PDA

View Full Version : Obama Tax cheat Timmy Geithner "taxes must rise..."


The Mad Crapper
06-23-2011, 07:56 PM
This guy is an evil cockroach just like his boss.

Geithner: Taxes on ‘Small Business’ Must Rise So Government Doesn’t ‘Shrink’ Thursday, June 23, 2011
By Terence P. Jeffrey


(CNSNews.com) - Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told the House Small Business Committee on Wednesday that the Obama administration believes taxes on small business must increase so the administration does not have to “shrink the overall size of government programs.”

The administration’s plan to raise the tax rate on small businesses is part of its plan to raise taxes on all Americans who make more than $250,000 per year—including businesses that file taxes the same way individuals and families do.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/geithner-taxes-small-business-must-rise

petegz28
06-23-2011, 08:41 PM
The amount of taxes owed by the Obama Cabinet would have paid for several jobs for a couple years, easy

Simplex3
06-23-2011, 09:02 PM
I'm all for them shrinking the overall size of government programs. I fail to see the downside to that. Anybody?

Dave Lane
06-23-2011, 10:38 PM
Its a good plan. Cutting spending has greater job impact than raising taxes. Everything can't be cut, cut, cut. It has to be a comprehensive mix of cuts and revenue increases.

My personal favorite is legalize marijuana and tax it heavily. That might balance the budget right there.

stevieray
06-23-2011, 11:40 PM
....so government won't have to shrink?

...and they call themselves public servants.

Der Flöprer
06-23-2011, 11:49 PM
Anything to push the Partisan movement, Comrade!

pr_capone
06-24-2011, 12:16 AM
My personal favorite is legalize marijuana and tax it heavily. That might balance the budget right there.

Yeah! Tax the pot smokers! I don't smoke marijuana so this would be a tax that would not affect me therefore we should tax the hell out of it.

I'm all for the legalization and taxation of weed but why tax it heavily?

Fishpicker
06-24-2011, 01:47 AM
Yeah! Tax the pot smokers! I don't smoke marijuana so this would be a tax that would not affect me therefore we should tax the hell out of it.

I'm all for the legalization and taxation of weed but why tax it heavily?

the tax should should be commensurate to the trip. And I want a heavy trip.

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 07:07 AM
Tax cheat Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner — a major architect of the most likely deliberate bankrupting of the United States — tells us it would be "irresponsible" not to further debilitate the economy by raising taxes just as we teeter on the brink of a depression. Of course he wants the debt ceiling raised too:

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2011/06/turbo-tax-tim-n.html

go bowe
06-24-2011, 03:22 PM
Its a good plan. Cutting spending has greater job impact than raising taxes. Everything can't be cut, cut, cut. It has to be a comprehensive mix of cuts and revenue increases.

My personal favorite is legalize marijuana and tax it heavily. That might balance the budget right there.

i saw something recently that indicated a study done in california showed that they could make hundreds of millions in taxes and fees but that the savings in law enforcement and prisons would be even larger...

don't have a link, but it's the strongest argument for legalization in my view...

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 03:24 PM
i saw something recently that indicated a study done in california showed that they could make hundreds of millions in taxes and fees but that the savings in law enforcement and prisons would be even larger...

don't have a link, but it's the strongest argument for legalization in my view...

Yeah, because when drugs are "legal" it never causes crime or violence.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43495854/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

Simplex3
06-24-2011, 03:27 PM
Yeah, because when drugs are "legal" it never causes crime or violence.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43495854/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

He killed them because he couldn't get those drugs legally, right? :hmmm:

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 03:32 PM
He killed them because he couldn't get those drugs legally, right? :hmmm:

So you are saying junkies should be able to get whatever drugs they want, whenever they want, and they don't need a perscription?

Or money to pay for it?

Simplex3
06-24-2011, 03:34 PM
So you are saying junkies should be able to get whatever drugs they want, whenever they want, and they don't need a perscription?

Or money to pay for it?

Drugs are cheap as hell to make. If crack were legal it'd sell for a buck a vial on the shelf at Walgreens. They wouldn't need to steal your TV to pay for their habit.

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 03:36 PM
Drugs are cheap as hell to make. If crack were legal it'd sell for a buck a vial on the shelf at Walgreens. They wouldn't need to steal your TV to pay for their habit.

Really? You really think those Mexican cartels would just go find another line of business if America "legalized" ie government took control of the heroin, cocaine, marijuana trade?

Simplex3
06-24-2011, 03:43 PM
Really? You really think those Mexican cartels would just go find another line of business if America "legalized" ie government took control of the heroin, cocaine, marijuana trade?

And what exactly do you think their response would be? Be careful since we have a historical analog for exactly what will happen.

Hydrae
06-24-2011, 03:58 PM
Yeah, because when drugs are "legal" it never causes crime or violence.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43495854/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

Yeah, because all those people locked up for drugs were commiting crimes (other than the drug one) and were violent. :rolleyes:

EDIT: What does that article have to do with legalizing marijuana?

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 04:45 PM
And what exactly do you think their response would be? Be careful since we have a historical analog for exactly what will happen.

Yeah, because all those people locked up for drugs were commiting crimes (other than the drug one) and were violent. :rolleyes:

EDIT: What does that article have to do with legalizing marijuana?

Yeah you two geniuses clearly have this all figured out. I'm not getting into this right now, it's an idiotic argument.

If taxing (illegal) drugs is the panacea-- how come congress can't balance the books on cigarettes and alcohol?

Please, just think about it, I'm not gonna waste my time reading your idiotic response.

Simplex3
06-24-2011, 04:55 PM
Neither of us said it would balance the budget. It would help, though.

Because you're, er, "too busy", here's what would happen.

They'd find another line of work. Something else that's illegal. They'd leave drugs. All you have to do is look at Prohibition and the mafia, it's a 1:1 comparison.

My guess is they'd compete with the mafia in prostitution and gambling, another two things that we could easily take the criminal element out of if it wasn't for religious types getting their panties in a wad.

HonestChieffan
06-24-2011, 04:56 PM
Its a good plan. Cutting spending has greater job impact than raising taxes. Everything can't be cut, cut, cut. It has to be a comprehensive mix of cuts and revenue increases.

My personal favorite is legalize marijuana and tax it heavily. That might balance the budget right there.


Increasing taxes on small business is a good idea? WTF? What do you do for a living anyway

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 05:24 PM
They'd find another line of work. .

Oh my God, you are a fucking idiot.

LMAO

WilliamTheIrish
06-24-2011, 06:06 PM
Dont know that it would balance the budget, but legalization would drive out the incentive the cartels have now. Wise guys used to run neighborhood 'numbers' rackets. It was a simple lotto that paid out weekly.

It's now Poweball. And the incentive to the wise guys is gone. So are local numbers games.
Posted via Mobile Device

Simplex3
06-24-2011, 06:08 PM
Oh my God, you are a ****ing idiot.

LMAO

Explain it to us then Einstein. I guess your evidence will be that the mafia is still running booze and speakeasies.

WilliamTheIrish
06-24-2011, 06:10 PM
Crapper makes a fairly luscent point though: Cartels are far wealthier than local crews. So they would probably offer resistance politically (in cloaked lobbying eforts) to thwart legislation.

But to remove that ability to make that kind of $ is certainly one way to begin crippling them.
Posted via Mobile Device

Brock
06-24-2011, 06:15 PM
Well, marijuana may be legal, sort of, some day. It already is in some places.

But methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin, etc., are never, ever going to be legal, so the conversation is kind of a non-starter.

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 09:42 PM
Crapper makes a fairly luscent point though: Cartels are far wealthier than local crews. So they would probably offer resistance politically (in cloaked lobbying eforts) to thwart legislation.

But to remove that ability to make that kind of $ is certainly one way to begin crippling them.
Posted via Mobile Device

Cocaine, Heroin, and to a lesser extent Marijuana, will always come from beyond our borders. We don't have the climate to grow and to supply the shit to our drug using population.

We can "legalize" it, that's not gonna change the rest of the planets lucrative operation.

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 09:44 PM
Explain it to us then Einstein. I guess your evidence will be that the mafia is still running booze and speakeasies.

Einstein? LMAO

It doesn't take somebody with an IQ over 80 to figure this shit out.

We've been in Afghanistan for ten fucking years.

Guess how many poppy fields we have destroyed.

Go ahead, google away Freddy!

LiveSteam
06-24-2011, 09:50 PM
poppies are our friends.

Simplex3
06-24-2011, 09:52 PM
Einstein? LMAO

It doesn't take somebody with an IQ over 80 to figure this shit out.

We've been in Afghanistan for ten ****ing years.

Guess how many poppy fields we have destroyed.

Go ahead, google away Freddy!

What the hell does A have to do with B? If I legalize opium I don't care where the poppy fields are. It's just another crop. And if Afghans are over pricing their poppies then someone else will grow them and sell them to us. Simple supply and demand. It's like any other commodity except Americans have been conditioned to believe there's something inherently different about "drugs". But just the bad ones, not the good ones like booze and tobacco and whatever pharma wants to push.

headsnap
06-24-2011, 09:57 PM
poppies are our friends.

<iframe width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/f6cGTq3nOwI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 09:58 PM
What the hell does A have to do with B? If I legalize opium I don't care where the poppy fields are. It's just another crop. And if Afghans are over pricing their poppies then someone else will grow them and sell them to us. Simple supply and demand. It's like any other commodity except Americans have been conditioned to believe there's something inherently different about "drugs". But just the bad ones, not the good ones like booze and tobacco and whatever pharma wants to push.

Yeah mmmmmmmmmmkay.

So let's take this back to the original point---

How is "legalizing" it going to increase revenue to the corrupt US government and eliminate our national debt?

Yeah chuckles, sprinkle some fairy dust on a string.

Simplex3
06-24-2011, 10:06 PM
We spent $44.1B in 2008 just in law enforcement for the war on drugs. If it was legal guess how much we wouldn't have spent?

That doesn't take into account the amount the State Department kicks out to foreign countries to help them fight their war on drugs.

Harvard economist Jeffrey A. Miron estimates that we'd see $32B in tax revenue.

So that's at least a $70B bump toward the black.

Math is so hard.

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 10:08 PM
We spent $44.1B in 2008 just in law enforcement for the war on drugs. If it was legal guess how much we wouldn't have spent?

That doesn't take into account the amount the State Department kicks out to foreign countries to help them fight their war on drugs.

Harvard economist Jeffrey A. Miron estimates that we'd see $32B in tax revenue.

So that's at least a $70B bump toward the black.

Math is so hard.

blah blah blah

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TAX REVENUE, JACKASS.

If "legalizing" marijuana, cocaine, heroin et al will "solve" the national debt crisis, then why are we in debt with the taxes on alcohol and tobacco?

Try.

Just try to think. Just once.

Simplex3
06-24-2011, 10:11 PM
So now the goalpost is we can only do something if it and it alone solves the debt problem?

And guess what? Expenses add to debt. Eliminating $1 of expenses helps exactly the same as adding $1 of tax revenue.

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 10:12 PM
So now the goalpost

Forget it. LMAO

I'm argueing with an idiot.

Simplex3
06-24-2011, 10:14 PM
Forget it. LMAO

I'm argueing with an idiot.

Keep telling yourself that while you're riding the bus back to that overpass you live under.

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 10:16 PM
Keep telling yourself that while you're riding the bus back to that overpass you live under.

Okesy Dokesy, Charlie.

:drool:

KC native
06-24-2011, 11:29 PM
Okesy Dokesy, Charlie.

:drool:

ROFL banned again already

Bwana
06-25-2011, 12:03 AM
ROFL banned again already

Not for long.........

Brock
06-25-2011, 12:07 AM
Banned for.....

Bwana
06-25-2011, 12:17 AM
Banned for.....

Filter bypass and not my ban.

petegz28
06-25-2011, 07:51 AM
So now the goalpost is we can only do something if it and it alone solves the debt problem?

And guess what? Expenses add to debt. Eliminating $1 of expenses helps exactly the same as adding $1 of tax revenue.

Not necessarily. Giving money to Congress is like giving money to a crackhead. You know what they are going to do with it regardless of the BS they spew out trying to convince you they have changed. They are going to blow it on BS.

It's time for Congress to show the people they are serious about spending cuts. THEN and ONLY then should anyone in their right mind even entertain thoughts about tax increases.

We will hear all the sob stories about how they realize this time they have to spend it wisely, how people will die, old people will suffer in alleyways, kids will grow up in cardboard boxes, old ladies will have to steal falseteeth from their dead sister and all that if we don't raise taxes and only cut spending.

It's all a BS ploy to make us think that "this time is different". We start hiking taxes without any significant proof of spending cuts and the new taxes will just get spent on even more BS. We will hear how Bush screwed us worse that previously thought, costs for Obamacare are higher than previously thought, we need to pay even more for illegals, etc., etc.

If you haven't learned by now that Congress is the King of excuses then you haven't paid much attention.

Simplex3
06-25-2011, 08:26 AM
When I said they were the same I meant from an accounting standpoint.

petegz28
06-25-2011, 08:28 AM
When I said they were the same I meant from an accounting standpoint.

Yes but that is the bogus part of the argument. It is only the same if the $1 in tax increase is not used for $1 of new spending, which we both know it more than likely will be.

JFC, the Dems are already saying they want another stimulus. How many times do we have to get hit in the head with a rock before we realize it hurts?

petegz28
06-25-2011, 08:29 AM
In other words, Simplex, it is time for Congress to make an effort and show the people they mean business before we start handing over more of our hard earned money. Especially in these economic times. They come up with some serious, significant spending cuts and enact them then we can talk about tax hikes.

Simplex3
06-25-2011, 08:39 AM
You're talking politics. I agree with your statements there.

Crap for Brains and I were talking math and he was dead wrong.

The Mad Crapper
06-27-2011, 07:27 AM
The goal of the Democrap party and Obuttocks was never to oversee an economic recovery. And why would it have been? Obama and his allies on the left believe that a prosperous economy is the root of all evil, and the chief obstacle to the people embracing a government mandate for socialism.

Jaric
06-27-2011, 08:25 AM
Cocaine, Heroin, and to a lesser extent Marijuana, will always come from beyond our borders. We don't have the climate to grow and to supply the shit to our drug using population.

We can "legalize" it, that's not gonna change the rest of the planets lucrative operation.

You can't be serious that you think we couldn't grow weed in this country.

The Mad Crapper
06-27-2011, 09:25 AM
You can't be serious that you think we couldn't grow weed in this country.

OK, I'll concede that but what about cocaine and heroin?

We already make synthetic heroin (methadone) and you can get it for free (well the taxpayer picks up the bill at gunpoint) so tell me why hasn't the narcotics trade evaporated?

Jaric
06-27-2011, 09:34 AM
OK, I'll concede that but what about cocaine and heroin?

We already make synthetic heroin (methadone) and you can get it for free (well the taxpayer picks up the bill at gunpoint) so tell me why hasn't the narcotics trade evaporated?

Look, I don't know enough about smack to be able to answer this intelligently, so I won't.

However, the reason black markets get involved in these sort of things (be it smack or weed or booze in the 20s) is because something people want is forbidden to them by those in charge. The black market is essentially a free market response to a demand. Almost by definition, if you legalize that activity, the black market evaporates because the demand is being filled by legitimate businessmen in a lawful fashion. When presented with a situation that allows people to legally purchase an commodity versus having to purchase it from some sort of criminal element, more often than not they will lean towards the legal method.

That's why mob bosses aren't making and selling booze anymore. That's why if they legalize pot, we won't have to buy it from mexican crime lords, we can buy it from Bob the farmer down the road who is using it as part of his crop rotation.

Will that stop Crime bosses, from commiting crimes? Probably not. But without drug money backing them up they will lose a significant amount of power.

The Mad Crapper
06-27-2011, 09:38 AM
Look, I don't know enough about smack to be able to answer this intelligently, so I won't.

