6 ms·

Weed being illegal on a federal level has had some interesting effects. Because of these laws, all legal weed has to be grown, processed, and retailed within a

Weed being illegal on a federal level has had some interesting effects. Because of these laws, all legal weed has to be grown, processed, and retailed within a single state. So much industry and local employment has been created by the legal barriers in place. It’s probably still a net positive to release the federal restriction, but I hope all these small/mid sized businesses don’t get gulped up by big tobacco or other mega corps

RobRivera 2y ago
'Time for them to perform due diligence and refactor their operations to take advantage of the new legal landscape to retain competitive pricing inorder for' all these small/mid sized businesses don't get gulped up by big tobacco or other mega corps.
- pm90 2y ago
  American corporations are great at retooling their business/supply chains for different products (see how quickly everyone moved into hard seltzers). I do expect big tobacco to move in aggressively if weed is made legal.
  - Scoundreller 2y ago
    Hasn’t really happened in Canada. I think a small-player alcohol company did move in, but only after the bubble popped. Turns out legalization of a drug doesn’t lead to massive increases in consumption. Who knew. Definitely kneecapped the black market though: most moved to the legal side and black market prices cratered.
    - cooper_ganglia 2y ago
      Lobbyists don't care about uncapturable black market money. The legal market has led to massive increase in legal, taxable money, so now is exactly the time for big tobacco to start salivating over the idea of capturing all of those transactions.
    - mminer237 2y ago
      Marijuana use has massively increased in the US as states have legalized it. Users have doubled: https://www.statista.com/statistics/264862/cannabis-consumption-in-the-us-since-2002/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/264862/cannabis-consumpt... Use among users has also increased 20%: https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/962353 https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/962353
      - Retric 2y ago
        20% increase in consumption isn’t exactly what I would call massive. Looking at historic trends the point where pot was first legalized for recreational use isn’t obvious. If anything the long term upward tends started long before legalization which didn’t seem to have significant impact. https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-020-8253-4#rightslink https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s...
        ghaff 2y ago
        I’m surprised it’s not more personally if the numbers are accurate. A lot of pretty casual users in professional jobs were mostly not going to find a friend of a friend to do an illegal transaction with. But they’ll go into a dispensary now and then. But you really see that reflected in the doubled number of users which is probably the more relevant number.
      - otherme123 2y ago
        If I could face consequences for using drugs, I will deny it even after being positive in a test. Of course, once legalized, I'll have no problem saying that I used in once or twice a year. Being it legal, safer and out of the dangerous black market, there will be some new users. Same happened after alcohol prohibition: more people consumed after the ban was lifted, but consumption was safer. But rarely people that didn't consume during the prohibition went on alcohol binge after the end of the ban. They just drank a couple of beers per week, maybe even a glass of bourbon twice a year, now that they can buy and consume it safely. Thus the stats you linked doesn't necesarily show a "massive" increase in use, but many people using it sparsely now and many people now admiting to use it that were using previously. In fact, while statista.com shows a 100% increase, the second and more controlled study shows only a ~20% increase that makes more sense (far from massive).
    - The_Blade 2y ago
      Denver definitely had perverse consequence. people eking out a living selling weed on the street quickly turned to... harder substances. people will get their dollar and people will get their high
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - jiayo 2y ago
      Big tobacco might have stayed out of the fray but since legalization the vape giant JUUL owns and operates dispensaries.
      - rascul 2y ago
        Juul is Big Tobacco.
      - dbtc 2y ago
        > Altria Group (formerly Philip Morris Companies), acquired a 35% stake in Juul Labs for $12.8 billion on December 20, 2018. Altria is the largest tobacco company in the United States. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juul
  - jerlam 2y ago
    Hopefully, the small/mid sized businesses hold a niche in the same way that craft brewers have maintained their existence (until they get acquired).
  - chrisweekly 2y ago
    Agreed -- but I think nobody knows quite how it'll play out. I think of the thriving microbrewery scene (vs not just Budweiser et al but so-called "premium" beers from megabreweries that don't hold a candle to the local stuff). I also wonder about the degree to which psilocybin might be following THC's path, wrt state vs federal laws....
  - tensility 2y ago
    Pabst already makes THC seltzers for the California market. Big business is already here, folks.
kgdiem 2y ago
Yes really good point. Won’t it still be up to the states to decide what the regulatory environment will look like — eg they can choose to preserve these jobs through existing regulatory frameworks in the same way that certain goods cannot be shipped to certain states
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- alistairSH 2y ago
  Note, they're only planning to move it from Schedule 1 (alongside heroin) to Schedule III (alongside anabolic steroids and ketamine). So, it won't be fully legal in the same sense as alcohol. Regardless, unless Congress does something to make it legal nationally, we'll still have the state frameworks. Just hopefully avoiding the most draconian criminal charges.
  - kgdiem 2y ago
    I read TFA after commenting. I think that is even more interesting; it’ll be very helpful for better understanding the safety profile of marijuana. Still curious to see how this may affect cannabis commerce. Will CVS have cannabis extracts behind the pharmacy counter?
  - tialaramex 2y ago
    One very important thing this does is get rid of a really glaring error. As a Schedule I drug, Marijuana supposedly is completely useless, its only role is as a potential danger and that's why nobody must have any - except, we've known for many years a bunch of people find it useful as a therapeutic drug, so that's clearly wrong and the Schedule I status is an error. Perhaps there shouldn't be any Schedule I drugs at all, the idea seems misconceived, but certainly if there are Schedule I drugs, Marijuana doesn't belong among them. Meanwhile in Schedule III it's a judgement call. Schedule III drugs like K or steroids are drugs we know are useful, your doctor can prescribe them, your hospital pharmacy has them, but we also know they get abused. That sounds much more like marijuana, and, to be honest, alcohol. Can we justify Schedule III for Marijuana and yet not for Alcohol? It's at least a serious question whereas the Schedule I status was just nonsense.
eyelidlessness 2y ago
A couple quick thoughts, having worked in the legal cannabis industry (now a few years out): - Consolidation is already happening in a lot of ways, in some cases despite state laws designed to prevent it - Consolidation by big tobacco seems less likely than probably other major industry incumbents (in the long run, I’d bet on companies primarily oriented around alcohol) - Federal posture since Cole (when first states legalized recreational, partially rolled back under Trump/Sessions but seemingly not as much as was feared at the time) is largely what prompted strong local laws; it’s based in analysis of interstate commerce; federal legalization could have a similar analysis without undermining existing strong local laws; the tradeoff would probably be large disparity of justice between states (on party lines) - A much better outcome would be a central rule not just to legalize, but to more strongly incentivize justice for people affected by draconian laws in the first place. This is a pipe dream, but it should be the focus because any compromise will start with that.
- omgCPhuture 2y ago
  Tobacco smoke killed ALL my grandparents, well, well one of them would have died from alcohol use, as he was a fisherman and they drink a lot. My uncle died from liver and bowel cancer, the liver cancer stems from alcohol consumption, or rather it's metabolite, acetaldehyde, which is _scary as hell_: It makes cancerous scar tissue of whatever it touches, thats why alcoholics die from liver failure: it becomes all scar tissue and cannot regenerate, which is part of its function (the average adult has a liver 3 years of average age). It is also what gives the alcohol buzz. He was not a heavy drinker, but only drank wine and aqua vit/liquor, 1-2 times a year he would get shitfaced -- he was a funny drunk. I miss him. I miss all my grandparnts, they were the best and did not deserve Emphysema , lung cancer and so forth. Grandma taught me soldering, welding, basic ircuitry, how to ride a bike, composting, growing veggies, all about berries in the wild and helped me save up for my Nintendo NES,encuraged mt curiosity...I would beat the crap out a tobacco exec if I crossed paths with one, a part of me wants to torture them. I smoked for 15 years, turns out quitting was easy, once you undestood the way the addiction works, but nobody considers that they developed oral fixation from sucking on a potennt noootropic habit forming substance all day, But then we have Silvy Listhaug (politician): Marijuana will continue to be banned because she is a mom, she told the reporter photographing her smoking cigarettes. I hope she gets lung cancer. Personally, as a monkey with a lump of fat in my head called a brain, I think drinking fat solving solvents are a bad idea for that reason alone.fMRI scans shows white brain tissue in drinkers literally dissolves over time. The increase in marijuana use is mostly due to 3 factors: * Nobody is hiding anymore. * We become more people every day. * More & more people realise alcohol sucks. The UK and CAnada's offcial stance on alcohol is that there is no such thing as a safe amount of alcohol consumption. The war on drugs is going well in Norway: Cocaine & MDMA purity averages above 80%, Racemic amphetamine is cheaper than hash now, and the hash is good as anything you can find in dutch coffeeshops. ..and it is all getting cheaper at the same time. The war is being lost so bad the police have stopped issuing Narcotics stats 2 times a year as mandated and dropped it to once a year. Last year crystal meth averaged over 99% purity, 99.2%-99.6% according to Kripos Crimelab!! 5000 mafia families in Europe alone funds their organized crime with proceeds from the artificially high price of cannabis caused by the ban, legalizing and taxing it resoanbly would snuff out those and would be a massive blow to organized crime. GHB is fueling a rape epidemic here. Oh and you can legally buy poppy seed and grow them here...
notaustinpowers 2y ago
I've got my tinfoil hat on but I totally believe this to be due to the lobbying efforts of big tobacco. Purely because cigarette sales continue to decline and vaping is becoming more and more regulated and, therefore, less profitable. But marijuana enjoys high markups, pseudoscience "health benefits", and is becoming more and more acceptable to Americans each and every year.
- pwillia7 2y ago
  I don't even think that's that tinfoil hat-y What else will I spend my billions in revenue on if I can't advertise and have to hide all my employees?
cm2012 2y ago
Being gulped up big corporations is good. They will much more efficiently serve the market. SMBs are notoriously unproductive. Though maybe you want your drug dealers to be unproductive, for society's sake! I may take this back...
- soperj 2y ago
  Can't say I've ever felt that massive corps and the people that work there are super productive. In many instances they seem less productive than government.
  - astrange 2y ago
    If the small companies were productive they'd be big companies.
    - int_19h 2y ago
      This assumes that every small company wants to be a big company.
    - DonHopkins 2y ago
      Except the many that are productive because they're NOT big companies.
- ehvatum 2y ago
  What SMB has the luxury of being notoriously unproductive? Economies of scale are very real and tend to make larger businesses more efficient, it's true, but you'll find that causes SMBs to be lean and mean to remain competitive.
  - cm2012 2y ago
    There are many many ways to look at this data, but here's one: https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F4cfc9536-ba2c-4298-a658-f47eda5c427e_1228x886.png https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_pr.... Bigger companies can pay a lot more because they are more productive. And further research has shown its the same pool/type of people at each.
RankingMember 2y ago
It's also made touching the financial aspect radioactive- none of the big credit cards want to have anything to do with it so all transactions are cash, which makes things more difficult/risky for operators.
- ehsankia 2y ago
  Also made research very hard too.
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    The research component seems the biggest boon from this. I assume Schedule III is much easier to get approved for. Which in turn will increase the number of studies. Which will in turn provide more support for eventual legalization. Research being blocked (often by the DEA) was one of the biggest hold-ups.
golergka 2y ago
> I hope all these small/mid sized businesses don’t get gulped up by big tobacco or other mega corps Why not? Laws of scale would drive the price down while improving the profit margins, both clients and investors would win.
- peddling-brink 2y ago
  There are more people involved than just clients and investors. I think some inefficiencies are important, especially when scoped to "who can do this thing the cheapest?"
  - bumby 2y ago
    >I think some inefficiencies are important To add a bit, the importance of some inefficiencies are lost when viewed strictly through an investor lens. E.g., investigative journalism is expensive and largely inefficient regarding the profitability of a newspaper. Redundant inventory/equipment is largely inefficient until low-probability events effect supply. Small businesses may be inefficient but provide economic stability to a non-urban center etc. etc.
beaeglebeachh 2y ago
Keeping in state doesn't help. It's still interstate commerce even just picking a plant and smoking on site non-commercially. Just walking an object within 1000 ft of a school, non-commercially, is interstate commerce.
- NewJazz 2y ago
  According to a really old SC decision that rests on shaky foundations at best.
  - beaeglebeachh 2y ago
    They'll never give it up. It would mean the end of the civil rights act, and tons of popular regulatory regimes that apply to in-state only trade. And the return of in state over the counter machine guns.
    - mr_spothawk 2y ago
      Relevant case: Wickard v. Filburn United States Supreme Court case Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111, is a United States Supreme Court decision that dramatically increased the regulatory power of the federal government. It remains as one of the most important and far-reaching cases concerning the New Deal, and it set a precedent for an expansive reading of the U.S. Constitution's Commerce Clause for decades to come. The goal of the legal challenge was to end the entire federal crop support program by declaring it unconstitutional. An Ohio farmer, Roscoe Filburn, was growing wheat to feed animals on his own farm. The U.S. government had established limits on wheat production, based on the acreage owned by a farmer, to stabilize wheat prices and supplies. Filburn grew more than was permitted and so was ordered to pay a penalty. In response, he said that because his wheat was not sold, it could not be regulated as commerce, let alone "interstate" commerce. [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn)
joecool1029 2y ago
