Pottery

Short Version:
Legalize marijuana, social and financial benefits will ensue.

Long Version:
Big article in the Vancouver Sun Saturday and another today about the imminent collapse of the British Columbian economy on the back of California's various proposed new marijuana legislations. Apparently the illegal (and therefore untaxed and unregulated) export of "B.C. Bud" to the USA, and particularly California, is a huge money-spinner for the province, despite the lack of official taxation measures on the trade.

I have a healthy disrespect for the Vancouver Sun - two or three quality writers excepted - to the extent that I'm remembering the NZ Herald almost fondly. However, even taking the pair of under-informed articles and their statistical guesstimates with a healthy pile of salt*, it's interesting to see that the dollar value of B.C.'s marijuana export trade is thought to be really high: variously "at least $3 billion," or "$4-5 billion." Either way, that's a lot of pot-related income, especially when you consider that (again, guesstimated) 70% of it is being moved illegally across an international border, which constitutes a whole new level of criminal offending and commensurate harsher sentencing for those who get nabbed. And a whole new level of taxes and excise duties which are not being collected.

Neither the B.C. provincial government or the Canadian federal government - or their US counterparts - makes a cent from direct taxation of this highly lucrative trade. Secondary financial benefits accrue through the spending habits of the growers and transporters - and the snack attack food purchases of the end users - but the huge amount of lost wealth borders on criminal, especially in light of the current state of world financial affairs**

Some parts of California are investigating legalizing - not just decriminalizing - the marijuana industry. A number of states and provinces, including both B.C. and California, already have "Medical Marijuana" programmes in place, whereby marijuana is considered a valid medicinal substance which can be prescribed by a licensed medical practitioner. The NZ Medical Association is backing a Law Commission recommendation to introduce a similar arrangement in NZ, but a number of Californian cities are taking things several steps further, with Oakland looking at legitimizing "four production plants where pot would be grown, packaged and processed into items ranging from baked goods to body oil" in order to increase the level of legitimacy - and therefore taxability - of the city's marijuana industry.

Apparently the four current licensed marijuana stores in Oakland turned over in excess of USD$28 million in 2009, and one has to assume that the revenue generated by the illicit market reached much, much higher levels. At state level California is currently broke, and municipal bodies sound like they're not much better off, with police forces - which are a local government responsibility in the USA - being cut heavily along with a number of other services. So they're turning towards increased regulation and taxation of the marijuana trade, which will mean not only a new revenue stream for governmental organisations, but also job creation on a number of levels, from legislative creators, inspectors and enforcers, to those working in the marijuana trade, whose roles are not currently included in job statistics.

On the flip side, it's well known that as soon as a rule is set down, loopholes are sought, found, and exploited, a la the medical clinics next door to most medical marijuana outlets, where a friendly physician will prescribe marijuana for whatever ails you - or, as I suspect is more usual, does not ail you.

Still, I think it's a bloody good general principle, and that NZ should look seriously at the issue of legalisation. Not in the piecemeal, incoherently- and multiply-regulated way that its being done in the States, but under a sensible model which is regulated and workable from end to end, including opportunities for employers to have a say in the allowable levels of THC (the active ingredient in marijuana) for their employees. A well-constructed system for regulating and controlling the industry would see not only increased revenues for government coffers, and a swag of new jobs created and/or recognised just when that's most needed, but also a drop in the use of methamphetamine.

Admittedly, I have no evidence to support that last bit, but everything I've heard about methamphetamine as sold in NZ suggests that, unlike marijuana, it's a comparatively odorless drug; the end-user saleable units are comparatively compact; it makes users go nuts and attack people with samurai swords. As far as I'm aware, the number of marijuana-induced samurai sword incidents currently stands at zero, and legalising its production and sale would make it a far more attractive proposition than the far more physically- and socially-destructive methamphetamine scouge.

In fact, I've seen enough evidence to support ranking pot far less likely to induce or encourage non-pot criminal activity not only than dirty methamphetamine but also alcohol, which is a legal, regulated drug, and is, according to the Queenstown police chief, responsible for pretty much all of the crime in Queenstown. I've heard doctors say that alcohol is a major factor in the majority of Friday- and Saturday-night hospital Emergency Department admissions and it plays a significant role in NZ's appallingly high teen pregnancy rate. Sounds like a better candidate for illegality than pot to me.

Legalise marijuana production. Gain income through taxation; gain new export markets; increase land values in hilly, hitherto-unproductive regions; reduce crime statistics threefold, through reduced methamphetamine use and through increased pot-induced slothfulness and through no longer pursuing marijuana "crimes"; increase all-night service station snack food sales; increase police resource allocation to significant crime activity; decrease unemployment statistics; create a bunch of new careers. Get some smart cookies involved in figuring out the rules and regulations around driving/working/doing things under the influence. Social and financial benefits will ensue.







* = There's a newly-sparked rehashed salt-intake media beat-up going on here at the moment. Everything I've read has referenced the levels of sodium people are getting from the shitty junk food they ingest with such gusto, which begs the question: Why try to target people's after-market salt use, rather than the fact that they're eating "food" so bad it makes them fat while still leaving them malnourished?

** = Although B.C. has apparently been experiencing both general economic and job growth of late, in direct contrast to the rest of Canada, most of the USA, and NZ