you cannot posses more than an ounce. period.
If the November bill gets passed, what does that mean for us growers?
- Thread starter ninjagaiden
- Start date
you cannot posses more than an ounce. period.
Cali chronic
Well-Known Member
It is 1.3 that is vague as well as it is still illegal Federally so you are doing nothing for the acceptance rather allowing an amendment. Which we all know is designed to fuk us and help them.
Read on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_19
Read on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_19
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
Not state wide, but in Oakland/Berkley that is reasonably accurate. (technically it's Rich Lee, Harborside, BPG, and one other group. but your premise is correct). But they don't have the infrastructure to take over the industry state wide and there are PLENTY of opportunities to carve out your own nitch in the game if you're smart and planning ahead.
You forgot to mention that this charge goes on your permanent record and can prevent you from getting a job or place to live in the future. Sure, it puts new laws on the books but they aren't entirely unreasonable. Not selling to kids is a good law, shouldn't be doing that anyways. It eliminates more laws than it creates.
But that's all besides the point. If this works out the actual wording of the law does not matter. If it passes and is successful it will lead to other states following California's lead towards the ultimate goal of national legalization. National legalization is a good thing right?
Prohibition is THE highest form of government control by definition. The "cannabis lobby" is in no way more powerful than complete prohibition. While this bill clearly and shamelessly supportive of Richard Lee's business interests, it does not give him any authority over the state cannabis market that you or I could not acquire.
People here seem to be completely ignoring the fact that with this law ANY citizen of California can create their own cannabis business legally and for profit! The permits are not unreasonably priced. All people need to do is get off their asses and do it. You don't need privilege or to be a millionaire.
For the entirely reasonable price of $5000 dollars YOU can buy a permit to grow your own field of cannabis legally. That should be the best thing that has every happened to most of the people on this forum.
But instead of people actually planning and working to get this amazing opportunity, they'd rather complain about Rich Lee and Phillip Morris. Well I know for a fact that the worst shit I grow is better than the best top shelf in Rich Lee's sorry little dispensary. So if the big boys want to compete with my shit, I say bring it on!
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
gasoline off the top of my head. Everything has a sales tax, many other items have their own special taxes.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
Unless you have your 215. This allows you to have a zip without 215.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
And making money is evil? Have you thought about the fact that YOU can have your own commercial enterprise if this becomes law?Well after reading the thread on this and following many links and reading opinions on both sides I have changed my vote to a resounding NO on this
Here's why, I see now that this is being driven by interests that want to commercialize this industry for profit.
People assume that Richard Lee will own the entire cannabis industry after this. I assume none of these people have ever been to his dispensary Blue Sky Cafe. It's some of the shittiest weed in northern California. It's not a given that everyone will want to buy that product. Sure, he'll get rich, but he isn't taking over the entire industry. Weed smokers aren't going to all of a sudden want to smoke bammer. His entire growing philosophy is garbage and he adamantly believes in it.
Nothing is set in stone. People will be able to compete with him. The fact that he has an inferior product should make it pretty easy to do so. Nothing is stopping anyone here from forming their own business. All you need is the motivation to do so. Put out a better product at a reasonable price and people will buy your shit over Rich Lee's ditch weed every time.
Weedoozie
Well-Known Member
Oh shit and WOW, I just read the entire Tax, Control, Regulate Cannabis Initiative and you're right fdd2blk, as usual.
These motherfuckers behind the initiative are trying to pull a fast one against the medical cannabis patient community...they have conspicuously left out our rights under California's medical marijuana laws: Health & Safety Code Sections 11362.5 and 11362.7-11362.9. Mentions and omissions of MMJ laws occur in the 'preamble' of the initiative, titled Findings, Intent and Purposes. I'm concerned to say the least, nowhere in the sections to be added to California's legal code is there any mention of medical marijuana or any exemption for medical marijuana patients and providers. Is this not exploiting pain and suffering? My god, this initiative is extremely deceiving!
The major proponents of prop 19 are disguising this bill as a progressive positive step and yet the restrictions will be greater and more strict...If the authors of Prop. 19 wanted to protect medical marijuana patients, why did they write "notwithstanding any other provision of law"?
§11301 is titled Commercial Regulations and Controls. It starts with this quote: "Notwithstanding any other provision of state or local law". It prohibits sales to anyone under 21. Nowhere in this section is there any exemption for medical marijuana patients, cultivators, or distributors. I doubt they forgot. They have evil-genius-ly put together this bullshit bill to sound like it will be beneficial for cannabis consumers and yet, they hid all the real limitations and laws within the language...someone has put in a lot of time, money, and energy to get rich off of the passing of this bill and the inevitable suffering of medical marijuana patients who won't be able to supply their own medicine and who will basically be forced to purchase extremely expensive (in comparison to growing) and taxed medicine from the "government approved" distributors. That is really fucked up. They're are trying to create a sort of monopoly on the industry...!
In addition to allowing cities and counties to ban commercial cultivation and sales (including medical marijuana collectives and dispensaries) the initiative states:
"(g) prohibit and punish through civil fines or other remedies the possession, sale, possession for sale, cultivation, processing, or transportation of cannabis that was not obtained lawfully from a person pursuant to this section or section 11300;"
From what I gather, this means that the taxes and fees paid by the licensed commercial cultivators and distributors will be used to eliminate the competition.
For example, Oakland (the origin of prop 19) is in the process of licensing only four cultivators to supply the approximately 6,000 pounds per year sold by the four licensed dispensaries. Oaklands proposed new rules would eliminate small-scale growers since it would cost $5,000 just to apply for a cultivation permit, and a regulatory fee of $211,000 for those lucky few who will be harvesting enough to make multiple millions. The fee pays for regulating cultivation in Oakland, which will include enforcement against the people with Cannabis grow equipment in or around their homes. This is horrible...
I'm so disappointed in the way this prop was written. I think Benjamin Franklin would be pissed.
TokinPodPilot
Well-Known Member
The word is "niche" and this is yet another example of why people from other states need to work on/ruin their own states. Dick Lee has his mitts in both the Los Angeles and San Diego County markets. All you have to do is plan ahead, huh? Gee I can't imagine why Dick Lee didn't think of that? Oh wait, he did, as he was writing this crap legislation.
This bill adds new laws, period. And what charges? It's a $100 fine and currently just a misdemeanor. In fact, there is legislation before the CA Senate to reduce that to an infraction.
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/calif-senate-could-reduce-marijuana-possession-to-infraction
I'm not sure what astounds me more: the complete ignorance of how badly-worded laws are abused by law enforcement and government officials or how bad your understanding of what legalization is.
I see reading comprehension isn't one of your strong suits. I said this bill creates the lobby and legitimizes him as it's head. And if you think you're going to be able to just pop in and challenge his power-base, then you REALLY have no idea what is going on out here.
Yes, we must have missed that part. How silly.... I can't imagine how I could miss such so blindingly obvious. Oh, that's right.. because it's a load of crap. Oakland is already trying to set precedent and the fees they've been discussing range anywhere from $30,000 to hundreds of thousands. If there's anyone who needs to get off their ass, it's people like you. Go and fix/ruin your own state. California is much better without your input, TYVM.
Then go and get this piece of shit legislation passed in your own state. Or is it easier to sit from afar and ride the coattails of your betters?
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
Rich Lee is pretty damn far from controlling the LA and SD markets. Yes, all you have to do is plan ahead. There is no guarantee that Rich Lee's ditch weed is going to sell. With all his publicity, he still doesn't even have the top money making club in his own city. He's pretty far from controlling the California market. The cannabis industry is all about product. He puts out an inferior product. If you can put out a better product then he can (which is pretty easy), then your shit will sell.
So yes, put some effort into it and you'll benefit from this. Those who are being left out in the cold have no one to blame but themselves.
ANY legalization bill that has a prayer of passing will have some regulations. If you are against every legalization bill that has regulations in it, then effectively you are a prohibitionist.
I know how badly the proposition is written. I'm also aware that this bill isn't the final end to prohibition. It is just a huge first step.
And I realize reality isn't one of yours. You're willing to blow an amazing opportunity that may not come again because "booohooo! a corporation might make a profit!". Grow up!
California is my own state thank you very much. And I've gotten off my ass and am fully prepared for the effects of prop 19.
Yeah, I've lived in Cali my whole life. So stfu with that "go back to your own state" nonsense.
TokinPodPilot
Well-Known Member
Then you really fail. There were three initiatives up for the November ballot. Only the the one backed by Dick Lee was able to garner enough signatures because he paid $1.3M to get them. The other initiatives were volunteer-run and operated. You've gotten off your ass and prepared for your own little concerns and to cover your own ass. I stand by my assessment... you have one of the worst possible views on legalization. I'm rather glad this sort of obstinance isn't on our side. But, please... continue to cut and run and play at your scare tactics (really, this is our only chance? That's just rich... 20 years of work on legalization tells me otherwise). Good job at showing your true colors, though.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
Us grown folks understand that in the real world it takes cash to get things done. Those other initiatives weren't for real because no one financially backed them. So if you're waiting for someone to financially support a ballot initiative that they don't gratefully benefit from, GL with that. You'll be waiting a long time. NO ONE is going to spend a million dollars to support legalization unless the law is written in a way that gets them paid. That's how the world really works. To think anything else is borderline stupidity.
Damn right. Everyone else can do the same. If you don't, then that's on you. I know it's easier to complain than actually do something about it, but that's on you, not me. What's stopping you from doing the same? There is absolutely nothing wrong with working hard and profiting from that labor. It's the American way.
Only to be surpassed by your naive view that one day someone will write a flawless legalization initiative and people will give them the necessary money required to get it on the ballot because of course it's the right thing to do. lol. That world just doesn't work that way.