> I hope all these small/mid sized businesses don’t get gulped up by big tobacco or other mega corps Calling it: CVS and Walgreens will move into the medical market for this. You think these little shops will be able to process health insurance payments when that sector gets in on it? lol
- hn_version_0023 2y ago
  You described a worst-case scenario. I’d rather smoke Marlboro Greens, and I promised myself 20 years ago I’d never spend another penny with them.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 2y ago
    LOL @ Marlboro Greens :-) They'd be insane to not go with that name.
  - konfusinomicon 2y ago
    the marlboro man has traded in his horse and cowboy hat for some natty dreads and a gravity bong. Joe Camel now sports a wook blanket and a heady crystal wrap. can't wait to see what the overly happy and diverse Newport pleasure party goers have adopted
    - shicholas 2y ago
      lol
    - selimthegrim 2y ago
      You must not have seen the same Newport ads I did
    - DonHopkins 2y ago
      "You've come a long way, dude."
  - jeffwask 2y ago
    Marboro Green with 200 hundred additional chemical additives for your enjoyment.
MarCylinder 2y ago
Big corps are already an issue. They may not be able to move product over borders, but they can move money and resources
cryptonector 2y ago
Under Wickard even all-in-state marijuana trade would still fall under the Interstate Commerce clause and be subject to federal criminal statutes, regulations, and taxes.
- giantg2 2y ago
  Yep, some people tested this same theory out for firearms (or was it suppressors?) all produced and sold in one state in accordance with state laws. Of course the Feds shut that down and the courts agreed. The only reason they don't do this with pot is because they don't feel like it.
  - cryptonector 2y ago
    I believe that case is not resolved yet.
    - giantg2 2y ago
      Maybe it was the other case from that same state where they said state law enforcement couldn't assist the feds in enforcing federal gun laws.
- Auracle 2y ago
  My one big Supreme Court wish is that Wickard gets shot down. I could actually see it happen with the current court.
  - cryptonector 2y ago
    Wickard does seem pretty gross.
jajko 2y ago
Big tobacco means even more pressure to normalize it, globally, via UN just like they pushed it down the throat of every nation worldwide including those where its sacred plant for millenia like India or Nepal. US reversed decades of severe oppression and is leading free world (I know Canada, I know) so there is massive hope our idiots in EU and elsewhere will seriously wake up, even if in some primitive cargo culting effort. I don't mean half-assed decriminalization here and there which still feeds very healthy criminal ecosystem and for end user of say weed doesn't change a zilch in anything, I mean same legal treatment as tobacco and alcohol, we don't prescribe that for anxiety do we, its all fun and chill and introspection (for me). Its 2024 FFS, and we see idiocy live where politicians are lying in the cameras to please old conservative folks for next elections. I want to buy edibles, happy to pay any tax they slap on it. I want to buy a single joint, of strength and power I want to choose. Or vapes. Not some overpriced mediocre shit from paranoid desperate illegal immigrant standing in dark corners of shady parts of cities. Give that man an honest job on some weed farm or distribution system.
sokoloff 2y ago
It's sometimes even smaller than states. Many waterways are federal, meaning islands have to grow their own in order to avoid having to transport weed from one part of the state to another part of the same state across a federal waterway.
stevenwoo 2y ago
This discrepancy had the effect of jump starting the prominence of large chinese gangs in the marijuana and fentany and money laundering business in the USA, incidentally contributing to home shortage because they bought homes in California to grow pre pandemic and in Oklahoma now. There’s lots of older articles about California but some recent OK news https://www.kosu.org/news/2024-03-18/gangsters-money-and-murder-how-chinese-organized-crime-is-dominating-oklahomas-illegal-medical-marijuana-market https://www.kosu.org/news/2024-03-18/gangsters-money-and-mur...
- squigz 2y ago
  Interesting use of italics
  - stevenwoo 2y ago
    I thought it was of most relevance that gangs stepped in when the comment I was responding to was more concerned with larger companies and them being Chinese is a weird detail since one would have expected one of existing gangs in USA already like those with central or South American cartels instead.
ranger_danger 2y ago
I think they would make so much MORE money by making it federally regulated and generally accessible... the problem is that also takes away some incentive to keep spying on citizens in the name of drugs and related bad guys.
tonymet 2y ago
it's another good reason to advocate for more state autonomy . prior to 80s savings & loan crisis and then financial collapse, small family run banks were thriving too
- tonymet 2y ago
  typical hackernews mindset. weed consolidation is bad, but state authority that would protect the weed industry is also bad?
ted_bunny 2y ago
Those restrictions are probably just more grist for lobbyists, gotta keep milking it
Xeyz0r 2y ago
> It’s probably still a net positive to release the federal restriction, but I hope all these small/mid sized businesses don’t get gulped up by big tobacco or other mega corps this is the main cinsern for me

RobRivera 2y ago

'Time for them to perform due diligence and refactor their operations to take advantage of the new legal landscape to retain competitive pricing inorder for' all these small/mid sized businesses don't get gulped up by big tobacco or other mega corps.

pm90 2y ago
American corporations are great at retooling their business/supply chains for different products (see how quickly everyone moved into hard seltzers). I do expect big tobacco to move in aggressively if weed is made legal.
- Scoundreller 2y ago
  Hasn’t really happened in Canada. I think a small-player alcohol company did move in, but only after the bubble popped. Turns out legalization of a drug doesn’t lead to massive increases in consumption. Who knew. Definitely kneecapped the black market though: most moved to the legal side and black market prices cratered.
  - cooper_ganglia 2y ago
    Lobbyists don't care about uncapturable black market money. The legal market has led to massive increase in legal, taxable money, so now is exactly the time for big tobacco to start salivating over the idea of capturing all of those transactions.
  - mminer237 2y ago
    Marijuana use has massively increased in the US as states have legalized it. Users have doubled: https://www.statista.com/statistics/264862/cannabis-consumption-in-the-us-since-2002/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/264862/cannabis-consumpt... Use among users has also increased 20%: https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/962353 https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/962353
    - Retric 2y ago
      20% increase in consumption isn’t exactly what I would call massive. Looking at historic trends the point where pot was first legalized for recreational use isn’t obvious. If anything the long term upward tends started long before legalization which didn’t seem to have significant impact. https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-020-8253-4#rightslink https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s...
      - ghaff 2y ago
        I’m surprised it’s not more personally if the numbers are accurate. A lot of pretty casual users in professional jobs were mostly not going to find a friend of a friend to do an illegal transaction with. But they’ll go into a dispensary now and then. But you really see that reflected in the doubled number of users which is probably the more relevant number.
    - otherme123 2y ago
      If I could face consequences for using drugs, I will deny it even after being positive in a test. Of course, once legalized, I'll have no problem saying that I used in once or twice a year. Being it legal, safer and out of the dangerous black market, there will be some new users. Same happened after alcohol prohibition: more people consumed after the ban was lifted, but consumption was safer. But rarely people that didn't consume during the prohibition went on alcohol binge after the end of the ban. They just drank a couple of beers per week, maybe even a glass of bourbon twice a year, now that they can buy and consume it safely. Thus the stats you linked doesn't necesarily show a "massive" increase in use, but many people using it sparsely now and many people now admiting to use it that were using previously. In fact, while statista.com shows a 100% increase, the second and more controlled study shows only a ~20% increase that makes more sense (far from massive).
  - The_Blade 2y ago
    Denver definitely had perverse consequence. people eking out a living selling weed on the street quickly turned to... harder substances. people will get their dollar and people will get their high
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - jiayo 2y ago
    Big tobacco might have stayed out of the fray but since legalization the vape giant JUUL owns and operates dispensaries.
    - rascul 2y ago
      Juul is Big Tobacco.
    - dbtc 2y ago
      > Altria Group (formerly Philip Morris Companies), acquired a 35% stake in Juul Labs for $12.8 billion on December 20, 2018. Altria is the largest tobacco company in the United States. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juul
- jerlam 2y ago
  Hopefully, the small/mid sized businesses hold a niche in the same way that craft brewers have maintained their existence (until they get acquired).
- chrisweekly 2y ago
  Agreed -- but I think nobody knows quite how it'll play out. I think of the thriving microbrewery scene (vs not just Budweiser et al but so-called "premium" beers from megabreweries that don't hold a candle to the local stuff). I also wonder about the degree to which psilocybin might be following THC's path, wrt state vs federal laws....
- tensility 2y ago
  Pabst already makes THC seltzers for the California market. Big business is already here, folks.

kgdiem 2y ago

Yes really good point. Won’t it still be up to the states to decide what the regulatory environment will look like — eg they can choose to preserve these jobs through existing regulatory frameworks in the same way that certain goods cannot be shipped to certain states

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
alistairSH 2y ago
Note, they're only planning to move it from Schedule 1 (alongside heroin) to Schedule III (alongside anabolic steroids and ketamine). So, it won't be fully legal in the same sense as alcohol. Regardless, unless Congress does something to make it legal nationally, we'll still have the state frameworks. Just hopefully avoiding the most draconian criminal charges.
- kgdiem 2y ago
  I read TFA after commenting. I think that is even more interesting; it’ll be very helpful for better understanding the safety profile of marijuana. Still curious to see how this may affect cannabis commerce. Will CVS have cannabis extracts behind the pharmacy counter?
- tialaramex 2y ago
  One very important thing this does is get rid of a really glaring error. As a Schedule I drug, Marijuana supposedly is completely useless, its only role is as a potential danger and that's why nobody must have any - except, we've known for many years a bunch of people find it useful as a therapeutic drug, so that's clearly wrong and the Schedule I status is an error. Perhaps there shouldn't be any Schedule I drugs at all, the idea seems misconceived, but certainly if there are Schedule I drugs, Marijuana doesn't belong among them. Meanwhile in Schedule III it's a judgement call. Schedule III drugs like K or steroids are drugs we know are useful, your doctor can prescribe them, your hospital pharmacy has them, but we also know they get abused. That sounds much more like marijuana, and, to be honest, alcohol. Can we justify Schedule III for Marijuana and yet not for Alcohol? It's at least a serious question whereas the Schedule I status was just nonsense.

eyelidlessness 2y ago

A couple quick thoughts, having worked in the legal cannabis industry (now a few years out): - Consolidation is already happening in a lot of ways, in some cases despite state laws designed to prevent it - Consolidation by big tobacco seems less likely than probably other major industry incumbents (in the long run, I’d bet on companies primarily oriented around alcohol) - Federal posture since Cole (when first states legalized recreational, partially rolled back under Trump/Sessions but seemingly not as much as was feared at the time) is largely what prompted strong local laws; it’s based in analysis of interstate commerce; federal legalization could have a similar analysis without undermining existing strong local laws; the tradeoff would probably be large disparity of justice between states (on party lines) - A much better outcome would be a central rule not just to legalize, but to more strongly incentivize justice for people affected by draconian laws in the first place. This is a pipe dream, but it should be the focus because any compromise will start with that.

omgCPhuture 2y ago
Tobacco smoke killed ALL my grandparents, well, well one of them would have died from alcohol use, as he was a fisherman and they drink a lot. My uncle died from liver and bowel cancer, the liver cancer stems from alcohol consumption, or rather it's metabolite, acetaldehyde, which is _scary as hell_: It makes cancerous scar tissue of whatever it touches, thats why alcoholics die from liver failure: it becomes all scar tissue and cannot regenerate, which is part of its function (the average adult has a liver 3 years of average age). It is also what gives the alcohol buzz. He was not a heavy drinker, but only drank wine and aqua vit/liquor, 1-2 times a year he would get shitfaced -- he was a funny drunk. I miss him. I miss all my grandparnts, they were the best and did not deserve Emphysema , lung cancer and so forth. Grandma taught me soldering, welding, basic ircuitry, how to ride a bike, composting, growing veggies, all about berries in the wild and helped me save up for my Nintendo NES,encuraged mt curiosity...I would beat the crap out a tobacco exec if I crossed paths with one, a part of me wants to torture them. I smoked for 15 years, turns out quitting was easy, once you undestood the way the addiction works, but nobody considers that they developed oral fixation from sucking on a potennt noootropic habit forming substance all day, But then we have Silvy Listhaug (politician): Marijuana will continue to be banned because she is a mom, she told the reporter photographing her smoking cigarettes. I hope she gets lung cancer. Personally, as a monkey with a lump of fat in my head called a brain, I think drinking fat solving solvents are a bad idea for that reason alone.fMRI scans shows white brain tissue in drinkers literally dissolves over time. The increase in marijuana use is mostly due to 3 factors: * Nobody is hiding anymore. * We become more people every day. * More & more people realise alcohol sucks. The UK and CAnada's offcial stance on alcohol is that there is no such thing as a safe amount of alcohol consumption. The war on drugs is going well in Norway: Cocaine & MDMA purity averages above 80%, Racemic amphetamine is cheaper than hash now, and the hash is good as anything you can find in dutch coffeeshops. ..and it is all getting cheaper at the same time. The war is being lost so bad the police have stopped issuing Narcotics stats 2 times a year as mandated and dropped it to once a year. Last year crystal meth averaged over 99% purity, 99.2%-99.6% according to Kripos Crimelab!! 5000 mafia families in Europe alone funds their organized crime with proceeds from the artificially high price of cannabis caused by the ban, legalizing and taxing it resoanbly would snuff out those and would be a massive blow to organized crime. GHB is fueling a rape epidemic here. Oh and you can legally buy poppy seed and grow them here...

notaustinpowers 2y ago

I've got my tinfoil hat on but I totally believe this to be due to the lobbying efforts of big tobacco. Purely because cigarette sales continue to decline and vaping is becoming more and more regulated and, therefore, less profitable. But marijuana enjoys high markups, pseudoscience "health benefits", and is becoming more and more acceptable to Americans each and every year.

pwillia7 2y ago
I don't even think that's that tinfoil hat-y What else will I spend my billions in revenue on if I can't advertise and have to hide all my employees?

cm2012 2y ago

Being gulped up big corporations is good. They will much more efficiently serve the market. SMBs are notoriously unproductive. Though maybe you want your drug dealers to be unproductive, for society's sake! I may take this back...

soperj 2y ago
Can't say I've ever felt that massive corps and the people that work there are super productive. In many instances they seem less productive than government.
- astrange 2y ago
  If the small companies were productive they'd be big companies.
  - int_19h 2y ago
    This assumes that every small company wants to be a big company.
  - DonHopkins 2y ago
    Except the many that are productive because they're NOT big companies.
ehvatum 2y ago
What SMB has the luxury of being notoriously unproductive? Economies of scale are very real and tend to make larger businesses more efficient, it's true, but you'll find that causes SMBs to be lean and mean to remain competitive.
- cm2012 2y ago
  There are many many ways to look at this data, but here's one: https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F4cfc9536-ba2c-4298-a658-f47eda5c427e_1228x886.png https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_pr.... Bigger companies can pay a lot more because they are more productive. And further research has shown its the same pool/type of people at each.

RankingMember 2y ago

It's also made touching the financial aspect radioactive- none of the big credit cards want to have anything to do with it so all transactions are cash, which makes things more difficult/risky for operators.

ehsankia 2y ago
Also made research very hard too.
- ethbr1 2y ago
  The research component seems the biggest boon from this. I assume Schedule III is much easier to get approved for. Which in turn will increase the number of studies. Which will in turn provide more support for eventual legalization. Research being blocked (often by the DEA) was one of the biggest hold-ups.

golergka 2y ago

> I hope all these small/mid sized businesses don’t get gulped up by big tobacco or other mega corps Why not? Laws of scale would drive the price down while improving the profit margins, both clients and investors would win.

peddling-brink 2y ago
There are more people involved than just clients and investors. I think some inefficiencies are important, especially when scoped to "who can do this thing the cheapest?"
- bumby 2y ago
  >I think some inefficiencies are important To add a bit, the importance of some inefficiencies are lost when viewed strictly through an investor lens. E.g., investigative journalism is expensive and largely inefficient regarding the profitability of a newspaper. Redundant inventory/equipment is largely inefficient until low-probability events effect supply. Small businesses may be inefficient but provide economic stability to a non-urban center etc. etc.

beaeglebeachh 2y ago

Keeping in state doesn't help. It's still interstate commerce even just picking a plant and smoking on site non-commercially. Just walking an object within 1000 ft of a school, non-commercially, is interstate commerce.

NewJazz 2y ago
According to a really old SC decision that rests on shaky foundations at best.
- beaeglebeachh 2y ago
  They'll never give it up. It would mean the end of the civil rights act, and tons of popular regulatory regimes that apply to in-state only trade. And the return of in state over the counter machine guns.
  - mr_spothawk 2y ago
    Relevant case: Wickard v. Filburn United States Supreme Court case Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111, is a United States Supreme Court decision that dramatically increased the regulatory power of the federal government. It remains as one of the most important and far-reaching cases concerning the New Deal, and it set a precedent for an expansive reading of the U.S. Constitution's Commerce Clause for decades to come. The goal of the legal challenge was to end the entire federal crop support program by declaring it unconstitutional. An Ohio farmer, Roscoe Filburn, was growing wheat to feed animals on his own farm. The U.S. government had established limits on wheat production, based on the acreage owned by a farmer, to stabilize wheat prices and supplies. Filburn grew more than was permitted and so was ordered to pay a penalty. In response, he said that because his wheat was not sold, it could not be regulated as commerce, let alone "interstate" commerce. [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn)

joecool1029 2y ago

> I hope all these small/mid sized businesses don’t get gulped up by big tobacco or other mega corps Calling it: CVS and Walgreens will move into the medical market for this. You think these little shops will be able to process health insurance payments when that sector gets in on it? lol