However, the reason black markets get involved in these sort of things (be it smack or weed or booze in the 20s) is because something people want is forbidden to them by those in charge. The black market is essentially a free market response to a demand. Almost by definition, if you legalize that activity, the black market evaporates because the demand is being filled by legitimate businessmen in a lawful fashion. When presented with a situation that allows people to legally purchase an commodity versus having to purchase it from some sort of criminal element, more often than not they will lean towards the legal method.

That's why mob bosses aren't making and selling booze anymore. That's why if they legalize pot, we won't have to buy it from mexican crime lords, we can buy it from Bob the farmer down the road who is using it as part of his crop rotation.

Will that stop Crime bosses, from commiting crimes? Probably not. But without drug money backing them up they will lose a significant amount of power.

I understand all that but the premise put forward by Simpleton3x was simply by "legalizing" a drug that is currently only available on the black market, that the government can use the revenue to pay down our debt.

And my only point was well why aren't they doing that now with cigarettes and alcohol?

The lottery?

It always makes me laugh when so called libertarians want the government to take over the narcotics trade.

I thought they wanted government out of our lives?

Saul Good
06-27-2011, 09:50 AM
If weed becomes legal, I expect to see a spike in Reefer Madness.

Jaric
06-27-2011, 10:00 AM
I understand all that but the premise put forward by Simpleton3x was simply by "legalizing" a drug that is currently only available on the black market, that the government can use the revenue to pay down our debt.

And my only point was well why aren't they doing that now with cigarettes and alcohol?

The lottery?

It always makes me laugh when so called libertarians want the government to take over the narcotics trade.

I thought they wanted government out of our lives?Legalizing pot would certainly help with paying off the debt. All the money spent towards investigating, prosecuting, and incarcertating drug offenders is now no longer required.

As to taxation? While I doubt that taxes collected from the sticky icky would pay off the debt, I would certainly be willing to trade paying taxes on an item versus possibly having to go to jail simply to purchase it. If those taxes collected help pay off our debt and improve the financial condition of this country so much the better (I know, I'm being idealistic here)

Precedent in this country is that when we want to raise taxes, the majority of people want to see it come from either a. "rich" people or b. the so called "sin" or vice taxes. As I said, I am willing to make that trade off. Taxes are a neccessary evil and they have to come from somewhere (no matter how libertarian one is) On behalf of pot smokers everywhere, I say we are ready and willing to do our civic duty for our country.

http://www.emeraldglendoves.com/Veterans/PS-usa-waving-flag.gif

Saul Good
06-27-2011, 10:04 AM
How much does a joint cost (ditch weed, average, and good shit)?

The Mad Crapper
06-27-2011, 10:17 AM
Legalizing pot would certainly help with paying off the debt. All the money spent towards investigating, prosecuting, and incarcertating drug offenders is now no longer required.

As to taxation? While I doubt that taxes collected from the sticky icky would pay off the debt, I would certainly be willing to trade paying taxes on an item versus possibly having to go to jail simply to purchase it. If those taxes collected help pay off our debt and improve the financial condition of this country so much the better (I know, I'm being idealistic here)

Precedent in this country is that when we want to raise taxes, the majority of people want to see it come from either a. "rich" people or b. the so called "sin" or vice taxes. As I said, I am willing to make that trade off. Taxes are a neccessary evil and they have to come from somewhere (no matter how libertarian one is) On behalf of pot smokers everywhere, I say we are ready and willing to do our civic duty for our country.

http://www.emeraldglendoves.com/Veterans/PS-usa-waving-flag.gif

Millions of smokers quit smoking--- not for health reasons--- but because of the ever increasing taxes.

As a result, fewer people purchase cigarettes as their are fewer smokers, and tax revenue has decreased.

Like I said, I love when libertarians say they want the government to take over the narcotics trade.

Jaric
06-27-2011, 10:21 AM
Millions of smokers quit smoking--- not for health reasons--- but because of the ever increasing taxes.

As a result, fewer people purchase cigarettes as their are fewer smokers, and tax revenue has decreased.

