Mary Jane's Last Dance

Apparently Sessions will be enforcing the federal ban on marijuana.

https://reason.com/blog/2017/02/24/most-republicans-oppose-federal-interfer

But her emails, right?

I believe there is already a thread. The real impact should be limited to banks refusing to do business with MJ firms along with the odd federal raid. Last I heard local authorities had some ways to hold up the feds in that they had to ve informed first and in some cases they had to request fed action unless the feds already had an existing case open on that perp.

So much for conservatives being for state's rights, huh? They love big government but just want to make sure their donors benefit instead of the other guy's supporters.

To be fair, the Reason article points out that many Republicans aren't down with this.

States' rights only matter to Republicans when it's time to punish queers and trannies for making baby Jesus cry.



EDIT: Oh, and keeping the Negros down.

I haven't heard that. Got a link?

I imagine most conservatives under forty couldn't care less. No one believes that shit about pot destroying families and ruining lives, apart from what the Feds do to lock people up over it.

Nobody believes the Refer Madness propaganda anymore and a lot of republican house members are increasingly libertarian leaning. It's the Senate which is filled with old guard guys. I doubt even Cruz would give a shit.

ETA: this whole thing started with racist motivations towards Mexicans anyway, it would be smart for republicans to distance themselves from that.

Or if your religion is legal, 14th Doctor.

Yep, saw this the other day and thought "yeah, NOW LibertariaForge will be invested!"

I'm guessing that -- even as a percentage of total users, not just in raw numbers -- alcohol has destroyed many more families and ruined many more lives, yet hardly anyone argues to reinstate Prohibition.

The anti-legalization crowd really seems beyond all logic. Does it really all boil down to "in my head, I associate pot with people I don't like"?

I think it's a hold over from prohibition. My mom was against it because she likely bought the propaganda that it's a gateway drug, but we've been doing this dance for about 100 years now. I was able to change her mind a little, but we also grew up in the Bible Belt, so ...

Well, in the strictest sense, it probably is. But so is alcohol. (You'd probably be hard-pressed to find many hard drug users who don't also drink...)

It's only a gateway drug in the sense that the pot dealer may also have other drugs for sale and you get exposed to other drugs that way. If we legalize it, we reduce that possibility.

My reasoning is that the more mind-altering substances you've tried, the less likely you are to shy away from others. That's not a reason to ban either one; it is, however, a way in which alcohol and marijuana are fundamentally similar yet are treated differently.

Yeah, there are multiple reasons, but yeah, agreed.

Me personally, I started drinking alcohol before I tried my first joint. I've done just about everything, but my philosophy at the time was, "let's be like Jim Morrison and open up the doors in our minds." It worked, somewhat. Now I just drink.
Cue @Ten Lubak to make a stupid joke.

Like he needs a cue.

We know Sessions personally has a rage boner against pot, so this is likely coming from him. Apparently the anti-trans stuff too.

In many ways domestically, Trump's not nearly as dangerous as the monsters he's placed in his cabinet and given free reign.

I think domestically, Trump may not be that bad.

It really does.

My mom is the only person I know IRL who voted against pop 64 and a big part of it was just so that she didn't have to smell the pot being lit up in her apartment complex. 'Cuz no one was doing that prior to Nov. 9, least of all in the Oakland Bay Area she grew up in.

In this case, there's a queue

D'oh.

*libertardians

It all depends on which regulations he cuts and how bad his debt load becomes. If he some how manages to cut ones which truly are retarding economic growth without reducing protections for health or economic stability (deregulating banks will be a disaster yet again) then we might see an additional 0.5% to the national growth rate. If he fucks up the wrong regulations we will see mergers forming monopolies which result in higher prices, less competition, and lower growth while a repeat banking disaster would put the country into depression.

I honestly do not think Trump is smart enough nor wise enough to consult those who are smart enough to successfully thread that needle. He will end up just doing what ever the lobbyists pay him to do and that means economic rent seeking (a very bad thing) and a worse deal for the vast majority of the population. Conservatives always rail against redistribution but rent seeking, the economic hall mark of the Republican Party, does the same thing (only from everyone else to the top) and is far more economically damaging to the wider economy. Thus why people like Adam Smith railed against rent seeking behaviors.

IT'S A VAST EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN CONSPIRACY!!!11!!111!



Still no comprehension of why the Left has forever lost Middle America. Enjoy irrelevance.

If we really want to spike growth, by say 1%-2% a year faster growth, we need to find a way to stop NIMBYism from blocking or retarding new construction. Zoning laws and cumbersome regulations which slow or stop new construction artificialky restrict supply thus forcing up prices and lowering employment growth.

NIMBYs hate any building near them and local politicians love to pander for votes so the locals can't be trusted. Pass a law saying cities must pay for any economic loses when they block a development project and in short order this country will have a building boom which will power the economy forward as well as help reduce inequality because rents and prices will be lower.

The wealthy in San Diego definitely hold a lot more influence than most cities. Given it's a big transient town with the military and the colleges, there aren't a whole lot of people who stay here permanently. The La Jolla NIMBYs are the reason why the goddamn 805 doesn't go up to LA and merges into the 5 at Del Mar.

Trump is wise enough to know his own limitations and when he should delegate and defer to others. That is why he had been so successful.

Geography played a big part in the routing of the 805 in the form of very large hills.