• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cannabis commercialization question

jakesteele

Fait Accompli
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
2,181
Location
Rain City
Everybody is trying to figure out how to fix the economy nowadays. I have always been a proponent of cannabis/hemp/medicinal legalization and full production of its various applications. If it didn't fix the economy outright, it would still go a long way toward helping it.

What I am wondering is that if you assume you had full capacity production of these three areas going, how much money would each category generate?

1. Commercial

2. Recreational

3. Medicinal
 
The only way to find out for sure is to legalize it.

I suspect that "medicinal use" would mostly disappear if recreational use was allowed, just as "medicinal use" of liquor mostly disappeared once prohibition was ended.
 
It's not clear to me how beneficial it would be.

The weird thing is, it's already sold, illegally, so a lot of the money that would be involved in the marijuana industry, is already involved in the marijuana industry.

It seems like there would become a lot of legitimate jobs, but I'm not sure it would generate more legal jobs than illegal ones that already exist.

The price would come down, product quality would likely increase, and the industry would become much more streamlined and efficient. So that's a good thing.

Also, it could easily generate a lot of tax revenue for the government, so that would be good (for government). ETA: they can also stop wasting so much money on the "war on drugs."


It's just hard to say how much of the money and jobs will be a wash because that money and those jobs are already there, just illegally instead of legally.

Anyone know a lot about this that can comment?
 
Last edited:
The price would come down, product quality would likely increase, and the industry would become much more streamlined and efficient. So that's a good thing.
Hash is cheaper in Copenhagen - where it's illegal - than it is in Amsterdam - where it's legal. So, that's not necessarily true.

I doubt it would "save the economy", but it would surely boost it, and take the wind out of the sails of the mafia and various gangs. And that's a good thing, no? That's reason enough if you ask me.

It's evident that it's not quite as harmful as alcohol or other legal substances.. Here's from a 2007 article: Nutt, David, Leslie A King, William Saulsbury, Colin Blakemore. "Development of a rational scale to assess the harm of drugs of potential misuse" The Lancet 2007; 369:1047-1053.

http://www.udel.edu/chem/theopold/chem465/copland.udel.edu/~rmarcus/drug chart.gif

Edited by LashL: 
Removed hotlinked image. Please see Rule 5.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Everybody is trying to figure out how to fix the economy nowadays. I have always been a proponent of cannabis/hemp/medicinal legalization and full production of its various applications. If it didn't fix the economy outright, it would still go a long way toward helping it.


Not to get into why marijuana should or should not be legal, but I have to say that anyone who thinks that legalizing it would significantly help the economy has probably been smoking way too much of it as it is.
 
Isn't it already the number one crop in (at least part of) northern California?
 
Isn't it already the number one crop in (at least part of) northern California?

Largest cash crop in North America actually.

The study estimates that marijuana production, at a value of $35.8 billion, exceeds the combined value of corn ($23.3 billion) and wheat ($7.5 billion).
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=2735017&page=1

This is purely a result of its illegal status however. A price drop would certainly accompany legalization as producers could adopt more efficient large scale production methods without fear of prosecution. According to the best estimates about 85% of cannabis in N America is grown indoor under lights. This is a very inefficient process.
 
Not to get into why marijuana should or should not be legal, but I have to say that anyone who thinks that legalizing it would significantly help the economy has probably been smoking way too much of it as it is.
I have seen it estimated in a Danish newspaper that about 300.000 people are smoking it on a daily basis in Denmark, this is out of ~6 million people. Now let's do the math in DKK - simplified..

If they smoke at least one gram per day (and those I know smoke a lot more), and the price for one gram is 100 DKK with a tax of 40%, then we have this..

100*.4*300000*31*12 = 4.464.000.000 DKK (annual tax income)

That's ~4.5 billion DKK, which estimates to ~725 million USD per year - and this is just for little Denmark. Would you call that a significant number?
 
According to the best estimates about 85% of cannabis in N America is grown indoor under lights. This is a very inefficient process.
Ineffecient, but it results in a different crop than you can breed outdoors. Skunk made with artificial lights is usually much stronger than "field weed" like Mexican or Bolivian, due to various properties.. Weed grown outside is half the price of skunk here in Denmark, and also about half as strong. You can rest assure that legalization won't stop the indoor production of skunk. Just look at Holland.
 
Time Magazine (as of 03/09) said cannabis came in at $14 billion per year in California:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1884956,00.html

If cannabis were federally legalized, the total revenue wouldn't be 50 times $14 billion -- because not all states are California-sized -- but you can imagine that the total revenue figure would be in the hundreds of billions.

But my point is that it is produced and sold right now.

Thousands of people, right this second, are handing someone a wad of cash for a bag of marijuana. This money is already in the economy. It may not be represented by GDP figures, but the transactions do exist.

The real question becomes: Were it legal, how much economic gain would we see due to the efficiency gains of marijuana being legal. (No more growing indoors, or in secret warehouse basements, no more elaborate transportation schemes, less security and no need for police bribery, the list goes on)

(ETA: Good point, Thomas, yes higher grade marijuana would likely still be grown indoors, but still, more efficient if the operations were transparent and legal.)

Then we would have to subtract the inefficiency due to taxes and union lag.

Those are the numbers I would be curious to see, if possible.

ETA: Just so I'm clear, I'm not talking about medicinal marijuana, I mean legalize it for recreation as well.
 
Last edited:
Another factor to consider: There would likely be more people consuming marijuana were it legal. I assume there are people who might otherwise do it, if not for the stigma, or fear of the law.
 
I'd think it'd be worth it just for the 2 factors of taking some of the wind out of the sails of organized crime and reducing the pointless costs of police, legal and incarceration work around users and sellers. Even if the net effect is just losing a few prison jobs and adding a few commercial cannabis jobs I'd be satisfied.
 
Ineffecient, but it results in a different crop than you can breed outdoors. Skunk made with artificial lights is usually much stronger than "field weed" like Mexican or Bolivian, due to various properties.. Weed grown outside is half the price of skunk here in Denmark, and also about half as strong. You can rest assure that legalization won't stop the indoor production of skunk. Just look at Holland.


"The Botany of Desire" by Michael Pollan is a great study of how strongly human intervention has changed pot's properties.
 
Another factor to consider: There would likely be more people consuming marijuana were it legal. I assume there are people who might otherwise do it, if not for the stigma, or fear of the law.

I'm not so sure about this. Recent examples of decriminalization in Holland and Portugal have shown that the number of users has been steady and even declined somewhat after decrim.

You have to remember, cannabis gets a big boost in 'cool' from being illegal. Its rebellious and a tiny bit dangerous to a young person. Take this away and a lot of people will never try it in the first place.

Conversely, I don't really think there are many people who resist using cannabis due to its illegal status. Perhaps a few but not many in my experience.

Now if total legalization brought with it a flood of high dollar marketing from the likes of Philip Morris then perhaps we would see usage spike. I would think that cannabis would be even more tightly regulated than tobacco however and marketing would be a no no.
 
Ineffecient, but it results in a different crop than you can breed outdoors. Skunk made with artificial lights is usually much stronger than "field weed" like Mexican or Bolivian, due to various properties.. Weed grown outside is half the price of skunk here in Denmark, and also about half as strong. You can rest assure that legalization won't stop the indoor production of skunk. Just look at Holland.

What you say is very true. I suspect we would see a move toward greenhouses. They give all the benefits of a tightly controlled indoor environment but use the power of the sun with which no HID or LED lighting can compete for efficiency, spectrum and overall power.
 
There has to be a huge savings in law enforcement and prison costs.

Drugsense.org runs a drug war clock that estimates the total spent by US State and Federal agencies on the entire war on drugs. It only breaks out cannabis by arrests and the latest figures show 872,000 arrests for cannabis in 2007 with 85% of those being for possession only.

http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm

Consider this case.

http://stash.norml.org/tyler-texas-man-gets-35-years-for-4-6-ounces-of-marijuana

This man was sentenced to 35 years for 4.6oz of cannabis. I'm not sure about the cost of housing someone for that length of time but it surely has to be completely disproportionate to anything you might accomplish by getting this person off the street. You would think those millions could be better spent elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
Hash is cheaper in Copenhagen - where it's illegal - than it is in Amsterdam - where it's legal. So, that's not necessarily true.
That's mainly because it's also not legal in Amsterdam, only decriminalized. Basically, the police can't arrest you for having marihuana, and selling it from a coffee shop is also legal. However, there's no way for a coffee shop to legally get their supplies in bulk. The shops and people that visit the shops can only grow small quantities. Maybe if it would be completely legalized, it would get cheaper.
 