Like I said, I love when libertarians say they want the government to take over the narcotics trade.

Well, I'm going to assume that position is not one based on what they consider the ideal circumstances, but a position based on what they believe might be possible.

In other words, it's a pragmatic solution rather than an idealistic one.

Jaric
06-27-2011, 10:23 AM
Regardless of the tax revenue involved TMC, legalizing weed will be a net financial gain for the country even if no tax revenue was collected because it will represent a decrease in spending.

The Mad Crapper
06-27-2011, 10:25 AM
Well, I'm going to assume that position is not one based on what they consider the ideal circumstances, but a position based on what they believe might be possible.

In other words, it's a pragmatic solution rather than an idealistic one.

The Tobacco trade used to lucrative and generated alot of revenue for the government. Then the government got more and more regulatory and intrusive now it no longer does.

You can sit here all day and say "if only the government legalized marijuana it would increase revenues for the nation to pay down the debt" and I can go on and on about thousands of businesses that at one time generated revenues until they were taxed and regulated right out of business.

Only a fool would convince themselves that tax and regulation on legalized marijuana would be any different. And it's the libertarians, who fancy themselves such brilliant, pragmatic thinkers who are calling for this.

Saul Good
06-27-2011, 10:27 AM
Millions of smokers quit smoking--- not for health reasons--- but because of the ever increasing taxes.

As a result, fewer people purchase cigarettes as their are fewer smokers, and tax revenue has decreased.

Like I said, I love when libertarians say they want the government to take over the narcotics trade.

How is legalizing something tantamount to the government taking over the trade?

The Mad Crapper
06-27-2011, 10:28 AM
How is legalizing something tantamount to the government taking over the trade?

I'm not the one who initiated the proposition that the government could/should tax it. You'll have to ask simpleton3x that.

Brock
06-27-2011, 10:31 AM
How much does a joint cost (ditch weed, average, and good shit)?

Just "guesses", but an ounce would be free, 80 dollars and 300 dollars. (varies greatly by where you live)

Saul Good
06-27-2011, 10:32 AM
I'm not the one who initiated the proposition that the government could/should tax it. You'll have to ask simpleton3x that.

Everything (almost) that is sold is taxed. How would this be different?

The Mad Crapper
06-27-2011, 10:35 AM
Everything (almost) that is sold is taxed. How would this be different?

Did I say it's not?

Saul Good
06-27-2011, 10:35 AM
Just "guesses", but an ounce would be free, 80 dollars and 300 dollars. (varies greatly by where you live)

How many joints do you get from an ounce. Also, I meant "cheap shit that high school kids buy" when I said "ditch weed".

Jaric
06-27-2011, 10:35 AM
The Tobacco trade used to lucrative and generated alot of revenue for the government. Then the government got more and more regulatory and intrusive now it no longer does.

You can sit here all day and say "if only the government legalized marijuana it would increase revenues for the nation to pay down the debt" and I can go on and on about thousands of businesses that at one time generated revenues until they were taxed and regulated right out of business.

Only a fool would convince themselves that tax and regulation on legalized marijuana would be any different. And it's the libertarians, who fancy themselves such brilliant, pragmatic thinkers who are calling for this.

Well, again no matter how much or little taxes are collected the legalization is going to be a net gain for the country since we no longer have all the costs associated with prohibition.

However, I don't see how legalizing and taxing something is somehow worse than sending people to jail for purchasing the item.

Jaric
06-27-2011, 10:36 AM
How many joints do you get from an ounce. Also, I meant "cheap shit that high school kids buy" when I said "ditch weed".

Alot.

The Mad Crapper
06-27-2011, 10:37 AM
How many joints do you get from an ounce. Also, I meant "cheap shit that high school kids buy" when I said "ditch weed".

If you are rolling them for yourself, about 30, if you are rolling them to sell, about 60. LMAO

Saul Good
06-27-2011, 10:37 AM
Did I say it's not?

I took it that way when you said that Simplex initiated the prospect of taxing it.

