medical costs. Same, but how would this fall on taxpayers?
Societal Infrastructure costs. Dunno what that would mean.
public accidents. Definitely negligable.
Crimes to support drugs. Not when they are cheaper and more available.
Social welfare costs. Well I'm against that anyways.
Pharmaceutical costs. Medical costs, as above? Again how would this burden taxpayers?
Costs for children born from druggies. Well I don't know how much it would cost to euthanize the mother, father, and child. Shouldn't be too much for a lethal dosage of medication and dumpage down a chute into an incinerator or something.
mappatazee wrote:Addiction rehab. Meh, don't need it.
Lost work. That's hard to measure.
medical costs. Same, but how would this fall on taxpayers?
Societal Infrastructure costs. Dunno what that would mean.
public accidents. Definitely negligable.
Crimes to support drugs. Not when they are cheaper and more available.
Social welfare costs. Well I'm against that anyways.
Pharmaceutical costs. Medical costs, as above? Again how would this burden taxpayers?
Costs for children born from druggies. Well I don't know how much it would cost to euthanize the mother, father, and child. Shouldn't be too much for a lethal dosage of medication and dumpage down a chute into an incinerator or something.
HyPhY GhEtTo MaMi wrote:GeT ofF mAh OvaRiEz
Harrison wrote:This thread turned stupid.
Right about....mappatazee wrote:Addiction rehab. Meh, don't need it.
Lost work. That's hard to measure.
medical costs. Same, but how would this fall on taxpayers?
Societal Infrastructure costs. Dunno what that would mean.
public accidents. Definitely negligable.
Crimes to support drugs. Not when they are cheaper and more available.
Social welfare costs. Well I'm against that anyways.
Pharmaceutical costs. Medical costs, as above? Again how would this burden taxpayers?
Costs for children born from druggies. Well I don't know how much it would cost to euthanize the mother, father, and child. Shouldn't be too much for a lethal dosage of medication and dumpage down a chute into an incinerator or something.
There.
Martrae wrote:Rehab? For pot?
What about the cost of making career criminals out of people that are caught with weed?
What about the cost we put out already in housing, feeding, medical care of people convicted of minor drug offenses?
Arlos wrote:On the taxing the illegal drug issue, in some research I did I found that the estimation was that between the new income from taxing the drugs that are currently (snip)i
Mindia wrote:That's one of those comments that is so unbelievably stupid that I can't believe he actually said it with any degree of seriousness. People have gotten heart attacks and strokes and DIED from using cocaine for the first time in their life. So, how does that tie in with Drem's "intelligent" comment?
Drem wrote:
This is the part where I laugh at Lyion's knowledge of the subject when he says "Are you for legalizing cocaine, heroin, amphetamines, and opiates."
<big snip>
-----
For the record:
I don't think illicit drugs should be made available like cigarettes and alcohol, .
Drem wrote:Let's start with heroin and all the opiates. Heroin is illegal, yes, as is raw opium; I'm not disputing that. But how many opiates still circulate freely via prescription? Morphine, Hydromorphone (Dilaudid), Oxycodone (Percodan, Percocet, Darvocet, OxyContin), Oxymorphone (Numorphan), Meperidine (Demerol), Fentanyl, Methadone (Dolophine), Darvon, Talwin.
Drem wrote:Okay, next, amphetamines. First off, just another fyi that amphetamine is simply synthesised ephedra.
Drem wrote: staggering amount of people use illicit drugs and live completely normal lives. I am a good example.
Arlos wrote:*shrug* A very good friend of mine has been smoking pot since high school, and at various times has tried shrooms, acid, speed, ecstasy and a few others (though as of right now all he uses is pot, pretty much), and both owns his own home here in the bay area (you seen the house prices here?), pulls in well over 100k a year, and is the main person sent around the world by his employer on business travel to solve customer issues. In the last year he's been to Japan, Korea, China, England, Holland, Germany and France, and it's looking like he may be sent to India shortly.
Most of the people in the networking department at Oracle that I used to work with smoked pot, and many did other things as well. Never at work, obviously, but at home, yes.
Ultimately, at the very least Pot needs to be made legal. The hypocrasy of claiming it has no medical value, while at the same time allowing perscription of synthesized version of it's active ingredient is mind blowing. The problem with synthetic THC is it's much harder to adjust the dosage, and is overall significantly less effective than the natural version. As I've said before, one of the biggest contributors towards keeping pot illegal are the large drug companies, as they make $$$$ on synthetic THC, as they can patent it, whereas they cannot patent a plant.
-Arlos
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests