[yodude888]

Considering that recent reviews conducted by a panel set up by the government concluded that cannabis was of less risk to the human body and society than alcohol, why not legalise and tax the sale of cannabis in order to raise funds to support the cost of tertiary education?

[Kracked]

They don't legalise it because of scaremongering, tabloid reading morons.

[Persephone9]

Because cannabis, unlike alcohol and tobacco, is fairly easy to grow (or make) yourself. People wouldn't necessarily buy it from shops if it was heavily taxed, because they could get it tax free from dealers, even if the quality was lower.

[CLEE_F]

I, for one, concur my fellow stoner

[M1F2R3]

I don't smoke cannabis but this is a good idea.

[im so academic]

(Original post by yodude888)
Considering that recent reviews conducted by a panel set up by the government concluded that cannabis was of less risk to the human body and society than alcohol, why not legalise and tax the sale of cannabis in order to raise funds to support the cost of tertiary education?

That's just completely sad, what kind of a position are we in?

Are we really deep in the **** that we are even suggesting legalising (or do you mean decriminalising?) cannabis.

No, just no. I for one do not want the NHS sorting out the problem where people develop mental issues as a result of cannabis abuse.

[Bagration]

(Original post by im so academic)
That's just completely sad, what kind of a position are we in?

Are we really deep in the **** that we are even suggesting legalising (or do you mean decriminalising?) alcohol.

No, just no. I for one do not want the NHS sorting out the problem where people die as a result of alcohol abuse.

fixd mirite

[CKJMA]

Controversial idea. Anyone who has studied Economics at A Level will know that any form of drugs have negative externalities. The cost to society in the form of NHS bills, cleaning up waste and rehab clinics will inevitably be greater than the costs derived from tax revenue. You can argue that those costs already exist though so any type of taxation on the consumption of cannabis will be surplus.

[Enoch.]

(Original post by Bagration)
fixd mirite

[yodude888]

(Original post by CKJMA)
Controversial idea. Anyone who has studied Economics at A Level will know that any form of drugs have negative externalities. The cost to society in the form of NHS bills, cleaning up waste and rehab clinics will inevitably be greater than the costs derived from tax revenue. You can argue that those costs already exist though so any type of taxation on the consumption of cannabis will be surplus.

Cannabis is basically the only drug with next to no negative externalities, hence why I picked it. Compared to alcohol, negative effects on health are basically non-existent. Also, there is no such thing as physical addiction to cannabis - i.e. no need to rehab, et cetera.

[ABCI23]

(Original post by Persephone9)
Because cannabis, unlike alcohol and tobacco, is fairly easy to grow (or make) yourself. People wouldn't necessarily buy it from shops if it was heavily taxed, because they could get it tax free from dealers, even if the quality was lower.

If cannabis was made legal, there would almost certainly be a restriction on how many plants you can grow. In the Netherlands, you are restricted to growing 5 plants per person and only you can only carry enough for personal use. Drug dealing would still be illegal.

[Persephone9]

(Original post by ABCI23)
If cannabis was made legal, there would almost certainly be a restriction on how many plants you can grow. In the Netherlands, you are restricted to growing 5 plants per person and only you can only carry enough for personal use. Drug dealing would still be illegal.

I wasn't suggesting that dealing wouldn't be illegal. I just think that it's more likely that people will grow their own or get it from dealers if it's heavily taxed. People break the laws on cannabis now, and whilst the numbers may decrease, I don't think that would change entirely.

(Original post by PerigeeApogee)
Look at alcohol. Because of the tough position of the law on unlicensed retailers of alcohol, you don't get ANYBODY in this country getting their alcohol from unlicensed retailers.

I'm not saying that noone will buy it from shops - there are undoubtedly people who would rather pay a bit more to avoid a potential criminal record, and guarantee quality.

However, the people who can't afford to pay that bit extra may still just stick with dealers. It's a hard one to predict because it could go either way.

I am actually for the legalization of cannabis, I just don't think heavy taxation to generate a lot of money for the government will necessarily work (although possibly worth a try, I'll admit).

[allieee]

(Original post by yodude888)
Cannabis is basically the only drug with next to no negative externalities, hence why I picked it. Compared to alcohol, negative effects on health are basically non-existent. Also, there is no such thing as physical addiction to cannabis - i.e. no need to rehab, et cetera.

Well I'm not sure negative effects on health are actually non existent for cannabis.
There is a strong noted correlation between cannabis useage (especially heavy or when started young) and psychiatric problems in later life. My mother has been a mental health nurse for almost thirty years and she has also noticed this, that people that come into the hospital with mental problems more often than not have used cannabis in their younger days. So the money spent sectioning, hospitalising and looking after mentally ill people once back into the community may counteract this idea about raising money through taxes.
Also, I think saying 'no need to rehab, etc' because cannabis is not 'physically addictive' could be interpreted as being quite naive. It may not be physically addictive but it is mentally addictive, which can be a powerful problem for some people, who will needs counselling, could drop out of work etc.

[yodude888]

(Original post by allieee)
Well I'm not sure negative effects on health are actually non existent for cannabis.
There is a strong noted correlation between cannabis useage (especially heavy or when started young) and psychiatric problems in later life. My mother has been a mental health nurse for almost thirty years and she has also noticed this, that people that come into the hospital with mental problems more often than not have used cannabis in their younger days. So the money spent sectioning, hospitalising and looking after mentally ill people once back into the community may counteract this idea about raising money through taxes.
Also, I think saying 'no need to rehab, etc' because cannabis is not 'physically addictive' could be interpreted as being quite naive. It may not be physically addictive but it is mentally addictive, which can be a powerful problem for some people, who will needs counselling, could drop out of work etc.

1) There's a correlation with no proven causal link, and while I won't deny that cannabis may mess with some peoples' minds, many studies have concluded that the correlation is heavily down to the fact that people with pre-existing schizophrenic and other conditions are statisitically more likely to become cannabis consumers. However, these issues don't even slightly compare to the massive, massive health risks linked to alcohol, or even just over-eating.

2) That point, however, and the one about rehab, are actually moot. Cannabis legalisation isn't suddenly going to cause people to need rehab and hospitalisation more than is already the case. In countries where cannabis has been legalised or decriminalised, use has actually fallen. Case in point, Portugal

[jmenkus]

(Original post by im so academic)
No, just no. I for one do not want the NHS sorting out the problem where people develop mental issues as a result of cannabis abuse.

They're already having to sort out the problem where people develop lung cancer or cirrhosis of the liver (among other things), why not this?

[O93]

Theres no logical reason to keep drugs like this illegal, apart from scaremongering...

Its not like drugs are going to disappear just because you criminalise them, it just makes them more dangerous as it is not going to be regulated, as well as giving power to criminals and funding crime (Drug trade running into the billions?)

[Planar]

Great idea. Isn't going to happen.

[Corko93]

The government realised with tobacco that the tax income doesn't cover the cost to the NHS. They're not going to risk making the same mistake again.
Don't get me wrong I would like to see cannabis legalised, I don't see it as a "drug". It's just extremely unlikely to happen here in the foreseeable future.

[im so academic]

(Original post by jmenkus)
They're already having to sort out the problem where people develop lung cancer or cirrhosis of the liver (among other things), why not this?

Because it would only just add to the list.

[JGR]

No politician is going to throw their career away by not being "tough on drugs(/crime/whatever)", and there is very little incentive to bring these things up, as the government will look bad no matter what path they take.
Hence, it's just more convenient to sweep it under the rug and forget about it.