Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
How long has he been in office? Oh, yeah... a little over 50 days. What did you expect to happen when he got into office, that the economy would be fixed in a week?
I don't like all of Obama's policies, and I'm definitely not an Obama-maniac at all, but you have to understand everything takes time. Nothing is going to be fixed immediately... but that is what America expects, because a fair portion aren't educated in the field of politics. I, unlike Obama worshipers, do not expect the economy to be fixed instantly.
Furthermore, look what happened in '04...
Right he's been in office just over 50 days and people are assuming that he is going to be reelected in 4 years. You are making the same point that I am.
Also I am very underwhelmed with what he has done in such a short time, unfortunately.
Because he's doing such a bang up job so far that he'll definitely get elected in 2012.
Well so far all the headlines I've read regarding him go along the lines of "Obama elects _______ to new position" or "Obama signs legislation to ________" or "Obama proposes new bill to Congress to help small business" or "Obama looks to restore faith in economy's future"
The headlines of the last couple years have gone along the lines of "Bush to head to Texas ranch for a week" or "Lowest approval rating in decades!" or "Bush has shoe thrown at him"
by having a sense of humor and recognizing sarcasm.
Maybe people just don't find you funny
That doesn't mean they cant' recognize sarcasm. I'm the first person to jokingly point out that corn often makes people less than motivated? It's not like I made that up. And so far everybody I've told about that post who isn't burnt did find it funny. For that matter, so did a few who are.
Corn shouldn't be that big a part of your identity that you find such comments personally offensive. If it is then you have a problem. That's not a knock. It's friendly warning.
People discussing an issue that is important to many, may not be the best place to make "jokes." Maybe the problem is that I'm sure many of us have encountered such ignorance in real life and don't find it funny. Your "joke" along with your Obama comments lead me to believe that perhaps it wasn't a joke. Forgive me for not reading your "joke" as such.
People discussing an issue that is important to many, may not be the best place to make "jokes." Maybe the problem is that I'm sure many of us have encountered such ignorance in real life and don't find it funny. Your "joke" along with your Obama comments lead me to believe that perhaps it wasn't a joke. Forgive me for not reading your "joke" as such.
You are forgiven. Seriously, since it's that important to you, take what I said about finding it offensive VERY seriously. I speak from experience.
And I'm not a non-user. It's just very rare and totally unimportant to me. When it stopped being a habit I stopped caring.
People discussing an issue that is important to many, may not be the best place to make "jokes." Maybe the problem is that I'm sure many of us have encountered such ignorance in real life and don't find it funny. Your "joke" along with your Obama comments lead me to believe that perhaps it wasn't a joke. Forgive me for not reading your "joke" as such.
You are forgiven. Seriously, since it's that important to you, take what I said about finding it offensive VERY seriously. I speak from experience.
And I'm not a non-user. It's just very rare and totally unimportant to me. When it stopped being a habit I stopped caring.
Yes, because I am taking it very seriously(sarcasm) <--see how that works. That's fine that you don't care, you can go on not caring however you like. Just please don't come in and rain on people's parade or discussion as it were, if they do care. Just go fishing or something instead. If you have something to add to the discussion, well then, by all means......
Post by Fishing Maniac on Mar 16, 2009 19:58:09 GMT -5
I added a different perspective. Every conversation should have one. It's funny how those who claim to embrace diversity and expression are so often those who scorn the expression of diverse opinions.
sarcastic remarks are not a different perspective. What do they add to the conversation? they're meant to get a reaction out of people, not to fuel discussion.
Post by lordrockinhood on Mar 16, 2009 21:29:18 GMT -5
Sarcastic or not... among other things, frequent corn use definitely contributes to decreased motivation in many people, when the corn becomes more important that the rest... and that IS a problem
Yes it was a joke, but it also IS a different point of view... legalizing would have good effects and bad effects
Something wrong with pointing that out? I don't know how he intended it, but I took his post as a political cartoon...
There is a question mark in the title of this thread... I take that to mean, "is this a good thing or a bad thing, please discuss"
For the record, I believe in medical marijuana100%. I also believe in decriminalization, for the most part... but NOT in selling pot at the local Bodega... it's my opinion, and for what it's worth I've certainly nommed my share...
Well the savings is gonna come mainly from non incarceration/prosecution of cornheads more than anything. There will be people who have problems with it, but probably more or less at the same rate that we have alcoholics, who also tend to lack the motivation to look for jobs.
Post by Fishing Maniac on Mar 17, 2009 7:39:37 GMT -5
Also, we should examine the topicality of the thread title as a contention.
"Legalization to SAVE the economy?"
Quite simply - no. The statement over simplifies the problem. The introduction of one (basically one) new consumable product into the economy with taxation applied to it's reduction ad sales would have minimal impact on the overall economy. In no way would this meager increase in tax revenue even begin to correct the mortgage crisis and banking crisis which started this entire thing. Nor would it help to pay for the multi-billion dollar stimulus package (which all of us tax payers will foot the bill for eventually).
So let's say that the people in this black market industry just go out of business. Now they are no longer contributing to the economy as consumers. This would also have a negative effect.
Now, I'm certainly not saying this matter of factly. I put this forth as a hypothetical scenario. What are the potential economic down sides?
I am still not sure when I run some conservative taxation numbers I come up with 15.6 billion or so which is not a trifling amount. However factor in the savings from the war on drugs, and the judicial system, and I would think you could add another 10 Billion or so to that. These numbers are not going to save the economy but I think they will do it some good. As to the Black Marketeers, I assume once it is legal that the best and brightest will be the first to start collecting these taxes, they will have savings on security, and having to start in a new place every couple of years.
So to sum up I dont believe it will "save" the economy, but I think it can do it a lot of good over time.
Also, we should examine the topicality of the thread title as a contention.
"Legalization to SAVE the economy?"
So let's say that the people in this black market industry just go out of business. Now they are no longer contributing to the economy as consumers. This would also have a negative effect.
Now, I'm certainly not saying this matter of factly. I put this forth as a hypothetical scenario. What are the potential economic down sides?
The people in the black market aren't paying Income Taxes. New jobs will be created for "knowledgeable sales people". Many of these black market people (just to stick with your phrase) are collecting government benefits bc they have no declared income. Also, the big money players in the black market game right now, have to resort to violence as a means of protection.
This will also save consumers lots of money. How many times have you been ripped off? Or paid more than you should bc it was the only source, wasted gas driving around waiting for a phone call, or driving a good distance to get it. Or got it confiscated or had to ditch it.
And I think people underestimate the amount of $$ spent on prisoners serving jail time for distribution.
While it obviously won't cover our debt, it would certainly be a step in the right direction.
on the opposite side, the prison industry will not like this very much...and they have powerful friends in gov't. nor will the overstaffed DEA like this much...
i still dont really see any negative effects to complete legalization and sale. maybe more people try it, but probably not many. if anything, it becomes less sexy.
Post by rooconteur on Mar 17, 2009 11:40:50 GMT -5
^^The prisons are all over-crowded. Everywhere. The DEA (buncha narcs, man) would obviously not like it but that's big $$$ the taxpayers would be saving.
There was a great series of articles on this topic in the economist the week before last. Not just marijuana, but all drugs. I highly recommend that you read them:
Prohibition of drugs has caused the US to prop up corrupt puppet regimes all over the world. Paramilitary groups and terrorist organizations have been strengthened as a result of the trade in illegal drugs. US drug policy has essentially created a failed state in our neighbor and second-largest trading partner. So the drug war has a tremendous negative effect on the producer countries (like Colombia and Afghanistan) and the distributor countries (like Mexico).
Even if stopping drug use in America is a worthwhile goal for government (a separate issue), it's not clear that the very expensive war on drugs has been effective at doing this. Supply lines are still strong. When Colombia successfully burns down huge coca fields, they spring up in Peru and Bolivia. Even when supply lines are shortened, distributors cut their product, making drugs even less safe for users (though no less commonly used). Many drug education programs intended to reduce demand have proven ineffective. And filling up our nation's jails with nonviolent criminals, disproportionately minorities, can do untold social harm.
The drug war is a foreign policy disaster, promotes terrorism, costs ridiculous amounts of money for the American taxpayer, and threatens the fabric of American society. Legalization would provide a tremendous economic stimulus.
2/5- Papadosio 3/3- MUSE 3/12- John Mayer 3/19- The Werks 3/31- Passion Pit 4/18- Ben Folds 4/20- Against Me! 6/10- Bonnaroo 6/30- Eric Clapton and Roger Daltrey
Right he's been in office just over 50 days and people are assuming that he is going to be reelected in 4 years. You are making the same point that I am.
Also I am very underwhelmed with what he has done in such a short time, unfortunately.
Yes, I don't think that you can make that assumption, that he will be reelected. But I was also talking about your comment of "since he is doing such a bang up job." I'm saying that is kind of unfair seeing that it hasn't even been 2 months. He still has over 3 1/2 years left to impress.
Reading your comment in a different context I understand where you are coming from.
+1 for offering an opposing opinion. I love discussing both sides of all topics. Usually I defend the ones I don't even really stand for...
But I think it would help the economy. Not entirely, but to some extent. So far weed contributes to a high death rate in Mexico, funding to gangs in the u.s, and imprisonment... or severely screwing with your record.
Legalization would cut down on the problem with Mexico, the gang funding, and would free up the prisons a bit. The DEA has a problem with this... but if the government puts a tax on it, then that is bringing them a fair bit of money, not to mention creating a bunch of new jobs. Also if it is legalized, the DEA can spend their precious time on matters dealing with substances that are more severe.
That is my view at least. But I'm only 19, so whatever.
2/5- Papadosio 3/3- MUSE 3/12- John Mayer 3/19- The Werks 3/31- Passion Pit 4/18- Ben Folds 4/20- Against Me! 6/10- Bonnaroo 6/30- Eric Clapton and Roger Daltrey
;D
