Don’t like the fact that tobacco is legal? While not everyone is in favor of the legalization of cannabis or psilocybin, the natural compound found in Magic Mushrooms that gets users “high,” as you probably know, marijuana is now legal in Canada and numerous states in the US. But did you know that British Columbia and Oregon have legalized some forms of psychedelics for research and medicinal purposes?
The issue here is not about getting stoned. It is about recognizing the sovereignty of adult human beings to make decisions over their bodies, health, and consciousness, while doing no harm to others. I fully recognize that a case can be made that indirectly and unintentionally smoking marijuana can harm others, akin to second-hand smoke.
Usually, such impact on others can simply be dealt with by not allowing the activity in public places. If the person using, is alone, they are only impacting themselves.
Sovereignty of your body
Here, for me, it the moral/philosophical issue: If you are in Canada, the United States or Britain, or for that matter in most, if not all, other countries, you live in a country where sovereignty over your body and consciousness are not usually recognized. That means you, we, are not living in a “free society” in any meaningful sense of the term. We live in a hypocritical society where abortion restrictions, mandatory vaccinations, and the control of alcohol and pharmaceuticals is imposed on society.
But our governments are not against altered states of consciousness. In fact, they support industries which enable individuals to achieve such states. The US, Canadian and British governments all allow Big Pharma to make billions from drugs that alter states of consciousness, such as anti-depressants, which have been called horrible drugs, potentially harmful, but, as long as you have a doctor’s prescription, they are perfectly legal to use. And, of course, alcohol also changes one’s state of consciousness, is very harmful to the user, extremely dangerous, but is totally legal.
Society, it seems, is only against particular kinds of altered states of consciousness. It’s a mixed bag which appears not to have any rhyme or reason. Yet we, as a society, do not generally question the existing system of governmental control which regulates mind-altering substances.
There does not appear to be any logical process by which the government chooses which drugs, or vices, are legal and which are not. But appearances can be deceiving. In this case, the common denominator seems to be money. If a product becomes essential to the government making money (read: taxes), as with tobacco, it will not be made illegal and will not be forced to be withdrawn from the market. It will be regulated. It may be placed behind the counter. But it will be available to consumers.
Cannabis was illegal in Canada
Times can change. Cannabis was illegal, now, not so much. Before the 1970s, psilocybin was legal. Until recently, as noted, it has been banned but, just as cannabis slowly became legal, so now will psilocybin. Will it be sold legally throughout the US and Canada in a year? A decade? Who knows.
Nothing is ever totally new. Coke, as everyone knows, is called “coke” because it used to contain cocaine and other barbiturates. It was not meant to be a cold drink on a hot day, but a tonic that would literally cure what ailed you. Then the government forced Coke to change its recipe. And, of course, back then the government had nothing to lose. It didn’t make any money off of Coke or its ingredients.
If the government does not have any particular values, or standards, for determining what is permitted and what is not, then it is not about keeping individuals or society safe, but about the government making money. If you can ensure that your product will earn money for the people, i.e., the government, who control your industry, they will not only allow you to operate but will protect your product from being outlawed.
Electric Vehicles
EVs are good for the environment. They help combat climate change. They are the panacea for saving the planet. They eliminate the need for fossil fuels. Well, not exactly.
First, a percentage, it varies depending on where you live, of that “clean” electricity which you are using to charge your EV, comes from fossil fuels. Second, let’s say it only costs you $5 to charge your vehicle at home. Even if it costs twice or three times that amount to charge at a commercial site, it is still a lot cheaper than filling up a tank with gas. So, what could possibly be the problem?
The government supports the EV industry. One day, it is safe to assume, there will be more EVs than gas-powered vehicles. That’s a good thing. But as fewer and fewer people fill up at the pump, the government will earn less and less tax revenue. Don’t bother looking; you will not find one. There is no example of the government losing tax revenue and simply walking away. They have to make up for the loss. How will they do that in the case of lost gas tax revenue? Perhaps a mileage tax? Perhaps increasing the tax on electricity? Carbon in the atmosphere goes down and your electric bill goes up.
