"
A New Jersey lawmaker wants to legalize marijuana, tax it and use the revenue to pay to fix the state's roads and bridges."
State Sen. Nicholas Scutari announced his plan Monday, acknowledging that opposition from Gov. Chris Christie could seriously hinder it but pointing out, "He's not going to be governor forever."
Scutari, a Democrat, said allowing adults to legally buy marijuana to use recreationally would curb the drug sales-fueled crime that grips several New Jersey cities and reduce the number of people who get criminal records for pot possession. He also said regulators could ensure the safety of the pot people buy legally.
Part of his argument is also fiscal: It would save, he said, more than $100 million annually if police and courts didn't have to deal with marijuana as a crime. It also would bring more money into the state coffers through a 7 percent sales tax, he said. He did not know how much money legalization would generate but said he expects it to be more than $100 million annually.
What about the other side of the argument, which has held sway for generations? The argument inherently expressed in a question the Governor of California Jerry Brown asked NBC's David Gregory on Meet The Press.
DAVID GREGORY: 40 years ago, we weren’t talking about legalizing marijuana in states either. Is that a good or a bad idea for California?
GOV. JERRY BROWN (D-CA): Well, we have medical marijuana, which gets very close to what they have in Colorado and Washington. I’d really like those two states to show us how it’s going to work. The problem with anything, a certain amount is okay, but there is a tendency to go to extremes, and all of a sudden, if there’s advertising and legitimacy, how many people can get stoned and still have a great state or a great nation? World’s pretty dangerous, very competitive. I think we needed to stay alert, if not 24 hours a day, more than some of the pot heads might be able to put together.
What is going to be our future?
34 comments:
The media are trumpeting Colorado's pot tax revenues. Problem is, the revenue isn't all that great, and is far below projections. (So - once again - the media are lying.)
The greatness threshold was passed many decades ago, Moonbeam. The fact that Jerry is governor again is all the proof one needs that California is beyond redemption, am I right, Rayo de Luna?
The future is state sponsored hedonism.
I see no way of averting this except through personal choice.
Hey, maybe we don't have any real problems. That's got be a good thing.
The truth is that through most of American history, the population has been much more intoxicated than it is today on a daily basis. Drunk, and not to mention burdened by the toil and sickness that was daily life, and yet an amazing nation was built. Maybe we should be getting more fucked up, because we could never accomplish that today with all our clear minds and clear schedules.
We have sober leaders who are worried that Guam may sink from too many people on it, and who can't build a website regardless of how much money and time you give them, so could a bunch of potheads running things really be much worse?
BTW calling people who smoke pot "potheads" like I did is really stupid, just like calling anyone who ever drinks "a drunk".
@bagoh
Little known is that factories once doled out shots of whiskey throughout the day to their workers to alleviate the boredom and grim working conditions.
Factory workers, particularly in the steel industry, were drunk 24/7.
Sobriety among the masses, I'm inclined to believe, is a relatively contemporary phenomenon.
ST, Oh yea, I know it. I grew up the kid of two steel workers. The street in front of the steel plant was lined with nothing but bars. Most of the plant would cross the street at lunch time to get drunk before returning to work the heavy machinery. They were a fun and happy lot, and I think they enjoyed their workday more than most people do today.
Jerry Brown will say anything because he's a known liar. I would prescribe large doses of pot and booze for him during his work day. It really can't hurt, and there is at least a chance it might improve his judgement.
I think Brown has a point, probably learned along the road of excess.
The impetus for the Temperance Movement and modern feminism was that the men were spending most of their paychecks on booze at the bars, instead of bringing the money home to pay for food and housing for the kids and wife.
That's why we all went to the bar together as a family when I was a kid. We were sinful rubes tearing apart society. That's how we roll.
Getting fucked up is never a good idea. Unless you're watching sports, or at someone's birthday party, or if it's a holiday, or if it's your birthday, or if you're in the man cave, or if it's a weekend, or if your dog died, or if your mom just got out of prison, and other stuff like that.
