Legal marijuana sales forecast to hit $23B in 4 years

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2016/03/20/legal-marijuana-sales-forecast-hit-23b-4-years/82046018/

by prostoalex • 10 years ago

124 124 10 years ago

sneak• 10 years ago

Terrifying, as the distribution of marijuana in the United States remains a federal crime, allowing anyone in this industry to be legally locked up at any time by the feds.

Someone once told me that this is how most of China operates; there are many common day-to-day things (such as money transfers) that close to 100% of the population engages in that are completely illegal, yet tolerated. When a person does something that the state disagrees with for any reason, legal or otherwise, the entirely legal option to lock them up for one of the unrelated common activities (which are illegal) is used.

awakeasleep• 10 years ago

What scares me is that we've pursued this in such 'medical' terms.

It really influences how people think. Remember when it seemed insane to see advertisments about how "8 out of 10 doctors recommend ___ brand cigarettes"?

It doesn't seem crazy to me now that there is so much "health" based marketing around marijuana.

hoodoof3• 10 years ago

And how the tobacco companies are evil and terrible but hey! Wanna smoke pot? That's all GOOD!

Marijuana should be legal but discouraged, not permitted to be advertised, put in plain packaging, kept behind counters and not turned into novelty products that appeal to teenagers like foods.

Hard to see how it's much different to tobacco really.

beachstartup3• 10 years ago

yeah but that's what every government, and many employers, do, everywhere. it's a basic PR strategy for exercising power.

hell, that's even what people do to each other when they want to break up a relationship. your s.o. did something you really can't stand, or maybe you're just over it, but don't want to admit it? blame it on all the other stuff that accumulated over the past 3 years.

tn132• 10 years ago

And so does India. Marijuana was legal in India til 1985 then US government forced Indian government criminalize it.

TheLogothete4• 10 years ago

Why did the US gvmnt do that?

mithras• 10 years ago

The USA did the same thing in the early nineties in Laos when it started to open up.

idra2• 10 years ago

I have the same question as another poster - why would the US government want to do it?

programmarchy• 10 years ago

It is a very precarious situation which I think extends beyond the marijuana industry, even in the US. What you said about China reminded me of the book Three Felonies A Day, which explains how modern federal crime laws put US citizens in a similar position of being extorted at the whims of the state.

It seems like there could be an opportunity for some kind of mutual aid arrangement -- an insurance policy of sorts -- that could underwrite the legal fees for a member who happens to get busted.

ams61102• 10 years ago

You might try to make the argument that if enforecement is highly inconsistent that it's being done with bias. Not sure a judge would agree but it seems to be a reasonable argument. If the Feds are not enforcing a law, what's the point of the law?

Similar to how trademarks can be voided if they are not consistently defended.

Edit: written before I saw vidarth's comment.

prostoalex• 10 years ago

It is probably a primary indication of a corrupt state, as it allows for selective law application.

"For my friends, anything; for my enemies, the law." – Oscar R. Benavides, President of Peru.

vidarh• 10 years ago

A way to "solve" this might be (and it'd be incredibly hard) to give a constitutional right for "uneven exercise of the law" or something of that sort to be a defence against most charges: If you could demonstrate that cases are selectively investigated or prosecuted other than by clear, published standards (e.g. based on amount of available evidence), the law in question should be considered null and void until the legislative has affirmed it again.

It'd be difficult to get something like that just right so that the bar is high enough (no chance of getting laws stricken down just because police is under-unded and has to prioritise and are trying their best) but still low enough to prevent abuse, and it'd put a burden of collecting a lot of statistics and do a lot of analysis on police to ensure they don't have undue biases, but it's work they should be doing anyway.

There'd still be the option of the legislative to intentionally pass the laws again, scold the police and do nothing to actually change things, but if the bar is low enough and it happens with a lot of laws, they'd be swamped...

Another thing I'd like to see is a legal requirement that laws comes with a set of pre- and post-conditions that the law is based on. E.g. "Given that it's proven that X causes Y effect, we pass this law" and "The intent of this law is to achieve a X reduction in Y behaviour within Z timerame", and give courts the power to suspend laws where the conditions provably don't hold...

Requiring laws to be regularly re-affirmed would be another fun thing - forcing people to go on record voting for a law that today sounds antiquated and that their opponents would use to club them over the head with in the press might substantially increase the chances of having bad laws stricken down... Even "just" requiring laws to be re-affirmed if X years have gone with less than Y prosecutions would be a big deal.

A lot of problems are down to legislatives being able to pass laws and then largely wash their hands of the whole thing and not worry about the consequences or whether or not the laws have the desired effect as long as it doesn't affect the people voting for them too much. Unfortunately that's also exactly the reason we're unlikely to see it happen - it's not in their interest to have to consider the fallout.

ridgeguy• 10 years ago

There is a "selective prosecution" defense [1]. In tax law, there is a "selective enforcement" defense [2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_prosecution

[2] http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1933943

cndnncxn• 10 years ago

Say what you want about ending the drug war, but I'm not quite in support of creating a whole new tobacco industry.

monocasa• 10 years ago

The industry was already there, we just have a much nicer set of owners now. Less beheadings.

zaroth2• 10 years ago

The pot industry exists and has existed for some time. Currently what is happening is highly fragmented tax-paying American outfits are replacing Mexican cartels as the production source, so that's at least a Good Thing. Even if it was legalized at the Federal level I'm not sure we would see a big-tobacco approach to growing pot.

Keep in mind this article is talking about growth of the state-legal pot industry, not growth of the overall pot industry (legal or otherwise) which I think must be growing, but more like at single digit percentage rates.

InclinedPlane• 10 years ago

Marijuana is far less addictive and because users smoke much less marijuana than they do tobacco, the health impacts are far less severe. Not to mention that a new tobacco industry would be preferable to the double whammy of the erosion of civil liberties, government, society, and human lives caused by the war on drugs and the financial windfall to cartels that illegal drugs have represented.

elevenfist• 10 years ago

A stopgap measure would be banning public advertisements for the entire industry and taxing tge industry to fund education and rehabilitation.

drawkbox• 10 years ago

The US could use a new market to add to the economy that is for sure. A large majority of people in the US support it at 58% for all, 64% under 50, 71% under 35 [1]

However with the surveillance society we live in, we need to rid the books of laws that most people break otherwise there will be a sea of non-violent crimes that don't make logical sense today. Laws as deterrents for moralistic or non-violent acts do not work but make it more unsafe in this case, you regulate and tax to make it safer and more about support/new markets rather than incarceration which is a drain on the economy.

The black market created by the war on drugs does not operate better or safer for kids, nor add tax revenues or regulations for safety. It funds cartels.

We have been doing it wrong for a long time.

Look how much money yearly has been going to the black market, cartels and diverted from benefits like school funding, support and regulation. Public university funding is plummeting along with K-12 [2][3]

This is only the start of it as well, probably in the hundreds of billions have been going to black markets/cartels. This cannot continue, legalization and regulation is the only way. I can't believe it is this slow now that there is this much money in it for revenues in a time of local/state huge budget shortages and most of all stopping funding of cartels. This moralistic prohibition is just as bad as the first prohibition in creating lucrative crime markets and attacking personal freedom.

[1] http://www.gallup.com/poll/186260/back-legal-marijuana.aspx

[2] http://www.marketplace.org/2016/03/14/education/illinois-cut...

[3] http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/13/pf/college/public-university...

rmc5• 10 years ago

However with the surveillance society we live in

Or you could change the US constitution so that it includes a right to privacy and data protection, like the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, or the European Convention of Human Rights

cbd1984• 10 years ago

It effectively does: the fourth amendment. More explicit verbiage is unlikely to matter.

Besides, nobody said Europe wasn't a surveillance society.

madaxe_again2• 10 years ago

Both known as "the bogeyman" in the UK and being used as an argument as to why we should leave the EU, by both politicians and press, which many appear to have already bought.

The mind boggles.

interdrift• 10 years ago

Great! Let's eliminate crime !!

justsaysmthng2• 10 years ago

Good. It's now time to explore the market for people who want to quit/detox from the weed.

I'm not saying this in a sarcastic way - I've been smoking on and off for 20 years and I have great respect for the plant.

But it has this "self-limiting" property - sometimes you want to be with it, sometimes you want to take a break.

And taking a break is not trivial for some people.

This is were the secondary market can take form - helping people take a break/detox from marijuana.

This can take the form of books, websites, applications, seminars, drugs, whatever.

bcook3• 10 years ago

Generic classes/treatments/therapy on addiction already exist. Marijuana has not been proven to be physically addictive like alcohol & heroin. Psychological addiction can happen with anything, so that is why I mention generic addiction treatment.

I think your point is valid though. We can always learn more, especially if it can help.

justsaysmthng2• 10 years ago

I so dislike the word "addiction" because it puts every type of cyclical behavior in one bucket.

Even worse is the word "addict", which is dirty and degrading and helpless.

Just like the word "drugs" or "criminal". There are so many shades to it that one word just doesn't cut it.

The word we use to state the issue gives us the frame of where to look for solutions, hence a bad statement can lead to bad solutions.

For example, instead of "addiction to marijuana" try using the expression "relationship with the marijuana plant".

This subtile change in statement shifts the domain of the issue and lets us look for a solution in new places. Now we're dealing with a relationship (with a plant) - might it be a replacement for a relationship with a human (current or previous) ? Who is it replacing in my life ?

And so on, you get the point ...

Reframing my "addiction to tobacco" to "relationship with the tobacco plant" has helped me quit smoking for good, because I was not thinking of it as a mechanistic dependency on a substance (nicotine), but as a case of relationship with a plant.

She was my closest friend, my protector, my thinking partner, but she was taking a toll on my health, hence we had to part ways. Peacefully and respectfully, we separated and I've been free ever since.

The point I'm trying to make is that we're still far from a clear understanding of what "addiction" is and how to approach it at the root and that's were green pastures for research and businesses exist.

random_upvoter• 10 years ago

I've never been sure what the difference between physical and psychological addiction is supposed to mean anyway. What we call psychology is a complex of physiological processes. What matters is that marijuana accounts for 17% of rehab admission, more than any other drug with the exception of alcohol. Cute sophistries that we're also addicted to coffee or air will not change the fact that this "psychological" marijuana addiction is a serious threat to quality of life.

VLM• 10 years ago

Culture is an interesting issue. At uni everyone smoked, which annoyed me because I got headaches from it. Decades later grown up in the burbs, the idea that I'd pound on a random neighbors door and smoke up is simply absurd.

For at least some addicts, they need a complete cultural transplanting, age change, or even social class change.

For an analogy think of alcohol pretty much owning 22 year olds at college bars as a cultural issue... short of going hermit mode or being really poor (that was me) or moving to a different non-western culture, there's no avoiding it, which is rough on people with susceptibility to alcohol addiction. Send them to rehab all you want, but until you remove them from the culture they're just gonna drink again.

hellofunk5• 10 years ago

There are definitely physical dependencies that develop with THC, perhaps not "addiction" but the body does get used to it to the point that withdrawal is a real and physical problem if you've been using it a lot and at strong doses.

deepvibrations2• 10 years ago

Have you tried a high CBD/low THC strain? When I found it was limiting me, I moved over to a strain of this type and it still satisfied my urge to smoke something tasty, but also did not hold me back from doing anything, as it these strains do not get you 'stoned' in the normal sense. In hindsight, my addiction was that I related the act smoking to sitting back and being lazy, so once I removed that link I no longer felt the urge to smoke and I rarely smoke anything these days. I recently read a book called 'The Power of Habit' which offers amazing insight and ways to help you overcome any addictions and in a much more efficient way...I highly recommend it!

antihero• 10 years ago

Yeah basically just sort yourself some Sativa instead of Indica. It's almost like a whole new drug. I much prefer it, plus sex on it is utterly amazing.

Overtonwindow• 10 years ago

Very good point. I've been a one-hit-wonder for years (1-3 hits and I'm done for the night) but I suffer with the whole laziness/limiting/apathy for at least a day afterwards. I hope this spawns a better market in creating strains that give you all the fun, but none of the laziness, and psychological dependency. I use it for depression and anxiety, and I know I'm addicted, but I also know it's entirely my fault.

Also: Being able to explore ways to discuss, diagnose, and ween myself off of the dependency of weed, while being open and free to discuss why it helps me in the first place, without stigma, would really help in my situation.

anonbanker• 10 years ago

Hydrate the day after, and your life will be completely different.

hellofunk5• 10 years ago

There seems to be this reverse-stigma attached to marijuana that causes many to think there is no such thing as weed withdrawal or dependence, and some laugh at the mere notion of this. Hopefully as the drug is more widely used recreationally and legally, this notion will change and most people will be more aware of these things. It is a remarkable plant but it is certainly not all positive and it can be dangerously abused like any other vice or medication, with real problematic side-effects.

vectorpush• 10 years ago

I think many people are aware of these risks, but the marijuana community is hesitant to concede them openly because of how overblown the risks have been portrayed in the past. I think you're right that this will change once the drug is more widely used, but more so when the community feels comfortable enough to relax the defensive posture that is primarily concerned with encouraging a mindset that favors legalization.

dominotw• 10 years ago

/r/leaves

andersen14882• 10 years ago

sometimes you want to be with it, sometimes you want to take a break.

