Berkely, stealing another 2% from dispensaries

[burgertime2010]

I dream of citrus trees in my yard. I just don't care for Florida or Socal. pomegranates, blood orange, grapefruit. it would be great.

It is a shared dream, I have aloe, lemons. rosemary, pomegranetes hang over the neighbors wall.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

It is a shared dream, I have aloe, lemons. rosemary, pomegranetes hang over the neighbors wall.

people do not realize what fresh fruit actually tastes like. btw......I do not mind paying into Medicare, and contribute much more than that, to those in need. if dispensaries were treated the same as Big Pharm, I'd have no problem with them giving back, but they are not. they operate with constraints; Big Pharm owns senators.

 

[UncleBuck]

if dispensaries were treated the same as Big Pharm, I'd have no problem with them giving back, but they are not.

they don't care what you think. they're gonna keep selling cannabis, giving some away, and laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

they don't care what you think. they're gonna keep selling cannabis, giving some away, and laughing all the way to the bank.

totally not the point. but, you know that.
and, very powerful ESP, there, Buck. reading every dispensary owners mind, an' all.

 

[UncleBuck]

totally not the point. but, you know that.
and, very powerful ESP, there, Buck. reading every dispensary owners mind, an' all.

not their minds, just their actions.

if they whined and cried about 2% as much as you are doing, they'd set up in the next town over.

instead, a new dispensary is gonna open up, 2% free weed and all.

i guess they'll just have to be content with a 49 to 1 split. such tyranny.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

not their minds, just their actions.

if they whined and cried about 2% as much as you are doing, they'd set up in the next town over.

instead, a new dispensary is gonna open up, 2% free weed and all.

i guess they'll just have to be content with a 49 to 1 split. such tyranny.

supposition
dismissed

 

[burgertime2010]

people do not realize what fresh fruit actually tastes like. btw......I do not mind paying into Medicare, and contribute much more than that, to those in need. if dispensaries were treated the same as Big Pharm, I'd have no problem with them giving back, but they are not. they operate with constraints; Big Pharm owns senators.

Thank you for any contribution to Medicare without ripping my head off, big pharm is too big....growing your meds is a big fuck you to them.

 

[UncleBuck]

supposition
dismissed

i guess their actions don't speak louder than their non-existent words.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

i guess their actions don't speak louder than their non-existent words.

you have not an inkling how they feel about it.
pay us, or uproot your business. yes, I know folks in that line of work. extortionists. not my cup of tea.

 

[UncleBuck]

pay us, or uproot your business.

or they could sell their dispensaries for millions.

what a horrible option.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

or they could sell their dispensaries for millions.

what a horrible option.

so many options. except for not being extorted. that one's not on the menu.

 

[UncleBuck]

so many options. except for not being extorted. that one's not on the menu.

how is it extortion when they agree with it?

again, there is a new dispensary allowed to open. if someone goes ahead and does the capitalist thing and opens a dispensary, they do it knowing full well that they have to give away 2% of their weed.

if they didn't agree to that, they wouldn't open the dispensary and make a ton of money. or they would open a dispensary somewhere else that didn't mandate 2% to the poor.

retard.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

how is it extortion when they agree with it?

again, there is a new dispensary allowed to open. if someone goes ahead and does the capitalist thing and opens a dispensary, they do it knowing full well that they have to give away 2% of their weed.

if they didn't agree to that, they wouldn't open the dispensary and make a ton of money. or they would open a dispensary somewhere else that didn't mandate 2% to the poor.

retard.

so......they "agreed."
let's give them the option of not paying it, and see how many agree to that. your argument is flaccid. bargaining for what level of extortion is wrong........inane. we're done here, tax-slave.

 

[UncleBuck]

let's give them the option of not paying it

are you saying they have literally no other options than to give away 2% of their weed?

even if they sell their dispensaries for millions and retire on the central cali coast, they still have to give away 2% of their weed?

you are literally retarded.

they all absolutely have the option to not give away 2% of their weed to needy patients.

 

[burgertime2010]

so......they "agreed."
let's give them the option of not paying it, and see how many agree to that. your argument is flaccid. bargaining for what level of extortion is wrong........inane. we're done here, tax-slave.

Are dispesaries non-profit collectives? Are they technlically a business? I think this detail has been overlooked.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

I seek two patients in northern AZ; MS pts. step to front of line. $0 donation required. starting 2015.

 

[DonAlejandroVega]

are you saying they have literally no other options than to give away 2% of their weed?

even if they sell their dispensaries for millions and retire on the central cali coast, they still have to give away 2% of their weed?

you are literally retarded.

they all absolutely have the option to not give away 2% of their weed to needy patients.

slave......."done," means just that.

 

[Rob Roy]

Patenting a naturally occurring plant seems a little possessive of[/QUOTE]

no one has ever been forced to own a dispensary. it is a CHOICE that people make of their own free will.

and the chance o earn some real money comes with some strings attached, like always.

no one wants to live in your world where you deny service to blacks because they are black. we tried that and rejected it over 50 years ago.

go cry elsewhere.

Asking others for permission (via a license) is a clear example of who is making the choices.....In other words free people don't need permission to own themself or grow a plant they might like. Slaves do. If there were any elements of free choice, coercive government would not be in the equation....Meathead.

When my boys were little sometimes I'd give them "choices" of Strawberry Oatmeal or Blueberry Oatmeal for breakfast. If they had the ability to exercise "free choice", I would not have been the one DEFINING the choices. They'd have been all over the Capt. Crunch.

When is a "service" a service and when is it an imposed edict? You never go there....because you'd get all tangled up in your contradictions.

You forgot to tell me how a person that is forced to serve another isn't in some way at least partially enslaved. I'm sure you'll give me a very direct reply right after you're done feeding the gerbils..

 

[Rob Roy]

can't believe you're calling civil rights "special privileges" and "slavery".

we tried it your way without civil rights more than 50 years ago. go ahead and ask some blacks who were around back then how peaceful it was.

So when you are going to explain to me the difference between an actionable act of aggression and an act of indifference or is that too much for your pea brain and canned answers to be able to examine?


What you are implying is that a person has NO property rights and that all choices of what will be "the choices" are to be made by the coercive government.

Would you like strawberry oatmeal or blueberry Little Bucky? See?



You have tried to position my view as that as a racist, which is kind of funny, yet you are the one that thinks a person because of their race or place in an imposed hierarchy has the right to make others serve them. I don't. I think all people should interact on a peaceful and consensual basis. You don't.

 

[Rob Roy]

Your not even responding or acknowledging half of what i posted...

Do you agree that its unfair the gov is listing laws to be followed without proper vote from the people?

Just the same as gay marrage should be voted on by the people?

Difference between 2 is one has alot of faith an religion involved and one is business which is black and white to be followed by strict wording... not fair to compare such opposite subjects

Gay marriage should be between the participants. You and I voting on whether the participants should be allowed to do something that doesn't involve us is a slippery slope. It could lead to things like making plants illegal.

As far as Uncle Buck goes, there's something you should know....he was found by a pack of feral gerbils as a young lad babbling incoherently wearing dirty diapers in the bathroom of fast food establishment. You should be kind to him, there's alot that he has to overcome. It's not easy when your family home is a habitrail and your best friend growing up was a street wise black gerbil.