• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

Eh, that’s media spin. biden’s health is fine and he’s doing a good job.

The republican caucus is already covering themselves with something, and it’s not glory.

Their freedom requires your slavery.

Wow, you are pre-disappointed. How surprising.

Authoritarian republicans are opposed to freedom for the rest of us.

Republican obstruction dressed up as bipartisanship. Again.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

You can’t love your country only when you win.

Not all heroes wear capes.

Accountability, motherfuckers.

Take hopelessness and turn it into resilience.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

It’s time for the GOP to dust off that post-2012 autopsy, completely ignore it, and light the party on fire again.

Let there be snark.

It’s the corruption, stupid.

No offense, but this thread hasn’t been about you for quite a while.

A last alliance of elves and men. also pet photos.

If senate republicans had any shame, they’d die of it.

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

Do not shrug your shoulders and accept the normalization of untruths.

Never entrust democracy to any process that requires republicans to act in good faith.

The poor and middle-class pay taxes, the rich pay accountants, the wealthy pay politicians.

A Senator Walker would also be an insult to reason, rationality, and decency.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / War On Drugs / The War on Your Neighbor, aka the War on Drugs / The problem with marijuana cooperatives

The problem with marijuana cooperatives

by E.D. Kain|  August 17, 20102:49 am| 93 Comments

This post is in: The War on Your Neighbor, aka the War on Drugs

FacebookTweetEmail

Mark Kleiman, in the comments, objects to my framing of his argument against commercial sales of marijuana, and points to this passage in his original piece:

On the cannabis front, my plea is for a “grow-your-own” policy: consumers would be allowed to cultivate pot for their own use, to give it away, or to join small consumer-owned co-ops to produce the stuff for them. No commercial sales. [emphasis added]

There are several things wrong with this.

First, it creates at best a gray market. You can grow it, smoke it, and join a co-op to help produce it, but you can’t sell it to whoever you want or buy it from whoever you want. This is very fuzzy. Can you think of any other product like this? I can’t, and I don’t think Americans would take to the idea very well (what, I can’t buy bread at the store, I have to make it myself? What the hell is a co-op?) or that our regulatory apparatus would be up to enforcing it (not to mention the potential for regulatory capture at the local and state level). Furthermore, this strikes me as little more than Kleiman’s own preferred version of Capitalism Lite – a sort of throwback to distributism – Chestertonian in its romanticism, but not terribly practical.

Second, no matter how you spin this, consumers of marijuana under Kleiman’s rules would also have to be producers of marijuana – if not directly, then indirectly through a co-operative. Rather than casually purchasing pot whenever they wanted, they would have to make a commitment to either A) grow the stuff, or B) become involved with a group of people growing the stuff. If anything, this works against Kleiman’s paternalist instincts. Where Kleiman seeks to protect the consumer from the big marijuana corporations, he ends up making consumers more financially vested in the product, and thus more bound to its success, use, and so forth. Probably not the best idea when you’re attempting to keep use of the product to a minimum. This would be like forcing drinkers to have a financial stake in whatever alcohol they were consuming. And a lot of people just don’t want that. They want the freedom to choose to simply buy the stuff at a store or, if there’s no co-op nearby and nobody growing, then from a dealer.

Which brings us to point number three. I don’t think co-ops would actually spell the end of the illicit marijuana trade unless the co-ops were allowed to scale up to the point where basically they were operating as commercial businesses. So either you lose the idyllic co-operative-only market or you sustain the demand for the black market.

And last, there is simply nothing in this argument that makes it necessary. The problem with pot is that it’s illegal, not anything inherent with the drug – at least no more so than alcohol (and probably a lot less). If pot becomes legal I hope we don’t regulate out home growers or local co-operatives. That would be a disaster and a travesty. Imagine doing to the wine industry what was done to the beer industry for so long. Imagine the Budweiser of bud – and that all legal marijuana was so lifeless. But preventing commercial sale of anything that has a high consumer demand is just asking for trouble, even if you provide avenues for that demand to be met. Those avenues are simply unnecessary when an open market could exist instead. If we really want to curtail marijuana usage, legalize it and then tax the hell out of it. At least people will be able to buy it and consume it safely.

I love the idea of co-operatives and a more cooperative economy generally, but I don’t think this is the right way to go about it. Sure, Kleiman’s proposal is better than the status quo, but full commercial legalization makes much more sense and seems much more workable. It’s also a hell of a lot less paternalistic, and if the war on drugs has taught us anything, it’s that paternalism and pot don’t mix.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Update.

Some commenters are not reading me very closely. When I wrote:

I don’t think Americans would take to the idea very well (what, I can’t buy bread at the store, I have to make it myself? What the hell is a co-op?) or that our regulatory apparatus would be up to enforcing it (not to mention the potential for regulatory capture at the local and state level).

I did not mean that I didn’t know what a co-op is. If you read the whole post it’s fairly clear that I have a handle on the basic idea behind a co-op. My point is that many Americans don’t and wouldn’t understand why they were forced to either grow or join a co-op in order to have legal marijuana. My flippant example was if the same rule were applied to bread.

That being said, I think y’all are mostly right on target here. Cheers!

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Jane’s prediction
Next Post: Early Morning Open Thread: Mercy! »

Reader Interactions

93Comments

  1. 1.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 2:57 am

    Meh. I stay out of the pot debates because I’m allergic to it (not a traditional histamine reaction, but it does give me migraines, which I found out is related to me overmetabolizing THC, but I digress) but I have known many casual users of marijuana over the years. I have observed very little difference between their actions and those who imbibe. And I don’t drink either. Our marijuana prohibition does not work. And I’m actually starting to question the motives of those who argue to maintain illegalization.

    Sure, Kleiman’s proposal is better than the status quo

    I disagree. If it’s not a workable solution, why bother to propose it? You basically tear the whole idea to shreds with basic logic. I get the feeling this will be yet another generational battle. So bring on the damn death panels!

  2. 2.

    E.D. Kain

    August 17, 2010 at 3:02 am

    @Yutsano: Damn it, the death panels could use some reefer. Might make ’em go easy on grandma. That being said, grandma could probably use some reefer too.

  3. 3.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 3:05 am

    @Yutsano: Hi, hon. How you doing? I am in your boat. I don’t smoke weed (don’t like it) or really drink (am allergic to it), and I don’t see how the former is so much eviler than the latter. We have had this senseless war against drugs, especially pot for far too long. It’s time to talk rationally about it and to legalize it. I just don’t know if we (society) has it in us at this time or if we can tear ourselves away from pressing matters like meddling in local zoning projects and such.

  4. 4.

    MattR

    August 17, 2010 at 3:06 am

    @Yutsano:

    If it’s not a workable solution, why bother to propose it?

    Agreed. If anything, proposing and implementing a solution that does not work will actually make it harder to get a solution that does work. It will just be used as proof that marijuana cannot be made legal. This is not intended as a shot at E.D., but the first thing that pops into my head is the Republican complaint that government does not work after they spend years doing everything they can to neuter the power of the government. (And to go off-topic, my greatest worry about the health insurance reform bill is that when it predictably fails to control costs, because that is not what it was designed to do, that will be used as proof that government intervention only makes things worse)

    @asiangrrlMN: @Yutsano: What a bunch of party poopers your allergies are :) I am very glad I don’t have that issue with pot as I find it very useful in helping me get to sleep when the restless leg syndrome acts up. (Or maybe it just helps me get to sleep in general but I dont partake as much before bed when the RLS is in check)

  5. 5.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 3:16 am

    @E.D. Kain: I admit it. I LOLed. Of course since there actually aren’t any death panels, I guess that means more Mary Jane to go around then.

    @asiangrrlMN: Yes yes and yes. And check your e-mail as to a status update. More than anything I’m exhausted and a helluva lot poorer today. But I haz a new place to live, so there’s that. :)

    @MattR: It gets even funnier when you realize I went to a drinking school. Put a major research institution in wheat fields in the middle of nowhere and the kids find pretty much two activities to do. Prophylactic sales were also a very profitable business where I went to college.

    BTW heard on the radio driving home that Obama was going to be in Seattle tomorrow. True? False? Losing my gourd? I’m being punked?

  6. 6.

    Andrew

    August 17, 2010 at 3:16 am

    How about a simple solution, each adult can grow a set amount of plants per residence (i.e. 2x adults living at a house can grow 2 plants each 4 in total for the house).

    Then the rest is commercial.

    The fact that people can grow small quantities for personal use at home means that the cost never gets to high at a commercial level, while ensuring you’re not getting your local stoner growning a plantation and selling on the street corner.

  7. 7.

    MattR

    August 17, 2010 at 3:21 am

    @Yutsano:

    More than anything I’m exhausted and a helluva lot poorer today. But I haz a new place to live, so there’s that. :)

    Congrats.

    BTW heard on the radio driving home that Obama was going to be in Seattle tomorrow. True? False? Losing my gourd? I’m being punked?

    True

  8. 8.

    E.D. Kain

    August 17, 2010 at 3:22 am

    No I agree with both of you – there’s little sense in settling for an inadequate fix except that it might put a stop to some of the senseless drug raids and incarceration. Still…I’m all for a complete surrender in the war on drugs. Legalize everything. In countries where they’ve done this drug usage has gone down, far less money is spent on crime, crime goes down, etc. So these paternalistic half measures really rub me the wrong way, when all relevant data suggests simply ending the drug war is the best solution.

  9. 9.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 3:24 am

    @MattR: I am not allergic to pot–I just don’t care much for it. Alcohol, yes, I’m allergic. Least allergic to hard liquor. I am a rum/gin/bourbon gal when I do drink. I am also allergic to wheat and dairy, pollen, cats and dogs, and air.

    @Yutsano: If you get to meet him, that would be so cool! I bet you are one busy little bee.

    I am trying to find cute black platform shoes with less than four-inch heels for gals with wide feet. Unfortunately, I can only find what I want in stripper shoes (too-high heels) and drag queen shoes (too big). Sigh.

  10. 10.

    NobodySpecial

    August 17, 2010 at 3:24 am

    Sorry, folks, this one’s a done deal before you even get to the legalization.

    Legalization to grow will require licenses. Those will be priced out of the market for small growers. Then the cigarette companies (who have been waiting for this moment for decades) will roll out Camel Blunts and Marlboro Buds, and it’ll be shitty and laced with junk to maximize the obscene profits they’ll reap.

    I’m torn between feeling sorry for those who dream up utopian solutions that cut out corps from a multibillion dollar business or laughing like hell at them for being so naive.

    Either way, I don’t do it, so it affects me a nonzero but infinitesimally small amount.

  11. 11.

    Spiffy McBang

    August 17, 2010 at 3:25 am

    E.D., a co-op isn’t too bad of an idea in theory- but the way I’ve seen them run, I don’t know how they vary all that much from commercial sales.

    You said, “what the hell is a co-op?” I could bust out Wikipedia or some such, but I’ll just use a local example:

    A friend of mine manages a co-op grocery store that only carries stuff like free range chicken, organic vegetables, and so forth. People who shop at the co-op pay some kind of yearly fee, but they get the goods cheaper than they would at the odd regular supermarket that carries the same items. Part of the deal is that anyone who’s a member is also a shareholder; when the profits come down (I think quarterly), all those members get their share. And while theoretically only members are supposed to shop there, I know they let in others- the members are the only ones who get the profit checks, though, so they don’t mind too much.

    If a pot store was run in this fashion, it would essentially mean only one or two companies would be running the trade in a given area, but in all likelihood anyone who would want to buy could do so. It’d be a trip for some people to get to the store, but there are lots of items we have to do that for already. So I’m not really sure how much different it would be from straight commercial sales.

  12. 12.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 3:27 am

    FYWP for not letting me edit my comment.

    @E.D. Kain: I agree with you. It’s suggesting something for the sake of suggesting something without really coming up with a workable solution. In other words, it sucks.

    P.S. Co-ops rock, by the way. That’s where I get all my food.

  13. 13.

    jon

    August 17, 2010 at 3:27 am

    Incremental steps toward legalization are better than the status quo, but dumb steps are still dumb.

    If it’s going to be legal and if it’s going to be legal to stop the problems caused by the illegality, then the black market must be avoided at all costs. So a legal market is the best option.

    I’d suggest price controls as a decent half-step. I have no idea how much is a reasonable price, but it should be somewhere that allows for small growers to make a decent profit and large commercial growers to get the advantages of scale that are always available from the size of their enterprise. The large growers will then have the advantage of other parts of the plant being available in large quantities to make oils and fibers and such.

    But then, why should something be limited like that? If it’s like really good gourmet coffee, it shouldn’t be priced like a big red container of Folger’s crystals. At the end of the day, making it illegal to sell at a certain price is as stupid as making it illegal to sell at all. The market knows what’s insane, and if the farmer’s market or the alley behind that bar provides good stuff at a fair price, then sanity can prevail.

    But whatever, I’m not going to use that stuff much anyway. I can’t smoke anything without turning into a snot factory, don’t need help getting to sleep much (he said after waking up at midnight,) and don’t even like brownies or cookies. Luckily, I can drink a decent beer and enjoy a little buzz when desired. I’m not bothered if someone wants a different buzz as long as they aren’t a hazard to others.

  14. 14.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 3:28 am

    @MattR: Uhh…I thought the official name was Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. At least that’s how I’ve always heard it. Minor snicker moment on my part, but awesome. :) Actually, there’s a few wee little oopsies in that thing. Someone on his staff must be hella tired or something.

    @E.D. Kain: You are thinking of the great experiment that is Portugal. FH #1 can attest to this much better than I can as he visited there not long after legalization, but organized and petty crime both plummeted plus actual usage rates dropped as well. It was a hugely courageous thing for them to do, but it seems to be paying off dividends.

    @Spiffy McBang: I’ve never known a co-op that wasn’t open to outside of the membership. But they do lean on you hard to join up, as a lot of co-ops not only buy in they also volunteer a few hours a month to control labor costs and such. I like them a lot, I plan on looking one up in Seattle.

  15. 15.

    Crusty Dem

    August 17, 2010 at 3:29 am

    @E.D. Kain:

    there’s little sense in settling for an inadequate fix

    Well, for us democrats, settling for an inadequate fix is sort of a default legislative position. Plus, if we can’t punch a hippie over marijuana, what’s the point?

  16. 16.

    MattR

    August 17, 2010 at 3:32 am

    @asiangrrlMN:

    I am also allergic to wheat and dairy, pollen, cats and dogs, and air.

    I don’t think we should ever be allowed to procreate :) I went to get allergy tested after I had nasal surgery to remove polyps a few years ago. The nurse audibly gasped when she came in to read the results from the various pin pricks on my back. I am actually pretty lucky when it comes to food, but I am highly allergic to pretty much every sort of dust and pollen and mold out there. Same thing with cats, horses and several other animals included in the test, yet somehow my allergies to dogs are minimal/nonexistant. Interestingly, my mother shares the animal allergies (plus dogs) but does not have any of the airborne issues. However she does have major dermitological allergies (especially certain metals). And despite all the other medical issues I inherited from my dad, he had no problems with allergies at all.

  17. 17.

    Crusty Dem

    August 17, 2010 at 3:34 am

    @Yutsano:

    Actually, that’s correct, rather than flying into Sea-Tac, he’s flying into King County International, more commonly known as Boeing Field; It’ll minimize the traffic snarl (though I’m sure it will still suck). Fortunately, he’ll be missing both rush hours by making such a short trip (4 hours?!?!).

  18. 18.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 3:36 am

    @asiangrrlMN:

    I am trying to find cute black platform shoes with less than four-inch heels for gals with wide feet. Unfortunately, I can only find what I want in stripper shoes (too-high heels) and drag queen shoes (too big). Sigh.

    If you can find them and don’t mind getting a pedicure (snicker) gladiator sandals. A lot of the styles they make nowadays have heels and also usually accommodate wide feet. Go to a specialty shoe store, they will be much more likely to have ideas besides the one that just popped into my head. And yes you just had a sassy gay friend moment. :)

    I am also allergic to wheat and dairy, pollen, cats and dogs, and air.

    This is the beauty of gluten-free flours. I can still make decent cookies for you.

    @Crusty Dem: I wondered how that was going to work in Sea-Tac. I also never knew the official name for Boeing Field until just now. I iz edjumacated!

  19. 19.

    MattR

    August 17, 2010 at 3:39 am

    @Yutsano: Heh. I was completely shocked to recently discover that Toronto has a second airport after years of flying into Pearson.

  20. 20.

    SiubhanDuinne

    August 17, 2010 at 3:41 am

    @Yutsano #5:

    I went to a drinking school.

    You have to go to school for that??

    @E. D. Kain, top: “the Budweiser of bud.” Heh.

  21. 21.

    Martin

    August 17, 2010 at 3:42 am

    I think we’re seeing one problem butting up against another problem. The corporatization of food and agriculture has led to all manner of health and other crises in this country. If marijuana becomes legal, it’s not hard to see it go the same way as other products – patents on different varieties and the endless lawsuits that follow, more politicization of water rights, lobbyists and we all know its just a matter of time before there’s an agriculture subsidy for it in some form. Then on the retail side will be branding and advertising. Who will get the first pot-sponsored NASCAR ride? Will we get as many pot ads on TV as we have woody drug ads now?

    This problem butts up against free speech and general free-market issues, but as consumers we SUCK at resisting a well-oiled marketing machine, and the default end state on legal marijuana, as much as it would be an improvement over the disaster we have now, it’s exactly something to get excited about. At some point we need to address this kind of problem in our country, and I think this is as good a place to start as any. I suspect that the desire to keep consumers as producers is mainly to address the problem that the US free market is anything but. A free market requires the ability for new players to enter the market, but those opportunities rarely exist any more. Full legalization of marijuana will allow Monstanto and a handful of other players to jump in and own the market, and they’ll do that within 3 years. They’ll start by patenting and buying up the rights to everything, using their ability to secure capital more easily than small players in order to control the marketplace. From there they’ll use the legal system to expand their control and keep others from entering the market, and they’ll finish it off with marketing efforts that will convince consumers they don’t want competing products. We call that a free market, but it’s anything but. How could you instead open the market and keep it to small operators? Is there any example in the US that wouldn’t get attacked as a socialist plot from the right, or get devastated once the lawsuit reached the supreme court. When money equals speech, keeping large multinationals out of a market isn’t going to get supported by the courts. And any real effort at regulation wouldn’t last 30 seconds with Republicans in power.

  22. 22.

    MikeJ

    August 17, 2010 at 3:43 am

    @Crusty Dem: BFI also has a Boeing military plant. There are any number of planes with oddly shaped radar arrays parked just south of the museum of flight. Also where they park the Blue Angel jets then they’re in town. It’s more secure than SeaTac, and McChord (excuse me, Joint Base Lewis-McChord) is too far away.

  23. 23.

    Martin

    August 17, 2010 at 3:43 am

    Oh, fucking moderation again. Can someone get #20 out?

  24. 24.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 3:45 am

    @MattR: Well, I’m allergic to kids, too, so no worries there! We’ll just do it for fun (I’m not allergic to sex). But, yeah, allergies abound in my nose, like yours. It’s one reason I don’t let my boys sleep with me–I need one cat-free room. Plus, I sleep like shit, so there’s that, too.

    @Yutsano: This is the kind of shoe I like, though (with less heel), and in suede, not patent leather. You’re actually suggesting I go into a store? How novel. I will see what we have locally.

    @SiubhanDuinne: You! You’re a female. Do you know shoes?

  25. 25.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 3:46 am

    @SiubhanDuinne: I swear I am not making this up, but there actually is a one course elective at my university in wine tasting. You have to be a Hotel/Restaurant Administration major, and you have to be 21, but you could literally get college credit for drinking. College can be hella fun sometimes.

    @MattR: Boeing Field, as the informal name implies, is where they test the new jet liners when they are ready for delivery and/or prototype flights. Actually I wondered if he wouldn’t just fly into the Air Force base 40 miles to the south. But hey I guess Boeing Field works for that as well, since it can easily accommodate a 747.

    Am I crazy or did a comment get eated?

  26. 26.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 3:50 am

    FYWP!

    @MattR: Well, I’m allergic to kids, too, so no worries there! We’ll just do it for fun (I’m not allergic to sex). But, yeah, allergies abound in my nose, like yours. It’s one reason I don’t let my boys sleep with me—I need one cat-free room. Plus, I sleep like shit, so there’s that, too.

    @Yutsano: This is the kind of shoe I like, though (with less heel), and in suede, not patent leather. You’re actually suggesting I go into a store? How novel. I will see what we have locally.

  27. 27.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 3:51 am

    @Yutsano: Mine, damn it! I tried to edit it, and I forgot the link/reply combo. I reposted.

    @SiubhanDuinne: You! You’re female! What do you know about shoes?

  28. 28.

    Martin

    August 17, 2010 at 3:51 am

    @asiangrrlMN: Try a theatrical shop. They usually carry low heel shoes, many in black, for a range of foot types for performers. They usually either have or can order platforms for performers trying to even out height.

  29. 29.

    MattR

    August 17, 2010 at 3:51 am

    @Yutsano:

    Am I crazy or did a comment get eated?

    Not just you. I wonder what edit asiangrrlMN was trying to make that kicked her into moderation. And on that note, it is time for another attempt at getting to sleep. Have a good night all.

    @asiangrrlMN:

    I’m not allergic to sex

    Now that would suck (no puns intended)

  30. 30.

    Crusty Dem

    August 17, 2010 at 3:51 am

    @MikeJ:

    It’s secure on the ground, but it’s a complete nightmare for air defense, completely open with high ground just to the east.. And don’t remind me about the Blue Angels, I’m still pissed about having those fuckers fly over my house for 5 days (Seafair). Yeah, we get it, you’re loud. Every year it gives me a very clear idea of why we can’t win “hearts and minds” in Iraq/Afghanistan.

  31. 31.

    Tim in SF

    August 17, 2010 at 3:53 am

    I like the way it’s working right now: if I want delivery, I call my friend who will be here faster than a pizza. If I want something more exotic (like pot butter for cooking, or pot tea, or several different kinds of pot), I walk down to the pot co-op down the street.

    When 19 passes, I don’t see any of this changing. The co-op has waaaay too many good things to offer and home delivery will never go out of style.

  32. 32.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 3:54 am

    @Tim in SF:

    like pot butter for cooking

    I find your ideas intriguing, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

  33. 33.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 3:54 am

    @MattR: Read my comment first!

    @Martin: Damn it. I should have thought of that! Thanks.

  34. 34.

    Martin

    August 17, 2010 at 3:55 am

    I don’t think the SF experience will translate to too many other places. Just sayin’.

  35. 35.

    Tim in SF

    August 17, 2010 at 3:56 am

    @MattR:

    The nurse audibly gasped when she came in to read the results from the various pin pricks on my back.

    You just need a good hookworm infestation to take care of your allergies. They will clear you right up with minimal side-effects (besides the intense ick-factor).

  36. 36.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 3:59 am

    @E.D. Kain: Welcome to late night Balloon Juice blogging ED. Your thread is now officially hijacked. We did pretty good at being topical for a bit though.

  37. 37.

    Joey Maloney

    August 17, 2010 at 3:59 am

    @MattR: Keep in mind there’s growing evidence that prick tests and scratch tests are inaccurate, imprecise, and unreliable. That is, 1) they give false positives and false negatives; 2) the magnitude of the reaction is not well-connected to your actual systemic sensitivity; and 3) their results vary over time in the same individual without being tied to real changes in sensitivity.

    So unless you’re showing a strong systemic reaction to something, or removing something from your environment results in a positive health change, there’s little reason to treat prick test results as dispositive. I know people who have been sent on repeated wild-goose chases because successive test panels keep giving differing results.

    On the other hand, lots of people have allergic reactions without recognizing them because they aren’t the traditional runny nose/watery eyes. Allergies can cause skin rashes, digestive problems, migraines, hyper- or hypotension. They can also exacerbate other, seemingly unrelated health problems.

  38. 38.

    Tim in SF

    August 17, 2010 at 3:59 am

    @Yutsano:

    Paula Dean has the best carrot cake recipe, EVER. I’ve made it several times it always turns out unbelievably good. It’s so good. And really easy, too.

    I made a carrot cake with the pot butter and brought it to a party. Nobody could resist the cake and it felled the entire crowd. People were laying on the carpet for hours.

    It was awesome.

  39. 39.

    Martin

    August 17, 2010 at 4:01 am

    @asiangrrlMN: No prob. Wifey sings and has wide feet. I’ve heard the sordid tale of conspiracy by shoe stores against her many times. Not sure how many theatrical shops you have there (we’ve got zillions here) but online is pretty good these days.

    She’s also had good success with Nordstrom, or comparable high-end department store. One of the benefits of having an actual profit margin is that you can work the skinny tail of the market. She pays 20% more there, but they’ll also work hard to get the shoe she needs, and they have wide sizes in stock.

  40. 40.

    MattR

    August 17, 2010 at 4:01 am

    @asiangrrlMN:

    @MattR: Read my comment first!

    Aargh. Too many comments and we crossed the streams. I have no idea which part of my comment you were replying to and which comment of yours I needed to read first :)

    @Tim in SF: That sounds interesting but the ick factor might be too much for me. Especially based on this quote from a researcher who tested on himself. “The itch when they cross through your skin is indescribable,” he said.

    @Tim in SF:

    People were laying on the carpet for hours.

    Sounds like my millenial New Year’s party. We had to make a concerted effort to wake people up to see the ball drop.

  41. 41.

    Ginger Yellow

    August 17, 2010 at 4:02 am

    “First, it creates at best a gray market. You can grow it, smoke it, and join a co-op to help produce it, but you can’t sell it to whoever you want or buy it from whoever you want. This is very fuzzy. Can you think of any other product like this?”

    Absinthe (so labelled) in France. You can make it. You can drink it. But you can’t sell it within the country. So the French sell theirs to the UK and other countries.

  42. 42.

    Uriel

    August 17, 2010 at 4:02 am

    Hey- maybe I missed something, but it seems like a “good luck, keep your chin up, stop whining like Sharron Angle in range of a news camera” forsoonergrunt type open-thready-thing might be an appropriate FP post. Sort of, I guess. Maybe. Who knows? Not me! Jus’ sayin’….

  43. 43.

    Martin

    August 17, 2010 at 4:03 am

    @Yutsano: I wrote up a lengthy comment just to have it swallowed by the moderation monster. Having soçialism trigger the filter on this blog is simply retarded. Thankfully ‘shoes’ no longer does, or else this thread would be completely blank.

  44. 44.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 4:03 am

    @Martin: She’s preaching to the choir. You would think finding a pair of cute platform shoes (black) would be a snap–even for wide feet, but no. Apparently, we with the wide feet are supposed to just wear granny shoes. And, like your wife, I’m willing to pay for good, quality shoes. Last time I checked the local stores, even the pricier ones, nada. Then again, I’m INCREDIBLY picky. P.S. You’re so right about shoes. I’m glad that no longer trips the mod. P.P.S. I need the shoes for Saturday!

    @MattR: I just commented to you about your comment about us procreating, and I wanted you to read my reply. Night!

    @Uriel: I second this. E.D., if you’re still sentient or AL, I would like an open thread dedicated to soonergrunt as well. Thanks.

  45. 45.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 4:08 am

    @asiangrrlMN: Second on the Nordie’s love. They are REALLY good at satisfying their customers, plus they make a shit ton of money (I THINK the family was in the running to buy one of the local sports franchises but I could be remembering wrong) so they can afford to do a little bit of bending with their suppliers.

    And just for the hell of it, otter wuv.

  46. 46.

    MattR

    August 17, 2010 at 4:10 am

    @asiangrrlMN: At least you can buy some shoes that fit your wide feet. There is practically nothing for narrow feet. The typical solution for my foot having room to move is to stick a pad on the tongue of the shoe so the pressure makes sliding more difficult. It got so bad that whenever my father found a pair of sneakers that actually fit him, he would buy several pairs so he had spares in reserve

    PS. I read that comment the first time before WP ate it. This time I am really heading for bed (third time I have typed that tonight)

    @Yutsano: That’s otterly adorable.

  47. 47.

    Uriel

    August 17, 2010 at 4:11 am

    Ok- Screwed up the link- that should have read:

    a “good luck, keep your chin up, stop whining like Sharron Angle in range of a news camera” for soonergrunt type open-thready-thing.

    Otherwise, it makes the kind of sense the is non.

  48. 48.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 4:11 am

    @Yutsano: That video never gets old. Nordstrom means the megamall, I fear. Sigh…

    @MattR: I think women with narrow feet have an easier time, but that could just be the bitterness talking. Night!

  49. 49.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 4:15 am

    @asiangrrlMN:

    I second this. E.D., if you’re still sentient or AL, I would like an open thread dedicated to soonergrunt as well. Thanks.

    I think they’re both sneaking about, but I’m thinking this is more AL’s milieu. I wholeheartedly agree that he needs a front page stiff upper lip.

  50. 50.

    MattR

    August 17, 2010 at 4:17 am

    @asiangrrlMN: I guess it could be worse. I was reading earlier today about a high school kid who can’t find anyone who makes football cleats in size 22 (which may very well be bigger than my forearm).

    @burnspbesq: Could that actually kick some folks on the right into gear on CFR? The talking point of (illegal) drug dealers buying off our elections seems like it would be effective.

  51. 51.

    burnspbesq

    August 17, 2010 at 4:17 am

    Well, with our campaign finance laws being gutted, I expect that most of the No on 19 money will be coming from the Mexican cartels. They have the most to lose.

  52. 52.

    burnspbesq

    August 17, 2010 at 4:21 am

    The two best reasons to legalize pot in California: income tax and sales tax. The next two best reasons: shrink the prison population and reduce the political clout of the correction officers’ union.

  53. 53.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 4:24 am

    @MattR: Holy crap. What are they feeding that kid? Custom-made for him!

    @Yutsano: Hm. Apparently there is one a lot closer that isn’t the megamall. I may have to check it out.

  54. 54.

    burnspbesq

    August 17, 2010 at 4:25 am

    @MattR:

    I could almost live with it for one cycle – after all, every minute of TV time that is bought by the Zetas can’t be bought by Fiorina or Whitman.

  55. 55.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 4:28 am

    One of many things I will be eternally grateful to AL for:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc&playnext=1&videos=NON_umbzyQw&feature=grec_index

    It’s funny because a lot of the reasons I left my old job is because the incentives were so out of whack.

    Oh and the video has a pengie.

  56. 56.

    burnspbesq

    August 17, 2010 at 4:34 am

    @Yutsano:

    The Nordstroms were the original owners of the Seahawks.

  57. 57.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 4:38 am

    @burnspbesq: Ahh okay. I thought they were looking to get back into the game since the Japanese bought the Mariners not too long ago (yes I’m simplifying and it’s an owners consortium but it’s still partially true) and Paul Allen has the Seachickens. We shall not speak of that other franchise. Oh and go Sounders and T-Birds.

  58. 58.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 4:42 am

    Why the obsession with Mary Jane patent leather shoes for adult women? Seriously. I hate patent leather. I want suede, people! Or satin.

    Goooo Vikes!

  59. 59.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 4:53 am

    Goddamn it. I give up. No shoes, and the only boots I really liked were men’s boots. Sheesh.

  60. 60.

    Cris

    August 17, 2010 at 4:55 am

    @MattR: If anything, proposing and implementing a solution that does not work will actually make it harder to get a solution that does work. It will just be used as proof that marijuana cannot be made legal.

    You guys should check out the bullshit stew simmering in Montana over medical marijuana.

    We legalized MM in 2004 via ballot initiative. Not much happened for a couple years, but after the Obama admin announced they wouldn’t prosecute, the number of people applying for and receiving patient ID cards exploded. “Dispensaries” began popping up to meet the demand. Municipalities freaked out: there were no zoning laws on the books to determine where all these new cannabis distributors could and couldn’t set up shop, and a widespread overreaction ensued. Soon all the major towns in the state (which number about seven) had passed laws prohibiting distribution of MM within city limits.

    Now, the legislature, candidates, and concerned citizens are trying to repeal or amend the law. Nobody really knows what to do. Support for medical marijuana is diving. It’s a clusterfuck.

    And even as a proponent of legalization, I have to say: I told you so, dumbasses. Anybody who thought Medical Marijuana would open the door to proper decriminalization or legalization had their head in the sand. The predictable has happened: people interested in recreational use are abusing the system and posing as “patients.” People interested in growing for recreational users are abusing the system and hiding behind “caregiver” status. As a result, the whole endeavor of medical marijuana has received a black eye; the conservative citizen’s suspicion that MM was just a cover story for potheads has been reinforced.

  61. 61.

    scav

    August 17, 2010 at 4:59 am

    @asiangrrlMN: and the men’s boots wouldn’t work?

  62. 62.

    Yutsano

    August 17, 2010 at 5:03 am

    @asiangrrlMN: I’m giving up too, but in a completely different capacity. Night y’all.

    SOONERGRUNT THREAD!!

  63. 63.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 5:10 am

    @scav: Ummmmm…I never thought of that. I just thought they would be too big. Hm…..

    @Cris: Yeah. I can see how people who want it for recreational use might try to game the system. Which is why we need to decriminalize it completely, but I guess that’s too logical.

    @Yutsano: Wot you said. Night!

    I think I’m bailing, too. soonergrunt, still thinking of you and sending a white light in your direction. Keep us updated.

  64. 64.

    Ailuridae

    August 17, 2010 at 5:15 am

    Soonergrunt update? No?

    Hi Y’all! Yutsano, asiangrrlMN etc.

    EDKain – when you think to dismiss a notion out of hand you should probably do a little research to understand the idea. Learning about co-ops isn’t hard. Especially around here.

    As for the free market and dope smoking I think a lack of regulation can keep home-owners viable in the long term. In the short term, some ass-hole will pay for some weed, lace it with strichnine and kill a bunch of people. Kleiman (who is still likely wrong here) anticipated this issue but you’re apparently largely unawares.

  65. 65.

    scav

    August 17, 2010 at 5:17 am

    @asiangrrlMN: well, if the problem is wide, going male helps. They’ve just got a slightly different scale, so you’ve got to memorize two numbers.

  66. 66.

    Anne Laurie

    August 17, 2010 at 5:46 am

    You can grow it, smoke it, and join a co-op to help produce it, but you can’t sell it to whoever you want or buy it from whoever you want. This is very fuzzy. Can you think of any other product like this?

    Raw milk. Unpasteurized honey, in most states. Beef not slaughtered at a USDA-approved facility. I’m assuming most of the kludgy marijuana work-arounds are based on the “farm safety” laws from the early 1900s, which is why they bear little relation to the way modern Americans actually produce or use pot.

    @asiangrrlMN: Not platforms, but I still recommend on-line shoe shopping.

    @Ailuridae: From an earlier thread (Paging Pauline Kael, I think):

    I spoke to an Anesthesiologist at OU Medical Center today. From what he and the Thoracic surgeon We are tentatively scheduled for surgery on Wednesday, the 8th of September. It will be a “cardiopulmonary bypass” which means that the heart and lungs will be bypassed and a machine will pump and oxygenate my blood. I’ll be in surgery for between four and five hours, but will be pretty much out of it for the whole day. Probably not released from the hospital until the weekend.
    If it weren’t for the recent pneumonia, we’d go earlier, like next week, but I still get weak and tire easily.
    On a personal note, I wonder if anyone else has ever dealt with something like this and noticed how all the doctors all seem to hedge what they’re saying, “it seems to be” and “appears that” and so on. It’s like they’re spooked about either spooking me (that train left the station long ago) or they’re spooked about me suing them.
    Also, what is it with anesthesia? Like five minutes of different things that could go wrong and either kill me or leave me drooling on the lazy boy for 30 years. I’m almost more scared of the surgery now than just leaving the damn thing in.

  67. 67.

    asiangrrlMN

    August 17, 2010 at 6:30 am

    @scav: This is true (I am back). Given that I like many of the male boots, I will have to think about it.

    @Anne Laurie: I looked at Zappos. I will probably get my boots there, but I just didn’t find the shoes I want. I have a very specific look in my mind, and I can’t find them anywhere.

    @Ailuridae: Yo! S’up? I shop at co-ops, and I am a member of one. I think they are great.

  68. 68.

    Scott P.

    August 17, 2010 at 7:19 am

    So your position is basically — give me 100% of what I want, or nothing? You do understand that your position is in the minority in this country? That no government, even in Europe, has produced the kind of regime you demand? How is this different from the firebaggers?

    If marijuana is ever legalized in this country, it’s going to be with a bundle of regulations that dwarf the phone book. You can either try to find a path that is acceptable, or at least bearable, to both drug opponents and supporters, or go sit in your corner and have the Republicans write it.

  69. 69.

    milo

    August 17, 2010 at 7:33 am

    So, when I am nauseous and turn to a substance that will allow me to ingest and digest the nourishment that I need to survive, you think that the government should “tax the hell out of it.”

    Small government conservatives are strange people.

  70. 70.

    Sm*t Cl*de

    August 17, 2010 at 7:42 am

    You can grow it, smoke it, and join a co-op to help produce it, but you can’t sell it to whoever you want or buy it from whoever you want. This is very fuzzy. Can you think of any other product like this?

    Several countries apply that rule to game fish like trout. You can catch them, you can cook them, you can take them to a restaurant and pay a chef to cook them for you, but not selling them.

  71. 71.

    techno

    August 17, 2010 at 7:54 am

    Please, let’s at LEAST allow for homegrown.

    This would be a tremendous step forward. Grass is pretty easy to grow IF it is easy to pass around information on how its done.

    And instead of limiting the number of plants, limit the size of the operation. If a couple cannot get by on the weed grown in 16 square feet-4′ x 4′ (1.5 square meters) and 400 watts of light, they probably have a drug problem.

    But Kain is right. Pot should be sold in commercial settings like supermarkets. Because for most people, tending even a small grow room is WAY more hassle than they want to face just to get high. But don’t forget the growers. Pot is a fun crop.

  72. 72.

    Joey Maloney

    August 17, 2010 at 7:59 am

    @Scott P.: No, I think the position is closer to, I’ll be happy to take 60% of what I want, as long as the other 40% isn’t stupid unworkable counterproductive bullshit that screws up the 60%.

  73. 73.

    mr. whipple

    August 17, 2010 at 8:10 am

    F the pot. Just grant me an exclusive on the munchie concession.

  74. 74.

    Jamie

    August 17, 2010 at 8:27 am

    If I had to guess, I think Kleiman knows his proposal won’t do anything about the black market. He’s aware that, culturally, the pot-war is over and that at worst almost everyone just winks at people they know who smoke.

    I think his preferred policy really is no marketing, and is well aware that an official rule of “no selling” is silly and lots of low-ambition indoor gardeners would do well in his scenario. He’s willing to accept that hypocrisy for the no marketing rule.

    I might be, too, if that were a workable alternative to continued prohibition. It still leaves an unjust law on the table for cops to harass hippies doing nothing more violent than selling dried weeds, but it would be better than the status quo.

    The problem, of course, is the constituency for “legal, but no market” is approximately one person large. From a U.S. American perspective, it is outright weird (witness reactions here). No politician will get behind something you can’t make money from. Most patients don’t want to grow, nor do most actual potheads. The current growers, obviously, would have a problem with it. And the prison union will never endorse creating fewer “clients”.

