Prop AA: The weed tax

[newracer]

Acceptable is whatever the local tax base rate is. If the local tax rate on consumables is 7.25%, then what is the justification of having the weed be taxed at 25%? Oh yeah, for "regulation" and building schools for the kids.

There is additional regulation that needs to happen with the sale of this product that the normal local rate would not cover. However I do agree with you that the rates in the proposition are too high.

[O2HeN2]

From all of the griping and talk of 'black market' sales, it appears to me that those advocating that we should make pot a taxable commodity were disingenuous. They were willing to sell it illegally before, why should we think that the pattern would change? You can dye the fur on the leopard, but the spots are still there.

Good point. Just like with the repeal of prohibition, afterwards there's a still a HUGE amount of bootlegging and illegal alcohol being sold.

Oh, wait, come to think of it...

O2

[Irving]

There is additional regulation that needs to happen with the sale of this product that the normal local rate would not cover. However I do agree with you that the rates in the proposition are too high.

Are all those other consumables not regulated? I think that they are, especially foods, yet how are they not subject to special taxes?

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

Acceptable is whatever the local tax base rate is. If the local tax rate on consumables is 7.25%, then what is the justification of having the weed be taxed at 25%? Oh yeah, for "regulation" and building schools for the kids.

OK, so you're talking about all these other items that have special taxes that go beyond "the local tax rate on consumables" - are those not acceptable either?
What about the fact that two very close municipalities may have different local tax rates?

I'm not disagreeing, necessarily, I think the argument is framed up so awkwardly as to be entirely unconvincing.

[Irving]

I guess I just don't agree with any justification of a "sin tax."

[centrarchidae]

My problem here, is the idea of the sin tax.

The idea of government making people be good people for their own good, at gunpoint, was the whole philosophical foundation for progressivism. A sin tax on weed may be a little less offensive than forced sterilization and eugenics, but that doesn't make it right. I don't want the state to think it has any business trying to make me a better person. I had parents and a boy scout troop for that.

[Irving]

The bettering of people is just a thin veil for an excuse to steal money anyway. Either premise is not right.

[Ronin13]

I'll just say this, as one of my absolute favorite instructors I've had thus far in the academy is a CSP drug recognition expert- weed is worse than alcohol, especially for driving. At moderate doses, alcohol doesn't cause impairment for up to 24 hours... Let that sink in. And mark my words, legalizing it won't reduce crime like the pro-pot folks will tell you.

Sent from my evil, black smartphone.

[Irving]

Lol. Not at all relevent to the conversation at hand, and subjective at best, but okay. Noted.

[newracer]

Are all those other consumables not regulated? I think that they are, especially foods, yet how are they not subject to special taxes?

Yes they are however the legalization of MJ creates a whole new set of regulations and regulators. It's not like someone is simply introducing a new food, alcohol, fuel, etc that would fall under a current department.