Some good points brought up here, thanks. Let me define my terms a little bit more to see if we can get this more spefic.

1. By medicinal, I mean having the proper scientists research its various areas of effectiveness and come up with actual medicines. I suspect that whatever ailment it is being sold for as by smoking it could probably be administered by a type of derivative that would be more efficient and wouldn’t be as much fun as smoking it. Don’t know if this would actually produce patentable products for Big Pharma to make money on or not, but it least it would be a boon to some degree for the people.
2. Recreational - When people say that the price would go down because production costs would down are right, but the way I would address that is to keep the price per oz. pretty much the same as now (assume $200 per oz.). In return you would give the consumer an overall better end product in that it would come in all the flavors as now and more. Everything you bought would be perfectly manicured with no pieces of unnecessary stemage/little leaves, year around supply, never a drought. It would be sold from grams on up with the smaller units being charged more per unit that larger purchases.

Now, to counteract someone selling it illegally for less money I would deal with it this way: make the laws similar to the ‘moonshine laws’. By law, you would be able to grow enough for your own consumption (3-5lbs. per yr.), but would face stiff penalties for selling your own homemade ‘shine. Just like they have it today controlled by the ATF.

3. commercial - http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/popmech1.htm

NEW BILLION-DOLLAR CROP
Popular Mechanics
February, 1938

AMERICAN farmers are promised a new cash crop with an annual value of several hundred million dollars, all because a machine has been invented which solves a problem more than 6,000 years old (decorticator/hemp thrasher)…

…it will displace imports of raw material and manufactured products produced by underpaid coolie and peasant labor and it will provide thousands of jobs for American workers throughout the land.

…It is used to produce more than 5,000 textile products, ranging from rope to fine laces, and the woody "hurds" remaining after the fiber has been removed contain more than seventy-seven per cent cellulose, and can be used to produce more than 25,000 products, ranging from dynamite to Cellophane.

…producing fiber at a manufacturing cost of half a cent a pound, and are finding a profitable market for the rest of the stalk. Machine operators are making a good profit in competition with coolie-produced foreign fiber while paying farmers fifteen dollars a ton for hemp as it comes from the field.

…Thousands of tons of hemp hurds are used every year by one large powder company for the manufacture of dynamite and TNT. A large paper company, which has been paying more than a million dollars a year in duties on foreign-made cigarette papers, now is manufacturing these papers from American hemp grown in Minnesota. A new factory in Illinois is producing fine bond papers from hemp. The natural materials in hemp make it an economical source of pulp for any grade of paper manufactured, and the high percentage of alpha cellulose promises an unlimited supply of raw material for the thousands of cellulose products our chemists have developed.

…Our imports of foreign fabrics and fibers average about $200,000,000 per year; in raw fibers alone we imported over $50,000,000 in the first six months of 1937. All of this income can be made available for Americans.
…The paper industry offers even greater possibilities. As an industry it amounts to over $1,000,000,000 a year, and of that eighty per cent is imported. But hemp will produce every grade of paper, and government figures estimate that 10,000 acres devoted to hemp will produce as much paper as 40,000 acres of average pulp land.

As you can see from the data from above, we are talking about some big, big money and significant positive impact on the economy and society. Now, what I’m after is how money would cannabis, in all its forms and applications, generate for our economy?
 
That's mainly because it's also not legal in Amsterdam, only decriminalized. Basically, the police can't arrest you for having marihuana, and selling it from a coffee shop is also legal. However, there's no way for a coffee shop to legally get their supplies in bulk. The shops and people that visit the shops can only grow small quantities. Maybe if it would be completely legalized, it would get cheaper.
Good point, I have also heard from a Dutchman that it's still controlled by harsh men from criminal enviroments, so you may be onto something there.
 

Back
Top Bottom