They love to limit choice when it favors their bottom line.
At least update your argument.
And for the purpose of entertainment…
Because of you’re going to start these dumbshit threads, at least have the courtesy to give people a good laugh before they split their own skulls open on the nearest doorjamb after trying to talk sense to you.
Funnily enough, I’m actually on board with this one. The push for marijuana in this country has been an absolute shitshow of greed, corruption, and corps shitting on citizens (WHAT A SURPRISE).
Anecdotally, there are indications that its use may prevent some cancers and may cause apoptosis of cancer cells in vivo.
Oh no, this can’t be true as it is not a synthetic drug.
I notice this article was published back in Dec. of last year about 20 years after legalization first appeared. I guess it’s better late than never.
Does 1 companies patent disregard everything the INDUSTRY has done so far?
The only sense that has been talked about on these threads have come through me. However, it is difficult to deal with people who have been blinded by propaganda for decades.
I’ve been posting links to the latest research and developments from the companies that have been creating them for the last year.
You simply don’t read the links. I’ve watched the click counter on them.
You are stunningly impervious to anything that isn’t complete and utter horse shit.
Did you even bother to read the articles I posted. Better yet did you understand them?
the latest research and developments from the companies that have been creating them for the last year.
Where were they since 1996 when medical marijuana became legal?
This is nothing more than Big Pharma trying to protect their monopolies. The result is that the public suffers so they can make another buck. Totally immoral.
Actually Big Pharma is virtually powerless to stop eventual legalization. I’m talking more about the implementation of the laws and the legislation so far. What’s your opinion on how those could be made better?
You need to learn how to read a sentence.
I have been posting these developments for the past year does not mean that these developments have only been taking place for a year.
With that absolute moron Jeff Sessions in the position of power he is it makes it more difficult.
Big Pharma IS powerless because of the public demands.
First marijuana needs to be taken out of Schedule 1 classification. I think cocaine is only a Schedule 2. Unreal.
Marijuana ought to be legal across the country even for recreational purposes. It will take non-status quo people being elected to office for that to happen. People who don’t have Super-Pacs and don’t take money from corporations.
Corporate money out of politics would be a good place to start.
Then when were they taking place?
I don’t think big pharma is trying to prevent the medical use of Marijuana. If they are, they’re doing a shit job of it. How many states legalized weed for recreational use in the last 2 years, a lot, I think the numbers up to 8.
If they saw a real market I would say its completely likely that they would try to enter that market because its so lucrative, or come up with an enhanced version.
Little to no regulation or tax would be a good place to start.
Eh. ln this specific example regulation is pretty vital, as are the taxes. Govt has no incentive to legalize without the tax revenues.
“Sin taxes” are completely pointless, but politically savvy. Who is going to ride in to defend big tobacco, big alcohol or big pot? It’s so arbitrary and dumb what gets sin taxed.
But if you want to tax something that really costs society money… why not sugar?
Sin taxes do an amazing job at pricing a certain segment of the population out of the market. Typically, they’re designed to lower consumption of things that will actively harm the user (which turns into an increased average rate of collecting govt assistance).
I’m not necessarily opposed to lowering MJ taxation to standard (non sin tax) levels. But not only do I agree with the effect of a sin tax, not sin taxing MJ would probably lead to the inevitable fall of the sin tax in general.
This doesn’t touch on what usage would be without the sin tax.
Sin tax = higher costs = shifts the S&D dynamic. Either it lowers consumption or S&D doesn’t apply to anything sin taxed. Has to be 1 or the other.
I seriously doubt more people living below the poverty line would smoke if the price was lower.
I don’t. I also don’t doubt that average consumption per consumer is lower with the sin tax. S&D is pretty hard to argue against.