My Photo

December 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

BlogStats


« Ideological Images | Main | CLINTON UNFIT TO LEAD (updated 27sep16) »

21 September 2016

Comments

Patricia Smith

Thank you George, i will give the report a read later tonight. For the most part, I am finding that proponents of both sides of legalization are exaggerating their claims to rally support. I didn't spend four decades of my life helping patients to let them get thrown under the bus in favor or recreational users.

BradC

Saw this online,

https://lostcoastoutpost.com/2016/sep/29/governor-signs-cottage-cannabis-micro-farmer-bill/

Brad C.

Military vets working in MJ industry,

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6nzU0ZLkoak

Bill Tozer

Figured some growers would reject Prop. 64. Too much red tape, regulations, restrictions from state and local tax collectors seeking more revenue everywhere you turn. Fines, fees, and business taxes are a sure fire way to have the tax man and eco-police making several trips on one's property...without a warrant.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-marijuana-growers-idUSKCN1240AF

BradC

Re: 30sep16 update - RMJ has been on sale (tax free) in MMJ dispensaries since October 2015. The first RMJ only businesses opened their doors this week.

George Rebane

BradC 828am - Thanks for that clarification Mr Croul.

Patricia Smith

I got a phone survey from SAM last night asking if I supported Prop 64. How very stange to be siding with my nemesis. I keep waiting for the No on 64 TV ads to appear, but so far I've only seen ads that support he measure. Kevin Sabet said he raised $50mil to defeat Prop 64 as they see CA as a firewall. I hope they haven't conceded the race already.

BTW, I have a ultra-conservative guest on my radio show today. Buck Weckman is Don Bessee on steroids when it comes to MMJ, but we both agree that Prop 64 is bad law. Tune in KVMR at noon for a lively discussion.

don bessee

Hardly Pattie, the highly sophisticated, demographically targeted outreach campaign has been rolling on many media platforms in high density voter areas. Areas that have the most undecided voters.
People who have heard the truth about the advertising to kids aspects of 64 soundly reject it, truth that was adjudicated by the yes on 64 billionaires boys club. The language as approved by the judge is in the pro/con ballot arguments in the official ballot guide and is clear they will market to kids just like big tobacco did.

We just had a No On 64 rally at the capitol, it made AP, LA times, SF paper as well as lots of TV minutes. Sac TV news was very nice in terms of minutes of coverage over a couple of days. Of course you wont see any of that in our local media. Did anyone in my home base of Nevada county even hear about the AAA press conference with SAM Prez Dr. Sabet in which they came out against 64? Didn't think so. ;-)

Patricia Smith

Well that's comforting to know SAM is still in the fight (at least against Prop 64 - we will live to fight again on other issues). Prop 64 will win or lose in the cities where the most voters live so I'm glad to hear that's where their advertising money is going.

I had planned to attend the No on 64 rally in Sac but had a conflicting commitment. Many of my fellow pro-cannabis activists were there however. Many of us oppose AUMA (Prop 64).

So you can stop taking "pot" shots at me. We are on the same side of this issue - which makes me just a little bit crazy! You really can't make this stuff up.

don bessee

Too bad you were not able to make the rally, I would have given you a slot on the mic to slam 64. In my work in the urban areas I know what you mean about what a unique Nov. election cycle this is. I have spent years building coalitions of people who don't often vote for the same people for prez and so on. This cycle with the Bernie bro factor and the mmj folks v yuppies who want to become rich off selling weed to yuppies is the epitome of issue specific loose coalitions.
It may have forced us to refine positions out of necessity and then folks like you and me end up standing for No on 64 together. A maturing of the legislative landscape perhaps? ;-)

Bill Tozzzzerrrrr

About 20 or so years ago, I had a friend that wanted to grow a few tobacco plants in his backyard. Literally I mean tobacco leaves. Found out he could grow a few tobacco plants legally in CA fo personal uses. I am not kidding. . He ordered seeds from a tobacco company catalogue and they came complete with little plastic starter packs for humidity. The names of the seeds were the same as the common slang names of marijuana varieties at the time. Acapulco Gold, Panama Red, Hawaiian, etc.

The point is the tobacco companies bought up the trademark names of marijuana. That was decades ago. I told myself then if NORMAL ever got marijuana legalized, the Big Ag Boys would own the market. I still hold that view after all the talking is done.

http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/10/16/4-reasons-californias-marijuana-growers-surprising.aspx

Patricia Smith

I didn't know that Big Tobacco had bought up those names, but somehoe i am not surprised. The joke may be on them however as none of those MMJ strains have been around for ages and kids today haven't even heard of them. But I guess what goes around, comes around again eventually.

Between tobacco, alcohol and Big Pharma, there will be no place for small patient growers. I'm sure they will eventually outlaw personal grws altogether so they can collect more tax dollars - patients be damned.

George Rebane

PatriciaS 501pm - I feel we may be circling the barn here. If the patient numbers are anywhere near those that MMJ promoters (like you?) imply, then would we not want Big Pharma to get in there and make cheaper medicine available to those patients, and in the process make a profit on which taxes will be paid?

Gail Kraus

Then we could have the MJ equivalent of Box wine.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad