Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F
I don't have a huge dog in this fight one way or the other, but it does seem like there's a flawed logical assumption in the revenue argument.
Here in BC, it's widely acknowledged that the cottage grow-op industry is supplying enough pot for the market. Also, it's generally admitted that those who want to buy pot can easily get it; you often hear it anecdotally recounted that, if you're underage, pot is easier to obtain than alcohol.
If both of those are true, and if the gov't decides to heavily tax legally sold pot similar to cigarettes, why is anyone going to buy the legal stuff? And if you're already growing and selling pot illegally, why would you opt into a federally monitored program that required you to remit a bunch of your cash intake to the gov't?
You can bet that if the black market for cigarettes was more easily accessible due to a wide spread cottage tobacco industry, people wouldn't be shelling out, what, $15 for a pack of smokes? (That may be way off, as my personal knowledge of the price per pack is decades old).
|
If the quality is good and the supply is steady, people will pay for the convenience of being able to pick it up whenever they want. As easy as picking up pot may be, it's still not at the point where it's a quick trip to the corner store yet. Nor is it always guaranteed to be good. (Obviously different people will have different experience between dealers and growers, but on average I believe the above to be the case for a majority of people.)
As well, when it is easy to go get legally, more growers will leave the business because it won't be nearly as profitable. You don't see many people brewing their own booze now do you? Yet in the days of prohibition there were more than a few homemade stills around.
There will still be some illegal trade for sure, but I see it taking a big hit, and revenue streams going up for the government.