It is a great proposal health Canada. I think it is a really very good for the people of Canada. You should carry on this job and I think it is a great inspiration for all whole medical worlds. I wish you will success in your work.
Should you wish to bet on-line this pokies seems to have many of the perfect on line casino games that you have been seeking.
There probably are... you have to sift through it and decide for yourself. For example, I have long thought of the cancer pot relationship. My father had cancer, lung, from heavy smoking apparently. I have also been smoking from teen years, Export A and Players filter... but I have been smoking pot for just as long, about 35 years, yet no lung cancer. So I do have an open mind to the subject. The research I have found has confirmed my beliefs and the truth of the matter is cancer is a huge money maker, for treatment that is. If they found a cure, what would they do... especially if the cure was a free plant? Again you have to look at the money trail.
I have seen may studies like this on different subjects ,some of them are really interesting and some of them are not so interesting like this one but i always have one question that are these studies actually conducted or created using some dummy data
web on-line casinos - There's many betting sites for australia players but if you'd like the best online pokies you have to check out this unique internet casino that typically is loaded with critiques as well as pokie online games downloads.
Unless you are talking about total repeal of the prohibition on marijuana, you definately are out of the loop. Google marijuana and cancer, and diabetes, even checkout Holy Annointing Oil... the benefits of this drug goes far beyond a pain killer. New research in England has shown that Cannibinoids can block the receptors that are damaged and prevent cancer! Of course you will not find it in main stream media and the propaganda driven doctors claiming there is not enough research. Truth is big pharma companies refuse to do research because marijuana cannot be patented. No money, no proof, No proof, war on drugs for people taking it medicinally. Imagine the losses of the pharma, pain killers can be grown at home, my god... no more percocets or morphine as patients will consider marijuana the lesser of the two evils. They have to keep us addicted to make money.
We may pretend that we’re all clean but pot use is rampant. I don’t understand how people aren’t alert about the fact that their kids are stoned. Responsibility must begin at home.
Gaming at this amazing on-line casino could hardly be less difficult and you simply going to love all the bell and whistles at the online casino canada video poker machines, casino craps and holdem poker tables too.
Maybe I'm out of the loop, but I don't think it sounds like Marijuana should be used in the medical field. It's interesting to read your standpoint, though!
An internet based casino need to give the very best added bonus online casino casino around, not to mention the top winnings and additional bonuses and this particular online casino offers everything.
...as this is still an arguement eminating for and from the so called "medical prohibition authorities" telling me that there are/is risks that go along with Marijuana use and my reply to them is to have them show me the bodies!
because to me, there is not one shread of proof that hemp in any of its forms and uses has ever harmed anybody at anytime... so show me the bodies already, and until you can show me the actual harm pot use has done I will continue to state that prohibition is a lie and as such [to me anyways] its illegal to prosecute any prohibition cases in any court of law in canada... period...
Prohibition is a LIE!...
time to call their bluff and force them to play the hand they've dealt themselves... its all BS!
THE ECONOMIC COSTS OF CANADA'S WAR AGAINST CANNABIS
MORAL CASE
A moral case against drug prohibition might take several forms. Milton Friedman, for example, has argued that the war on drugs and prohibition in general offends against our personal sovereignty, and is analogous to the censorship of ideas: "The question is whether the government should have the right to say what you may put in your mouth any more than it has the right to say what you may put in your mind."
1 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-1 We can call this the sovereignty argument, but its pedigree is more easily recognized as the argument from self-ownership.
Alternatively we might insist that while the government does have a "right" to attempt to ameliorate self-caused harms, marihuana just is not sufficiently harmful to be prohibited. Call this the harm assessment strategy. The harm assessment strategy would include criteria for
judging something sufficiently harmful to be subject to prohibition. It is very difficult to believe that marihuana, in any of its forms, would even come close to some rational criteria for prohibition. And if it does not meet the criteria, then putting people in jail, or even giving them a ticket or fine, for smoking pot is harming them for no good reason. Since harming persons for no good reason is immoral, marihuana prohibition according to the harm assessment strategy is immoral.