So true. I'm at that point now, but finding it really hard to quit when I can just walk down the street to a store and buy it...

kazuyan2• 10 years ago

Wondering how big this is compare to Netherlands :) Marijuana has been legal there for long time.

nsomaru• 10 years ago

IIRC, marijuana is not legal in the Netherlands, but is 'tolerated'.

kazuyan2• 10 years ago

Oh, you are right! I didn't know!

http://europe.newsweek.com/marijuana-and-old-amsterdam-30821...

cr1895• 10 years ago

It's an extremely common misconception, but it isn't legal in the NL. It is tolerated through an official policy called "gedoogbeleid" in which it is effectively legal for people over 18 to buy up to 5 grams at a time in a coffeeshop. It's that famous Dutch tolerance.

However, there are some key differences with the situation in the US. In the Netherlands, the supply to the coffeeshops is still very much illegal; it's a "mystery" how the shops are supplied, but they've got the product (max 500g at any given time), and it's tolerated for them to sell it to the public. Supply however remains under the table. Enforcement is rigid, if they're over the 500g limit, selling to minors, or selling other hard drugs then they can be swiftly shut down.

The Dutch government at the highest levels is increasingly regressive; they've even begun to criminalize supporting the growing of cannabis, which is absurd when you see that innocent garden supply shops are now potentially liable. At the municipal level in the largely pro-cannabis cities (e.g. Amsterdam, Rotterdam), there have been plans to try regulated and tolerated growing. The national government however emphatically rejects these plans and prevents it from happening. Some councils (especially in the south near Belgium) have enacted resident-only restrictions, which has the not-unsurprising effect that nuisance street dealing picked up. The government tried to enact this nationwide, but many cities refused and there are usually no residence restrictions except for certain areas.

(Interesting fact: only 35% of visitors to Amsterdam visit a coffeeshop. It's a big, inaccurate stereotype that the Dutch are stoned all the time or that Amsterdam is all about weed. Americans smoke a lot more than the Dutch do, much to many visitors' surprise.)

pakiko82• 10 years ago

Has anyone figured out how one could get exposure to this in the stock market? Any other way to legally invest in this boom?

dexterdog• 10 years ago

Unfortunately I will assume the derivatives that are already taking advantage will make it an average bet at best.

hourislate• 10 years ago

At the moment these businesses in the USA can't even use the banks. There are some large growers in Canada that are listed on the TSX. Aphria Inc., Mettrum Health Corp., Canopy Growth Corp., which owns two of Canada’s biggest licensed marijuana producers, Tweed and Bedrocan.

It seems growers who supply the retail outlets will be the way to go.

my_username_is_• 10 years ago

Most of the growth pre-legalization at a federal level won't be at these companies though, right? There's no way these guys can be supplying the markets in WA/OR/CO/AK because they'd need to transport a lot of product over national borders and would have to deal with federal border agents. Right?

6502nerdface• 10 years ago

If you're an accredited investor in the US, you could consider investing in a number of cannabis-focused hedge funds, private equity funds, and venture capital funds that have sprung up recently.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/debraborchardt/2015/05/19/cannab...

http://poseidonassetmanagement.com/

http://www.privateerholdings.com/about/

delbel• 10 years ago

I am seeking small initial investment to scale from 1 to 16x its size current to-be licensed growers/producers operation. Please contact me.

at-fates-hands2• 10 years ago

Mark my words, now that states see the incredible tax revenues from this industry, they're going to tax the fuck out of it, and then regulate the hell out of it to discourage and limit new businesses popping up all over (which is already happening anyways).

This has become a cash cow for state governments and I don't see this ending well for anybody wanting to use legally. The government track record on stuff like this is absolutely miserable.

peteretep• 10 years ago

    > and limit new businesses
    > popping up

So they're going to try and maximise tax revenue by stopping new businesses? Gotcha

sageabilly• 10 years ago

No, it's probably going to turn into the same thing that's happened with liquor laws in the US where some states have state ABC boards and you can only buy the very specific liquors that are on the approved list and only at the state-run liquor stores. Even states that don't have state-run liquor stores have very strict importing and distribution rules which leads to three steps between the distiller and the store, with each step taking money off the top and paying taxes.

njharman2• 10 years ago

yeah, in retrospect it's obvious. How do you get any "vice" legalized. You figure out how municipalities and states can tax the fuck out of it.

JoeAltmaier• 10 years ago

For comparison: tobacco is a $600B industry annually.

Legal marijuana sales forecast to hit $23B in 4 years

Related Stories