The Government is Creating The Industry
And don’t kid yourself. Just as tobacco tax revenue goes for a lot more than just supporting the healthcare system, gas tax revenue goes for a lot more than infrastructure – roads, tunnels, and bridges. Although there is a difference. Fewer smokers mean less of a burden on the healthcare network, but more EVs makes no difference at all on the impact on infrastructure (although, with less or no exhaust from vehicles, roads and bridges won’t have to be cleaned as often). So, while the fossil fuel industry will lose most of its government protection (not all because fossil fuels are used for more than just automobile fuel), the EV industry will gain that protection because, for all intents and purposes, the government is the one creating the industry. Just like Tobacco, alcohol and pharma, EV has nothing to worry about, as long as it helps the government pay its bills.
What about cannabis and adult human sovereignty?
Despite what you may think, cannabis does not necessarily make you high. There are active components in cannabis, with THC and CBD being the two most commonly known. THC makes you high, alters your state of consciousness, and is incredibly good for pain relief. CBD, on the other hand, does not make you high as it has no psychoactive properties, helps with pain and inflammation, and has other health benefits. CBD, derived from hemp, is legal in the US and Canada, but is still illegal in many other countries.
Why is cannabis legal? It is a great revenue generator. In Canada, the federal government under Justin Trudeau controls the industry. Just as with tobacco and alcohol, taxes must be paid on “weed.” The sale is regulated by the provinces through the granting of licenses. So, again, it’s all about money. It is not about health. It is not about safety. To be kind, it is an example of unexpected consequences.
In my opinion, the government made two mistakes when legalizing marijuana, the consequences of which may not be known for decades. (In business, the “law of unintended consequences” should never be ignored.)
There are two primary ways to ingest marijuana, you can smoke it or eat (or drink) it. The preferred method is smoking. The user takes a bud, rolls it in paper, and lights it up. Inhalation of smoke containing THC is the quickest way to get high. Eating or drinking marijuana, as a drink, gummy or brownie, is a different experience because, while the user will still get high, it will take longer and may be less intense. Eating it can also upset some users’ stomachs.
Nicotine is not bad for you?
Nicotine is the tobacco equivalent of THC. A user can get their nicotine hit by using a patch, chewing gum, or eating a candy. There is no health downside to this because, as previously noted, while nicotine is addictive, in low doses, it is not bad for you. The bad part of smoking is the inhalation of the tar, carbon monoxide and other particles found in the actual smoke.
Eating cannabis is akin to eating nicotine. Smoking it is the same, only more so. The danger is in inhaling the smoke, just like with a regular cigarette. The problem is, one joint is equivalent to smoking about 20 Marlboros, a pack of cigarettes. Cigarettes have filters, are regulated, burn quicker and the tobacco is properly treated. However, only the sale of cannabis leaf is regulated, not the toxic constituents ingested in the use of the product itself.
Regulating the Manufacture of Marijuana
That was the government’s first mistake, not regulating the manufacture of marijuana cigarettes, or more importantly, not differentiating between ingestion methods. The second, which they also should have seen coming based on the Tobacco experience, was their inadvertent support for drug dealers. (As a general rule of thumb, making life easier for drug dealers is never a good thing.)
When you legalize something, you have to allow people to possess their purchases. Laws against possession of marijuana had to be amended. A person had to have the right to possess a quantity of product for their personal use. Being caught by the police with marijuana for personal use could no longer be a crime.
For sake of argument, since it depends on the jurisdiction, let’s say the government permits an individual to have on their person 10 grams (.35 ounces) of marijuana. That does not appear to be a lot, but it actually is enough for 100 joints. So now a drug dealer, standing on a street corner, can have 100 joints on him (or her) and the police can’t do a thing about it, unless they catch them in the act of selling the joints. That’s still illegal.
Now why would someone buy a joint from some shady character on a street corner? For the same exact reason that they would buy a cigarette from them. When someone legally sells marijuana, they charge taxes. The dealer does not. The dealer undercuts the government price. Customers don’t think about the quality of the product, just what they will have to pay.
And, for the record, in the fight against legal and illegal marijuana, even when marijuana has been made legal, as in California and New York, the illegal black market is still beating the legal market! Simply put, the black market undermines the legal market, by charging less. Customers don’t care.
That’s two very costly, and dangerous, mistakes the government made, especially when the threat of fentanyl is added to the equation.
Comments