    So it is a policy that will never happen.

    If I were to psychoanalyze, I think he just finds the LA-area pot market tacky and crass. So do I. But then, I don’t see how LA would suddenly develop taste over it. Indeed, if it did, it would lose all local character – LA is just tacky and crass. I think if he got to know Humboldt growers, or got to know Oakland sellers, or from my understanding, Colorado sellers, he’d see different options. Hell, for that matter, the quiet, efficient NYC home delivery dealers might give him hope.

  75. 75.

    Paris

    August 17, 2010 at 9:03 am

    Can you think of any other product like this?

    Google CSA. Community Supported Agriculture. Its very popular among organic farms. I belong to one with over 800 members that delivers to two city centers as well as the local rural area where I live. Its a perfectly viable approach to distributing weed and I agree with Kleiman that it is superior to Big Dope.

  76. 76.

    John Cole

    August 17, 2010 at 9:35 am

    How about a simple solution, each adult can grow a set amount of plants per residence (i.e. 2x adults living at a house can grow 2 plants each 4 in total for the house).

    Then the rest is commercial.

    How the hell is that a simple solution?

    Here is an actual simple solution- make it legal.

  77. 77.

    trevorb

    August 17, 2010 at 9:37 am

    I skipped everyones comments, but here in Montana we have medical marijuana co-ops. Not only can caregivers form co-ops, but then patients are still allowed to grow their own. It should be noted this does nothing to stop the ignorant anti-marijuana people to come out in force everytime there is a wiff of someone under the age of 90 smoking pot.

  78. 78.

    trevorb

    August 17, 2010 at 10:05 am

    @Cris: Just got up and read your thread, your position appears to be one of the medical marijuana opponents. The problem is that no one has yet to “game” the system, the law was written in such a way that anyone who has the balls to ask a doctor for a referal gets a card. This is not a bad position, people are also flipping because 2% of the state has a card due to chronic pain, but this makes sense somewhere around 20% of americans are living with chronic pain. The backlash in municipalities will go away soon, as these cities will soon realize the amount of tax revenue they are passing up. I know my caregiver just paid a quarter million dollars in taxes to the state, there is no way they a re going to shut him down.

  79. 79.

    DPirate

    August 17, 2010 at 10:44 am

    @Andrew: That is how it was in Alaska until they made it illegal. I think that was 1994. People were still going to jail for selling, since some people who wanted it either could not or would not grow their own, or possibly could not grow enough for themselves.

    Can you think of any other product like this?

    See raw milk.

    A co-op solution is possible. In fact, it is likely one of the best first steps toward full deregulation, as something of this nature (read regulated still) will be necessary to quell the “OMG think of the children” crowd.

    @Cris: I’ve got to say: Well, DUH! How many times does a pothead ask his friend “You know anyone that has reefer?” To think a guy wouldn’t try to get some because he’s not sick is silly. All it means is that they didn’t regulate it properly. Did Rush Limbaugh give prescription drugs a black eye, though? This is no different, in my mind. Not sure what you mean in your post, if anything, but that is how I see it. The only black eye is to the people tasked with enforcing whatever safeguards where decided on, if any.

  80. 80.

    Agoraphobic Kleptomaniac

    August 17, 2010 at 11:04 am

    Living in a state that until recently regulated home brewing and has an iron grip on alcohol, let me say that the proposal for coops and personal growth are the worst ideas out there. I’m not a free-market guy, but for purely recreational goods such as these, the free market seems to do a better job than states.

  81. 81.

    DPirate

    August 17, 2010 at 11:06 am

    Sorry, past time to edit, but I wanted to add that drinking clubs are run on a (pseudo?) cooperative basis as well. Mississippi has them, not sure where else. The bar furnishes the locale and may sell mixers, but it is BYOB. No reason that a bar cannot furnish marijuana to it’s members, though that does not address where the pot comes from.

  82. 82.

    Origuy

    August 17, 2010 at 11:11 am

    Survey USA poll from a few days ago: 50% Yes, 40% No, 11% Undecided. (Some roundoff error there.)

    Oh, regarding medical marijuana; Garfunkel and Oats have a song about that.

  83. 83.

    Laertes

    August 17, 2010 at 11:45 am

    @Yutsano:

    Meh. I stay out of the pot debates because I’m allergic to it (not a traditional histamine reaction, but it does give me migraines…

    This is part of a catch-22. If you smoke pot, or would like to without being harassed by cops, then your opinion is worthless because you’re self-interested. If you don’t smoke pot, for whatever reason, then your opinion is worthless because it’s none of your business.

    Ergo: Only drug warriors (like Kleiman) have “serious” opinions.

    I don’t smoke pot, and likely wouldn’t if it was legal, for uninteresting reasons. But we’ve ALL got skin in this game. Prohibition isn’t keeping anyone who wants to get high from getting high. The real evil of prohibition is the damage that this failed enforcement regime is doing. We’re wasting a staggering amount of money, destroying countless lives, and radicalizing our police forces. Prohibition is a disaster for absolutely everyone except maybe prison guards and the sort of narc who thinks that police should be enemies of the people, rather than their protectors.

    The black market and the violence that accompanies it is the real destructive force. Kleiman’s desperate pleading to preserve the black market while legalizing pot shows that he’s an unreconstructed drug warrior. He’s offering a shabby deal that amounts to “You guys can have your weed so long as my narcs still have someone to chase.”

  84. 84.

    Scotty C

    August 17, 2010 at 12:08 pm

    I disagree. An individual/coop solution solves most issues regarding prohibition while keeping big business at bay.

    Food is the same way. I can grow it in my garden. I can grow it or produce it as part of a co-op (CSA, etc). I can give it away.

    But if I sell my tomatoes to my neighbor (without a licensed commercial kitchen or an agricultural permit), I can get in big trouble.

    The solution is:
    a. better than the SQ
    b. affords all the benefits of homegrowing and co-operative growing
    c. legally crowds out commerical grow operations that attract shady business operatives, have incentives for “cheap” genetics
    d. forces a multibillion dollar a year economy into the nonprofit sector (something other industries — banks, utilities, etc. could benefit from).

    I would have to say I am for it.

  85. 85.

    Scotty C

    August 17, 2010 at 12:08 pm

    I disagree. An individual/coop solution solves most issues regarding prohibition while keeping big business at bay.

    Food is the same way. I can grow it in my garden. I can grow it or produce it as part of a co-op (CSA, etc). I can give it away.

    But if I sell my tomatoes to my neighbor (without a licensed commercial kitchen or an agricultural permit), I can get in big trouble.