TokinPodPilot
Well-Known Member
It's OK... I understand. You think you're grown-up when you're just giving up. It's sad to see, but not everyone has the backbone for this fight. To everyone else, I think Dan Kone's comments stand for themselves as a good example of who wants this bill to succeed and firmly places where the greed really is on this issue.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
Well ok. Prohibition has been here since 1937. This is the best chance at legalization on a state level in that 77 year period. If past other states are sure to follow. If past this will eventually lead to the end of prohibition on a national level. But you want to hold off for another 77 years because Richard Lee might make a buck? That has to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
TokinPodPilot
Well-Known Member
You don't listen to yourself very often, then. More gaffs than Biden, Quayle and Gore combined. But like I said... I get it. You want the quick and easy solution and don't care who gets destroyed in the interim. You can keep pretending to be a voice of reason, when the only thing you're concerned with is yourself.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
So how long should we hold out for this perfect bill? It hasn't happened in 77 years. Is it worth waiting another 77 years? Even if we do get this mythical perfect bill passed what's to stop Richard Lee from getting the state senate to impose legislation that gives him a monopoly anyways? Even in your best case scenario where for some strange reason someone decides to spend millions of dollars to get the perfect legalization bill passed, the end result will be the same. Corporations and rich people will manipulate the system to benefit themselves and cut out the little guy. Representatives from conservative districts will impose regulations on it to show off for their conservative base.
There is no possible situation where we can have legalization without any additional rules or taxes imposed on it. That's the way our system works. If you won't support any repeal of prohibition because it has strings attached then you are for all practical purposes a supporter of prohibition.
Anyone else find it ironic that the one thing cops and drug dealers agree on is the continuation of prohibition?
BIGDAVE
Member
"Right now I can grow with no question or interpretation 6 mature plants or I can get a license for 99. Under this that will now be completely under interpretation by some judge or court of judges that will not have our best interests in mind. 
"
How do you go about gettting the license for the 99 plants license. I am assuming were talking CA. Thanks in advance. And does anyone know how to fix my signature?
"How do you go about gettting the license for the 99 plants license. I am assuming were talking CA. Thanks in advance. And does anyone know how to fix my signature?
whiteflour
Well-Known Member
Again. Gasoline is not a commodity. It's manufactured from several different products. A commodity is something that can be produced by ANYONE. Corn, Cotton, Wheat, those are commodities. Any state can grow it, and who ever grows best product, for the cheapest amount of money wins.
Tobacco used to be a commodity until the pharmaceutical companies had their way with it. It's still a commodity based market however. The tobacco companies do not own the farms, the people do, and the market determines the price.
If I harvested a crop of tobacco: I would pay a tax to the feds and sell it to a broker tax-free in state. They sell it to a manufacturer tax-free. It gets rolled and packaged, and used to sold to distributors tax-free. That changed in the 90s, tobacco come off the stock market, and it became a "processed" good, and they taxed it at the state distributors. Then again in the stores.
Every tax is value added, so in the end, only the state reaps the beneifit of a higher proportion in "sales tax". To not be a double tax, ALL taxes would have to be determined at the base value. Cost of manufacturing + markup.
EDIT:
By your logic, we should be paying tax on a "can of corn" even though we don't on an "ear of corn". They need to make Tobacco and Cannabis LOOK like its manufactured, but they are not. They are "packaged" like every other crop.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
Ok. I understand your point. You're probably correct.
Problem is, this isn't corn. Maybe it should be treated the same, but it won't be under any circumstances due to public perception. Now that perception can change over time when everyone is used to the idea of legal cannabis. But for now it is what it is.
Even if we passed a legalization bill with no taxes included, there is nothing to prevent the state assembly from passing their own bill that taxes and regulates it anyways. In fact that is a sure bet. Why? Because they can get away with it and the conservative congressmen behind the tax will be supported by their conservative districts.
The fact is that under any circumstances legalization will come with taxes and regulations at least for the time being. The good news is that this bill isn't the end of the legalization fight and regulations/taxes that we don't like can still be fought in the future.
There is also a certain advantage to having the tax rate being set by Richard Lee instead of some conservative congressmen after the fact. Instead of a $50 per ounce tax, they could put a $200 dollar an ounce tax if you leave it up to the California state government to decide. At least we know what the tax is now and it's not so high that it makes it impossible to sell legally and still make a profit.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
You get your doctor to say you need 99.
whiteflour
Well-Known Member
It should be. But it won't ever have that chance should this bill pass, and if it passes it will most likely deter the tobacco industry from getting involved. They aren't going to sacrifice their image again to pander with the government.
If this is treated like a commodity, they can not tax it at the state level, except for sales tax. Ever notice you don't pay sales tax on gasoline? Because you pay an EXCISE tax instead. If I tell the store I want $5 in gas, I get $5 in gas. I don't pay $5.50 for it. Double taxing is ILLEGAL.
If this passes it will be the end of the fight for a "free market". If we settle for this that will most likely be the federal system as well, and then we can probably bank on cannabis being grow out of the country. Probably Mexico or Venezuala, were the tobacco companies have facilities, and then there will be little quality control and only imported goods. NOT a good thing.
No. We don't know what the tax is, and it can vary even at the local level. Every city and county can have their own tax. So we'll have places around Oakland with cheap weed, and places elsewhere with inflated prices.