Shouting Thomas said...
The impetus for the Temperance Movement and modern feminism was that the men were spending most of their paychecks on booze at the bars, instead of bringing the money home to pay for food and housing for the kids and wife.
The consequence of the Temperance Movement was Prohibition. It was misguided, but did it change that the men were spending most of their paychecks on booze at the bars, instead of bringing the money home to pay for food and housing for the kids and wife.?
Looks at what happened to Odysseus and his guys.
If there's absolutely no case for sobriety, then argue that, please.
@chickenlittle
I don't know if Temperance and feminism succeeded in that regard.
My dad was the first man in my extended family to make the decision to live a sober life. Both my grandfathers were kind, good men, but they were drunks. One of my granddaddies was a bootlegger.
So, from my experience, it would appear that sobriety is an individual choice.
@bagoh
And, yes, it is also little acknowledged that most of the ladies were drunks, too.
Feminine virtue, sobriety and chastity is not quite as widespread as the ladies claim.
Pre-legalization, actual tax is low and projected tax revenue is fictitiously high in order to get the suckers to vote in favor.
Post-legalization, the tax will be raised because that's the point of legalization: Increased revenues to the state. The actual burden of legalization, the increase in accidents and absenteeism, will fall squarely on the people and their private insurers.
Well knock me over with a feather, Gerry Brown is concerned about a "great" society? And all this time I coulda swore Governor Moonbeam was all about making California a cool society. Square terms like great must be polling well for a member of the Democrat ruling hipster elite to use it.
"How many people can get stoned and still have a great state or a great nation"
Idiotic question. People who want to pickle their brains have plenty of legal means to do so already. Somehow society muddles on even though you can buy booze in every supermarket.
As long as you keep voting democrat, then the good times will roll... or be rolled...
I guess the calculus is that the stoned vote democrat. So marijuana is voter outreach, or something.
Oh, here it is, I'm not making it up,
Democrats' great green hope? Americans only want to vote for marijuana.
The stoners will outnumber the voters paying higher insurance premiums. Offsetting those potential losses.
They have enough cash for marijuana so they have enough cash for our healthcare plan for them, so thick with presumption an odd dichotomy when stoners are self-medicating for something maybe something even so banal as boredom with ordinary thoughts.
I suspected I might be a stoner myself at a very early age and determined to be wary. Foremost among impulses is curiosity. It kills me every time. All over the place. The road of learning how such things as physics affect the physical body has been a long and torturous winding rubble-ridden dirt and mud patch road. I used to twirl around, spin, until I fall in the grass and the world continued to spin in a blur, I'd hold my stomach and wretch. Gather my wits and do it again. I'm recalling about 4 years of age. And I recall thinking way back then, "you better watch it." I knew I could get carried away with that whole alternate consciousness thing. That was the earliest indication.
AllenS ...for President, Governor, Senator, anything damn thing he wants...based solely on his 12:35 PM commentary.
Quite a few.
Once the equivalent of game-changing industries like GOOGLE or Amgen pops up in the Bible Belt or the Midwest then we'll be more understanding of Jerry Brown's worry over excessive dreaming.
The truth is that through most of American history, the population has been much more intoxicated than it is today on a daily basis. Drunk, and not to mention burdened by the toil and sickness that was daily life, and yet an amazing nation was built.
True, dat.
Maybe we should be getting more fucked up, because we could never accomplish that today with all our clear minds and clear schedules.
Can't argue there.
BTW calling people who smoke pot "potheads" like I did is really stupid, just like calling anyone who ever drinks "a drunk".
And when you're on a roll, you're on a roll. Can't say that doesn't make sense, either.
Liquor, if done right, provides a more exhilirating high than pot. It's also got a built in Puritan ethic. You really pay for your sins the next day......Pot got more cachet than it deserved because it was illegal. Now that it's legal, pot people will look sad and harmless. Over the years they've created and consumed a lot of bad music, but they're not a genuine threat to civilization.
Post a Comment