    The solution is:
    a. better than the SQ
    b. affords all the benefits of homegrowing and co-operative growing
    c. legally crowds out commerical grow operations that attract shady business operatives, have incentives for “cheap” genetics
    d. forces a multibillion dollar a year economy into the nonprofit sector (something other industries — banks, utilities, etc. could benefit from).

    I would have to say I am for it.

  86. 86.

    Laertes

    August 17, 2010 at 12:15 pm

    I don’t see the problem with “big business” getting involved. I don’t want to be forced to buy liquor from co-ops, or to make my own. I’m perfectly happy with the product that Seagrams makes. And even if you don’t drink, you should be pleased that Seagrams does their business without murdering judges, corrupting police, terrorizing poor neighborhoods, and filling our expensive jail cells with disposable day-laborers.

    I’m a Big Fat Liberal, and generally pretty partisan, but Kleiman and his fellow travelers make me understand why some people hate liberals so much:

    Sometimes we just can’t keep our stupid fucking hands to ourselves.

    This precious twirling about “keeping big business at bay” is a perfect example, delivered in a tone of invincible smugness, as if it’s self-evident that foiling big business trumps any other consideration.

    It’s enough to drive a fellow to libertarianism, or would be if they weren’t such a bunch of self-absorbed sociopathic fuckwits.

  87. 87.

    Cris

    August 17, 2010 at 12:18 pm

    @trevorb: You’re right that I sound like an opponent, and it’s a pity that my irritation with the issue has brought me to that. Because I agree with everybody else here: the “problem” would go away altogether if cannabis was legal. I don’t oppose people using it for medical reasons, because I don’t oppose people using it at all.

    But I do oppose disingenuous support for backdoors to legalization (namely, MM and industrial hemp activism), because I expect them to backfire.

    @DPirate: Sure, the “black eye” I refer to remains to be seen. If reason prevails at the next legislative session and they come up with some clear regulations that allow caregivers and patients to continue to cooperate, then great, I’m wrong. If the backlash results in a complete rollback of MM in MT, then yeah, I’d say we fucked up the implementation.

  88. 88.

    Cris

    August 17, 2010 at 12:20 pm

    @Scotty C: But if I sell my tomatoes to my neighbor (without a licensed commercial kitchen or an agricultural permit), I can get in big trouble.

    I hope you picked a bad example. Tomatoes are fresh produce; if you’re not processing them, there’s no reason for a commercial kitchen. (If you’re selling salsa, that’s different.)

  89. 89.

    mclaren

    August 17, 2010 at 12:22 pm

    Another spectacularly sensible post by Kain.

    My own take on the paternalism is that it represents a fumbling effort by the elites to come to grips with finally renouncing 70 years of mass insanity. People in power never want to admit they were 100% totally utterly wrong. So we’ll get half-measures. Bogus co-ops. Quasi-legal status. Weird gray areas…until eventually…it all just slides out of being The Weed With Roots In Hell and becomes just another government-taxed recreational substance like alcohol or tobacco.

    Like some others here, I don’t use the stuff. No weed, no tobacco, no alcohol, nothing. But I’ve got a dog in this hunt nevertheless. Banning weed ups my taxes to pay for all the prison inmates. My civil liberties get destroyed along with everyone else’s when the drug police smash down doors with no-knock warrants based on bogus info from informants who were high when they fingered innocent people to the cops.

    So yeah, even though I don’t use the stuff and never have and never will, damn straight it affects me. California turned into a penal colony with a nice ocean view because weed was demonized and illegalized, and I saw it happen first-hand. Ugly business. No thanks, time to legalize and tax it.

  90. 90.

    Origuy

    August 17, 2010 at 12:43 pm

    @Cris: I just talked to a friend of mine in Colorado. She has chickens and wants to sell the eggs. If people come to her house and pick them up, she doesn’t need a license. If she sells them to a co-op or takes them somewhere else, she does.

  91. 91.

    Brachiator

    August 17, 2010 at 12:52 pm

    @E.D. Kain:

    Sure, Kleiman’s proposal is better than the status quo

    Kleiman’s proposal is a waste of time. As I noted before, some California communities, anticipating a ballot proposition which would legalize pot, are already considering factory farming marijuana production.

    Kleiman’s proposal would require that all of the present law enforcement costs associated with prosecuting the pot trade be shifted to stifling commercial production. This is not better than the status quo. It is the status quo.

    Someone in another thread, in favor of home grown and co-op weed, noted that marijuana is ridiculously easy to grow. Cookies are ridiculously easy to bake at home, but this doesn’t prevent there being a huge market for supermarket sweets.

    There is too much good land, in California and Hawaii, and elsewhere, that could be used for cultivation of superior marijuana crops, for home grown to ever be a realistic alternative to commercial pot. You would inevitably have a gray market, at least.

    Also complicating the issue: Mexican officials are debating whether to push for the legalization of pot in Mexico if the California ballot initiative passes (assuming that the feds don’t bring the hammer down on California).

    The problem is recognised by the politicians too. Nexos, a Mexican magazine, recently asked six likely contenders for the presidency in 2012 whether Mexico should legalise marijuana if California did. One said no, but four answered yes, albeit with qualifications. Enrique Peña Nieto, the early leader in the polls, said carefully: “We would have to reconsider the view of the Mexican state on the subject.”
    __
    Since marijuana provides the gangs with up to half their income, taking that business out of their hands would change the balance of financial power in the drug war. But curiously, polls suggest that one of the groups most strongly opposed to the initiative in California is Latinos.

  92. 92.

    Cris

    August 17, 2010 at 1:08 pm

    @Origuy: I’ll be damned. Learned something new today, I suppose I can clock out.

  93. 93.

    Jebediah

    August 17, 2010 at 10:27 pm

    @Brachiator:
    Any info on why Latinos are opposed? Cutting off funding for the cartels is on of the benefits of legalization that I always thought just about everyone could agree on.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

2023 Pet Calendars

Pet Calendar Preview: A
Pet Calendar Preview: B

*Calendars can not be ordered until Cafe Press gets their calendar paper in.

Recent Comments

  • Mel on Respite Open Thread: *Legendary* Bucket-List Outing (Jan 27, 2023 @ 3:50am)
  • Traveller on Respite Open Thread: *Legendary* Bucket-List Outing (Jan 27, 2023 @ 3:45am)
  • Mel on Respite Open Thread: *Legendary* Bucket-List Outing (Jan 27, 2023 @ 3:44am)
  • sab on Respite Open Thread: *Legendary* Bucket-List Outing (Jan 27, 2023 @ 3:41am)
  • prostratedragon on Respite Open Thread: *Legendary* Bucket-List Outing (Jan 27, 2023 @ 3:23am)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Favorite Dogs & Cats
Classified Documents: A Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup

Front-pager Twitter

John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
ActualCitizensUnited

Shop Amazon via this link to support Balloon Juice   

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!