hn_version_0023 2y ago
You described a worst-case scenario. I’d rather smoke Marlboro Greens, and I promised myself 20 years ago I’d never spend another penny with them.
- HeyLaughingBoy 2y ago
  LOL @ Marlboro Greens :-) They'd be insane to not go with that name.
- konfusinomicon 2y ago
  the marlboro man has traded in his horse and cowboy hat for some natty dreads and a gravity bong. Joe Camel now sports a wook blanket and a heady crystal wrap. can't wait to see what the overly happy and diverse Newport pleasure party goers have adopted
  - shicholas 2y ago
    lol
  - selimthegrim 2y ago
    You must not have seen the same Newport ads I did
  - DonHopkins 2y ago
    "You've come a long way, dude."
- jeffwask 2y ago
  Marboro Green with 200 hundred additional chemical additives for your enjoyment.

MarCylinder 2y ago

Big corps are already an issue. They may not be able to move product over borders, but they can move money and resources

cryptonector 2y ago

Under Wickard even all-in-state marijuana trade would still fall under the Interstate Commerce clause and be subject to federal criminal statutes, regulations, and taxes.

giantg2 2y ago
Yep, some people tested this same theory out for firearms (or was it suppressors?) all produced and sold in one state in accordance with state laws. Of course the Feds shut that down and the courts agreed. The only reason they don't do this with pot is because they don't feel like it.
- cryptonector 2y ago
  I believe that case is not resolved yet.
  - giantg2 2y ago
    Maybe it was the other case from that same state where they said state law enforcement couldn't assist the feds in enforcing federal gun laws.
Auracle 2y ago
My one big Supreme Court wish is that Wickard gets shot down. I could actually see it happen with the current court.
- cryptonector 2y ago
  Wickard does seem pretty gross.

jajko 2y ago

Big tobacco means even more pressure to normalize it, globally, via UN just like they pushed it down the throat of every nation worldwide including those where its sacred plant for millenia like India or Nepal. US reversed decades of severe oppression and is leading free world (I know Canada, I know) so there is massive hope our idiots in EU and elsewhere will seriously wake up, even if in some primitive cargo culting effort. I don't mean half-assed decriminalization here and there which still feeds very healthy criminal ecosystem and for end user of say weed doesn't change a zilch in anything, I mean same legal treatment as tobacco and alcohol, we don't prescribe that for anxiety do we, its all fun and chill and introspection (for me). Its 2024 FFS, and we see idiocy live where politicians are lying in the cameras to please old conservative folks for next elections. I want to buy edibles, happy to pay any tax they slap on it. I want to buy a single joint, of strength and power I want to choose. Or vapes. Not some overpriced mediocre shit from paranoid desperate illegal immigrant standing in dark corners of shady parts of cities. Give that man an honest job on some weed farm or distribution system.

sokoloff 2y ago

It's sometimes even smaller than states. Many waterways are federal, meaning islands have to grow their own in order to avoid having to transport weed from one part of the state to another part of the same state across a federal waterway.

stevenwoo 2y ago

This discrepancy had the effect of jump starting the prominence of large chinese gangs in the marijuana and fentany and money laundering business in the USA, incidentally contributing to home shortage because they bought homes in California to grow pre pandemic and in Oklahoma now. There’s lots of older articles about California but some recent OK news https://www.kosu.org/news/2024-03-18/gangsters-money-and-murder-how-chinese-organized-crime-is-dominating-oklahomas-illegal-medical-marijuana-market https://www.kosu.org/news/2024-03-18/gangsters-money-and-mur...

squigz 2y ago
Interesting use of italics
- stevenwoo 2y ago
  I thought it was of most relevance that gangs stepped in when the comment I was responding to was more concerned with larger companies and them being Chinese is a weird detail since one would have expected one of existing gangs in USA already like those with central or South American cartels instead.

ranger_danger 2y ago

I think they would make so much MORE money by making it federally regulated and generally accessible... the problem is that also takes away some incentive to keep spying on citizens in the name of drugs and related bad guys.

tonymet 2y ago

it's another good reason to advocate for more state autonomy . prior to 80s savings & loan crisis and then financial collapse, small family run banks were thriving too

tonymet 2y ago
typical hackernews mindset. weed consolidation is bad, but state authority that would protect the weed industry is also bad?

ted_bunny 2y ago

Those restrictions are probably just more grist for lobbyists, gotta keep milking it

Xeyz0r 2y ago

> It’s probably still a net positive to release the federal restriction, but I hope all these small/mid sized businesses don’t get gulped up by big tobacco or other mega corps this is the main cinsern for me