The Mad Crapper
06-27-2011, 10:38 AM
Well, again no matter how much or little taxes are collected the legalization is going to be a net gain for the country since we no longer have all the costs associated with prohibition.

You ever heard of the ATF? :p

They've been in the news alot, lately.

The Mad Crapper
06-27-2011, 10:39 AM
I took it that way when you said that Simplex initiated the prospect of taxing it.

Well it more than that--- His premise was/is that we wouldn't have to raise taxes if we legalized pot.

Again, you'll have to ask him to connect the dots.

Saul Good
06-27-2011, 10:43 AM
So a really good joint runs about $10? You can getseveral people pretty high from a single good joint, right?

Jaric
06-27-2011, 10:44 AM
You ever heard of the ATF? :p

They've been in the news alot, lately.

Regardless, legalization will still result in a net gain financially.

Jaric
06-27-2011, 10:46 AM
So a really good joint runs about $10? You can getseveral people pretty high from a single good joint, right?

Good weed can get you high in 2 or 3 hits (inhales) Unless you're celebrating something using that kind of stuff in a joint is really just wasting it.

The Mad Crapper
06-27-2011, 10:46 AM
Regardless, legalization will still result in a net gain financially.

So your argument is that if Pot is legalized, the government will stop spending 1 dollar for every 40 cents of tax revenue is takes in? :p

Jaric
06-27-2011, 10:48 AM
So your argument is that if Pot is legalized, the government will stop spending 1 dollar for every 40 cents of tax revenue is takes in? :p

STRAWMAN!

No, my argument is that legalizing weed is one step we need to take towards getting our countries finances out of the red.

Saul Good
06-27-2011, 10:48 AM
Well it more than that--- His premise was/is that we wouldn't have to raise taxes if we legalized pot.

Again, you'll have to ask him to connect the dots.

I'm completely lost here. What I got from his posts are that legalizing weed would:

1. Hamper the drug traffickers' ability to do what they do.

2. Save the expense associated with chasing and imprisoning nonviolent offenders.

3. Generate revenue through taxing the sale of the now-legal product.

Where do you disagree?

Saul Good
06-27-2011, 10:53 AM
Good weed can get you high in 2 or 3 hits (inhales) Unless you're celebrating something using that kind of stuff in a joint is really just wasting it.

Any way you slice it, it seems to me that getting high, even on premium stuff, is way cheaper than getting drunk.

Hydrae
06-27-2011, 10:53 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/36600923/The_Cost_and_Benefit_Arguments_Around_Enforcement

The Cost-and-Benefit Arguments Around Enforcement
Published: Tuesday, 20 Apr 2010 | 12:03 AM ET Text Size By: Rob Reuteman,
Special to CNBC.com


In the 2010 edition of “The Budgetary Implications of Drug Prohibition,” Jeffrey Miron, director of undergraduate studies at Harvard University, estimates that legalizing marijuana would save $13.7 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition.

“Legalization eliminates arrests for trafficking and possession," Miron says. “Second, legalization saves judicial and incarceration expenses. Third, legalization allows taxation of drug production and sale.”

Miron estimates that eight states each spend more than $1 billion annually enforcing marijuana laws: New York, $3 billion; Texas, $2 billion; California, Florida, $1.9 billion; Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, $1 billion.

Arizona—another border state—spends $726 million, while Colorado spends $145 million. North Dakota spends the least—$45 million a year—reflecting both its location and population density.

The budget for the federal Drug Enforcement Administration has increased 40-fold since its inception in 1973, from $65 million (and 2,800 employees) to $2.6 billion (11,000) in 2009.

The American public eyes these expenditures with growing alarm, says Aaron Houston, chief lobbyist for the Marijuana Policy Project.

“With the Mexican cartels procuring 70 percent of their profits in the U.S. from marijuana sales alone, and with the U.S. Joint Forces Command saying that Mexico may collapse under the weight of the cartels' insurgency, it seems only a matter of time before the American public gets fed up with the failed policy of marijuana prohibition that destroys lives every day,” says Houston.

Others, including public officials such as former two-term New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson as well as top former law enforcement officers such as Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper, make the same argument.

Others in law enforcement and drug treatment disagree, saying the war on drugs is working and worth it.

"The current balanced, restrictive, and bipartisan drug policies of the United States are working reasonably well and they have contributed to reductions in the rate of marijuana use in our nation," says Dr. Robert DuPont, who is both a former director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse and White House Drug Chief, as well as a treatment specialist.

Miron’s massive study, first released in 2005, concludes that state and local government would save money and resources every step of the way, from arrest to prosecution to incarceration.

“I don’t think there is any data to suggest any payoff for greater enforcement,” Miron tells CNBC.com. “If you are making lots of arrests then you are spending more money making arrests, lots of prosecutions, etc. In terms of showing that differences in enforcement lead to differences in use rates, no, there isn’t any evidence to support that."

Supporters of enforcement also warn that economic arguments alone should not shape the greater debate.

"Even with the U.S. economy struggling, we should not buy into the argument that vices should be legalized, taxed and regulated—no matter how much revenue we think it may generate," Asa Hutchinson, a former DEA director, U.S.. Congressman and U.S. Attorney, tells CNBC.

© 2011 CNBC.com

Jaric
06-27-2011, 10:59 AM
Any way you slice it, it seems to me that getting high, even on premium stuff, is way cheaper than getting drunk.

Yes. It is. You're also far less likely to get into a fight, abuse a child, get kidney or liver cancer, rape someone, get into a car wreck, vomit uncontrollably, black out, die from alcohol poisioning, have a hangover, act a fool, be "that guy."

You will however be far more likely to laugh uncontrollably. Music will sound better. Food will taste better. You will probably like people more. You might spend an hour or two just thinking about the meaning of your life.

Jaric
06-27-2011, 11:04 AM
Others in law enforcement and drug treatment disagree, saying the war on drugs is working and worth it.

Only those who smoke the pot they seize.

Brock
06-27-2011, 11:06 AM
["The current balanced, restrictive, and bipartisan drug policies of the United States are working reasonably well and they have contributed to reductions in the rate of marijuana use in our nation," says Dr. Robert DuPont, who is both a former director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse and White House Drug Chief, as well as a treatment specialist.

That is absolutely hilarious and completely out of touch with reality.

Hydrae
06-27-2011, 11:09 AM
My post was specifically to address TMC's concerns about whether legalizing marijuana would have any possible impact on our current budgetary issues. Whether the politicians use it wisely is a much, much different discussion.

Saul Good
06-27-2011, 11:10 AM
Yes. It is. You're also far less likely to get into a fight, abuse a child, get kidney or liver cancer, rape someone, get into a car wreck, vomit uncontrollably, black out, die from alcohol poisioning, have a hangover, act a fool, be "that guy."

You will however be far more likely to laugh uncontrollably. Music will sound better. Food will taste better. You will probably like people more. You might spend an hour or two just thinking about the meaning of your life.

Where does Reefer Madness come into play?

donkhater
06-27-2011, 11:16 AM
Others in law enforcement and drug treatment disagree, saying the war on drugs is working and worth it.



Of course they are going to say that. Their jobs depend on it. 11,000 people at the DEA are suddenly out of work if weed were legal.

Ebolapox
06-27-2011, 11:20 AM
Yeah! Tax the pot smokers! I don't smoke marijuana so this would be a tax that would not affect me therefore we should tax the hell out of it.

I'm all for the legalization and taxation of weed but why tax it heavily?

because, even heavily taxed, it would be cheaper than the black market price.

Brock
06-27-2011, 11:20 AM
because, even heavily taxed, it would be cheaper than the black market price.

Would it? Hmm. I don't know.

Saul Good
06-27-2011, 11:29 AM
Would it? Hmm. I don't know.

You get 20 or so cigarettes for $5-$6, right. That's a lot cheaper than weed.

Jaric
06-27-2011, 11:37 AM
Where does Reefer Madness come into play?

That's what you watch and laugh your ass off after getting baked.

And if anyone takes it seriously they should immediately be airlifted to the nearest psych ward as they are obviously delusional and need medical attention.