This article, however, does not attempt to make the above strictly moral arguments against the prohibition of marihuana. Instead, it will focus on the economic costs of keeping marihuana illegal, and attempts to make the economic case for re-legalizing marihuana. This is not to say that an economic case for marihuana re-legalization is not simultaneously a moral case, of course it is. An efficient health care system means fewer deaths. An efficient economic system means people are better off -- they get more of what they need or want, at a cheaper price.
Decisions about how to spend scarce police and legal resources are moral questions. If we spend one dollar on ensuring that Jones does not smoke pot, that's one dollar less to ensure that Smith does not have her car stolen, or gets it back should someone make off with it. Rational public policy requires dealing with the opportunity costs of spending a dollar here rather than elsewhere; rational public policy demands that we deal with trade-offs between policy priorities.
So it is a moral question that we are facing. And there is every reason to believe that keeping marihuana illegal is not just immoral, it's deeply, profoundly irrational. From a rational public policy perspective, marihuana prohibition is, to be charitable, unwise. It may very well be the most unwise public policy around. At least, it is difficult to find public policies that cost so much, benefit us so little, and destroy as many lives as marihuana prohibition. Or so I will argue.
COSTS AND BENEFITS
How much marihuana is being circulated in Canada? The exact numbers are difficult to pin down. What we do have, however, are reports on the amount of marihuana seized in Canada, polling data on use, as well as estimates by various groups, including the 2002 Senate Special Committee Report on Illegal Drugs.
The United Nations issues an annual World Drug Report
<http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/WDR-2008.html> .
4 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-4 The Royal Canadian Mounted Police issues an annual Drug Situation Report. The most recent version available is the 2007 Drug Situation in Canada <http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/drugs-drogues/pdf/drug-drogue-situation-2007-eng.pdf> report. According to the report, "an estimated 50,000 kilograms [50 tonnes] and over 1.8 million marihuana plants were seized in Canada" in 2007.
5 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-5 Approximately 90 per cent of the marihuana seized was seized from the provinces of Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia.
Chart 1: Cannabis seizures in Canada http://www.c2cjournal.ca/images/431/30UWnz74jE.jpg
The Drug Report estimates the total street value of all seized cannabis and cannabis derivatives (marihuana plant, marihuana herb, hash, and hash oil) at $2.3 billion dollars. Since the total street-level value of all illicit drugs seized by Canadian law enforcement was estimated at $2.6 billion, marihuana and its derivatives represent the overwhelming majority of seizures.
6 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-6 Relying on the annual Drug Report data, the 2002 Senate Special Committee Report on Illegal Drugs <http://www.parl.gc.ca /common/committee_senrep.asp?language=e&parl=3
7&Ses=1&comm_id=85> concluded that approximately 800 tonnes of cannabis circulates in Canada. The Senate report suggested that approximately 50 per cent of this total is Canadian-made. That yields an annual 400 tonnes of cannabis produced in Canada for circulation. Assuming that these numbers remained constant through to 2007, the ratio of seized to delivered cannabis is 50 out of 800 tonnes, or 6.25 per cent. The Senate report suggested that the amount of cannabis circulating in Canada is greater than the 800 tonnes figure. There are at least two good reasons to believe that the amount of cannabis circulating in
Canada is greater, possibly much greater, than the 800 tonnes cited. For one, the staggering proportion of Canadians telling pollsters that they have tried or continue to use marihuana strongly suggests a larger figure. According to the 2004 Canadian Addiction Survey
<http://www.ccsa.ca/eng/priorities/research/CanadianAddiction/Pages/default.aspx> published by the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, 14.1 per cent of all Canadians reported using cannabis in 2003 -- nearly double what was reported in 1994 at 7.4 per cent -- while 30 per cent of 15- to 17-year-olds, and 47 per cent of 18- to 19-year-olds reported using cannabis in 2004. Nearly half, 44.5 per cent, reported using cannabis at least once in their lifetime. The 2007 UN World Drug Report http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/drugs/users.html had 16.8 per cent
of all Canadians using marihuana in 2006, the highest amongst developed countries.
Secondly, the Senate Report was making calculations on the basis of figures obtained earlier than 2002, when they issued their report. Given the upward trend of use in Canada, as well as an increase in population, this suggests that cannabis availability has increased as well as demand.
COST OF PROHIBITION: LOST POTENTIAL TAX REVENUE
Depending on taste preferences, one gram of marihuana produces between one and three marihuana cigarettes, according to Stephen T. Easton's analysis http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/marijuanaGrow thinBC.pdf for the Fraser Institute.
7 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-7 That means the average marihuana consumer is willing to spend between $3.33 to $10 per marihuana cigarette, assuming a street value of $10 per gram, as the RCMP does. A standard tobacco cigarette has 0.8 grams of tobacco per cigarette. If all marihuana cigarettes were made just like tobacco cigarettes, that would result in retail prices of $8 for a marihuana cigarette, and $160 per pack of marihuana cigarettes at 20 cigarettes per pack, holding commodity price constant at $10/gram.
Stephen T. Easton has estimated that it costs approximately $4.70 to produce one gram of marihuana using 2002 production methods and techniques, in an illegal market. At wholesale prices, each marihuana cigarette would cost between $1.60 to $4.70 to produce,
8 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-8 or $3.76 at 0.8 grams, the amount of tobacco in tobacco cigarettes. That yields $5.30 in profit for every gram, $4.24 in profit for every 0.8 grams. This amount is available for taxation.
In what follows, I have made use of three different assumptions to estimate the size of the domestic marihuana market, and to generate the amount of revenue open to taxation. The first method is to assume half of the marihuana in circulation is consumed annually; the second is to
update Easton's calculations for the Fraser Institute with more recent data about population size and the proportion of Canadians who use marihuana; while the third takes Jeffrey A. Miron's calculations for the U.S. marihuana market and applies a crude conversion based on population
size to generate potential revenues in Canada. If half of the marihuana in circulation were consumed by Canadians (400 tonnes), and if taxes consumed the profits, that would yield an
astonishing $2.12 billion in revenue every year.
The above estimates of production costs are conservative. It is much more likely that the cost of production would dramatically decrease if marihuana were legalized. Let us conservatively estimate that production costs would be halved. Let us further assume that we don't want increases in consumption, so we adjust the tax to compensate for a decrease in production costs. Using these assumptions, we can expect $3.06 billion in revenue.
Alternatively, we can use the cost of producing medicinal marihuana for Health Canada as our guide. Prairie Plant Systems Inc. produces marihuana for Health Canada, charging the government $328.75 per kilogram (Health Canada charged patients $5,000 per kilogram, or $150 per 30 gram bags, or $5 per gram, a 1,500 per cent markup) in 2007, according to documents http://www.thestar.com/article/203337 obtained under the Access to Information Act by the Toronto Star. That means a cost of $0.33 per gram. At a cost of $0.33, that would yield $3.87 billion in taxable revenue, or $3.95 billion in 2009 dollars.
Easton used different methods http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/marijuanaGrowt... to come to similar usage statistics. Easton took the number
of users of marihuana in Canada and made assumptions about how many marihuana cigarettes they smoked per month (18.7), multiplied that number by the weight of each cigarette (0.4 to 1.0 grams), and, for the year 2000, came up with 159.4 tonnes as the low figure (assuming 0.4
grams per marihuana cigarette), and 413.4 tonnes as the high figure (assuming 1.0 gram marihuana cigarettes). That would yield $1.22 billion (low) to $3.16 billion (high) of revenue open to taxation in 2004 dollars, or $1.33 billion (low) to $3.46 billion (high) in 2009 dollars.
We can adjust Easton's measurements to account for the higher population and usage statistics in 2006. Easton used 7.4 per cent of the Canadian population as having used marihuana, data consistent with 1994 figures. In 2006, however, rates of use in Canada have more than doubled, at 16.8 per cent of the population, according to the UN's World Drug Report.
Since the Canadian Addiction Survey may be a better gauge of use, we will use the 14.1 per cent of all Canadians 15-and-older figure obtained in 2004. Canada's population was 31.9 million http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/demo02a-eng.htm in 2004, giving us 4.5 million users. Per Easton's assumptions, these users smoked, on average, 18.7 marihuana cigarettes per month, giving us a domestic marihuana market of 404.3 tonnes (low) or 1,010.6 tonnes (high). That yields taxable revenue of $3.14 billion (low) to $7.73 billion (high) in 2004 dollars, or $3.44 (low) to $8.46 billion in 2009 dollars.
9 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-9 A third method might be to use U.S. consumption and expected revenue figures, and adjust them for Canada. Jeffrey Miron estimated http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/miron/files/budget_2008.pdf that the U.S. government could expect annual revenue from taxes at US$6.7 billion. Miron arrived at this figure by using the 2000 estimates of total expenditure on marihuana by Americans provided by the Office of National Drug Control Policy, and assuming a tax rate similar to taxes
levied on alcohol and tobacco. The ONDCP estimates http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/pdf/american_users_spen... that US$10.5 billion was spent by Americans on marihuana in 2000 [p. 3], which would be US$12.6 billion in 2006, after adjusting for inflation. Meanwhile, taxes represent 24.5 per cent of total alcohol cost, and 61 per cent of tobacco costs [Miron, p.14]. Miron therefore assumes that taxes would account for 53.2 per cent of the total cost of marihuana. Assuming rates of use for Canada and the U.S. were identical, Canada could expect revenue of US$670 million per year, or CAD$717 million (U.S. expected tax revenue divided by 10), or CAD$748 million adjusted for inflation.
This last method may significantly underestimate the potential tax revenue in Canada. For one, Miron assumes that expenditure on marihuana has remained constant from 2000 through 2006. This is unlikely.
Secondly, Canadians consume more marihuana than Americans. According http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/factsht/druguse/ to the ONDCP, 12.6 per cent of Americans reported using marihuana in 2001, compared to 14.1 per cent of Canadians in 2003, and 16.8 in 2006 (the highest rate amongst all developed nations). Finally, there is some reason to believe that Canadians will tolerate higher tax rates.
Assuming taxes accounted for 76.5 per cent of total costs (as we earlier assumed after production costs were halved), we could expect $1.06 billion in revenue, or $1.11 billion adjusted for inflation.
That gives us a range of $748 million to $8.46 billion in potential revenue open to taxation. The lowest and highest numbers are very unlikely. Excluding those (as well as the $3.95, $3.46, and $3.44 billion figures, to be conservative), we have a range of $1.33 to $3.06 billion in annual revenue open to taxation. This number does not include potential additional revenue from increased tourism, which would be very likely (especially from the U.S.). Since we excluded the highest number, which assumed increased consumption, we are also not accounting for any possible increase in consumption, which is also likely. This range is conservative. It can be restated as: $2.195 billion +/- $865 million.
Chart 2: Expected revenue http://www.c2cjournal.ca/images/431/47WLuq25xZ.jpg
(Inflation calculator: http://www.bankofcanada.ca/en/rates/inflation_calc.html )
Some might object that fewer people will consume marihuana purchased in the legal, taxed environment, and will continue to use black market, or illegal marihuana, or grow their own. There is no reason to believe this. First, we have assumed black market prices at $10/gram. Given the option of buying regular or black market marihuana at the same price, there is no reason for someone to choose the black market. While people could grow their own marihuana, there is no reason to believe that this would take up anything but an insignificant proportion of the whole. People can currently grow their own tomatoes and cucumbers, but few do.
Similarly with tobacco, which is a weed just like marihuana. The most obvious comparison is to alcohol, which saw a switch from home-made booze to professionally-produced alcohol almost immediately after repeal of prohibition. With the assurance of quality and the decrease in
potential violence that comes from a legal regime, we can assume that nearly all marihuana will be purchased in the legal and taxed environment, rather than in the illegal, or homegrown, and untaxed market.
COST OF PROHIBITION: ENFORCEMENT TRADE-OFF
In addition to expected tax revenues of between $1.33 to $3.06 billion per year, we would see significant law enforcement savings as well.
It is difficult to estimate the total cost of enforcing marihuana laws in Canada. There are many reasons for this. It is difficult, for example, to estimate the percentage of time a regular police officer spends on marihuana-related enforcement activity, compared with her other police activities, when out on patrol.
But we have to do the best we can, with the evidence we have at our disposal. In 2001, the Auditor General of Canada estimated that federal law enforcement agencies spent $450 million between 1999 and 2000 on drug control, enforcement, and education, with 95 per cent of the costs attributed to enforcement alone. For enforcement only costs, the Auditor General reported http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/att_0111xe06_e_11634.html
the following break down by enforcement activity:
Canada Customs and Revenue Agency: $10 to $32 million Correctional Services Canada: $169 million Department of Justice: $71 million National Parole Board: $4 million
RCMP: $168 million Total enforcement cost: $422 to $444 million. Further, according http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/att_0111xe02_e_11630.html to the Auditor General, 34,347 persons were charged with cannabis-related crimes -- including possession (21,381), trafficking (8,112), importation (157), and cultivation (4,697) -- out of a total of 49,585 persons charged under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in 1999. Cannabis-related charges therefore represent 70 per cent of all persons charged in 1999.
Assuming an efficient distribution of enforcement expenditure to persons charged, we would expect that federal law enforcement agencies spent 70 per cent of their law enforcement budget on cannabis-related crimes. That would yield a total of $295.4 to $310.8 million in cannabis-related enforcement costs in 1999, or $8,600.46 to $9,048.83 per person charged.
This figure includes the estimated annual cost of housing prisoners, which is approximately http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/LegislativeSummaries/Bills_ls.asp?lang=... $57,000 per year in provincial jails, and $88,000 per year in the federal system. Adjusted for inflation, we get a total enforcement cost of $363.7 to $382.7 million, or $10,590.19 to $11,942.29 per person charged in 2009. Assuming a constant cost-per-person-charged rate, we can estimate more recent costs of cannabis enforcement. According to Statistics Canada http://cansim2.statcan.ca/cgi-win/cnsmcgi.exe?Lang=E&RootDir=CII/&am... ,
the number of persons charged with cannabis-related offences under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act has fluctuated significantly from 1999 to 2007, 2007 representing the most recent data available. From a high of 41,128 persons in 2002, to a low of 29,503 in 2005. In 2007, 32,472 persons were charged with cannabis-related charges. At $10,590.19 per person charged, we get $343.9 million in cannabis-related enforcement costs in 2007, and at $11,942.29 per person charged, we get $387.8 million. The following chart provides us with detailed figures http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/legal14a-eng.htm for all cannabis-related charges from 1999 until 2007, as well as estimated cannabis-specific law enforcement expenditures using the above crude estimate (notice that Statistics Canada provides a different number for persons charged in 1999 than the Auditor General's report. I am not sure which numbers are correct).
Chart 3: Cannabis-related charges http://www.c2cjournal.ca/images/431/91HKmu88wL.jpg
http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/legal14a-eng.htm In total, a legal marihuana regime would see cannabis-related enforcement cost savings for federal law enforcement agencies between a low of $312.4 million (using 2005 estimates) to a high of $491.2 million (using 2002
estimates) per year. That money could be diverted to other law enforcement priorities (most likely), spent on other priorities like health or education (less likely), or returned to taxpayers in the form of tax cuts (unlikely). These numbers should be treated with some caution. This is because many costs associated with cannabis are dealt with at the provincial level, and we can anticipate continued costs, like roadside testing for drugged driving. The significance of this cost
to the total, however, is likely negligible.
SOCIAL COSTS OF LEGAL MARIHUANA
To accurately assess the economic case for marihuana legalization, we need to look not just at potential tax revenue and potential law enforcement savings, we need to also assess the potential social costs of marihuana use.
According http://www.ccsa.ca/2006%20CCSA%20Documents/ccsa-011332-2006.pdf to
the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse's The Cost of Substance Abuse 2002, the social cost of substance abuse, including alcohol, tobacco, licit and illicit substances, is approximately $38.9 billion dollars,
10 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-10 or $44.5 billion in 2009 dollars. They break these costs down as follows. Indirect costs, in terms of productivity loss, amount to $24.3 billion, or 61 per cent of the total cost. Direct health care costs amount to $8.8 billion, or
22 per cent of the total. Direct law enforcement costs are set at $5.4 billion, or 14 per cent, while other direct costs are estimated to be $1.3 billion, or three per cent.
According to the study, tobacco accounted for $17 billion of the total cost (42.7 per cent), while alcohol accounted for $14.6 billion of the total cost, (36.6 per cent), leaving $8.2 billion (20.7 per cent) attributable to all illegal drugs. We will adjust for inflation after figuring out the numbers in 2002 dollars. We need to know what proportion of the $8.2 billion ($8,224.3 million) in social costs is attributable to marihuana, and what cost we could expect if marihuana were re-legalized. Direct law enforcement costs from all levels of law enforcement (including federal) come to $2,335.5 million, according to the study. If marihuana were re-legalized, cannabis-specific enforcement costs would be negligible. Subtracting the total law enforcement costs from $8,224.3 million gives us $5,888.8 million, or $5.9 billion still to be distributed.
Direct health care costs amount to $1,134.6 million for all illegal drugs. In a separate study using the same data as The Cost of Substance Abuse 2002 study, the Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse revealed http://www.ccsa.ca/2007%20CCSA%20Documents/ccsa-011350-2007.pdf the cannabis-specific health care costs as $73 mi llion per year, while all
other illegal drugs accounted for $1,061.6 million, or $1.06 billion (a surprising ratio of 14.54 to 1).
11 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-11 Of the $5.9 billion total social costs still to be distributed, we can eliminate $1.06 billion as a health care cost due to non-cannabis illegal drugs, while putting aside $73 million as a definite health care cost of cannabis. Subtracting both numbers from the total, we get $4,754.2 million, or $4.8 billion still to be distributed.
Productivity loss caused by all illegal drugs is $4,678.6 million. The study uses two primary methods of inferring productivity loss -- death and morbidity (potential years of life lost plus acute care hospital days). The most significant portion of this figure is due to "long-term
disability" at $4,408.4 million, with "premature mortality" at $248.5 million. Apart from driving-related deaths, no death has ever been attributed to the use of cannabis. We can use the direct health care cost numbers as a proxy for indirect productivity loss due to "long-term disability." At a constant ratio of 14.54 to 1, we get $303.2 million as a result of "long-term disability" for cannabis only. We can assume that this is the only significant cost in terms of productivity loss due to cannabis only.
These findings are consistent with the conclusions of the 2002 Senate Report, which surveyed the findings from the 1992 study by the Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse, and concluded that, "Except in the case of traffic fatalities, cannabis is not a cause of death and involves none
of this type of social cost. Morbidity corresponds to losses attributed to problems caused by drug use as measured by the difference between the average annual income of users and of the population in general. Here, two further observations about cannabis should be noted. A large proportion of cannabis users are young people who are not yet part of the workforce; and cannabis use involves none of the addiction and attendant problems that follow from heroin or cocaine use. It is, therefore, the costs that can be attributed to cannabis in this regard
are likely minimal. If one accepts the methodology of the authors, cannabis in itself entails few externalities, which are the main measures of the social cost of illegal drugs."
12 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-12>
We are now left with $75.6 million after subtracting the total productivity loss costs from the remaining $4,754.2 million. This amount falls into categories like awareness, education, and research, thus it is not possible to further break down this figure.
The total cannabis-only social costs, then, are $376.2 million, plus some proportion of $75.6 million. $451.8 million represents the absolute upper bound in terms of social costs, assuming that all of the "other costs" were cannabis-specific. Adjusting for inflation, we get a total of anywhere between $430.65 to $517.19 million.
Chart 4: Expected social cost of legal cannabis http://www.c2cjournal.ca/images/431/19AGmj24wN.jpg
CONCLUSION
Maintaining prohibition of marihuana costs the Canadian government $1.33 to $3.06 billion in lost taxable revenue (or, $2.195 billion +/- $865 million), and approximately $400 million in law enforcement costs.
Meanwhile, the social costs of marihuana are minimal, estimated at between $430.7 to $517.2 million per year. Considering only domestic costs and benefits, the decision to continue to keep marihuana illegal is, from an economic point of view, profoundly irrational.
Adding to the irrationality is the fact that, currently, criminal gangs are seeing the benefits of marihuana prohibition through an enormous revenue stream provided by the prohibition on marihuana. We could expect the same devastating impact on criminal gangs with marihuana
re-legalization as we witnessed after the re-legalization of alcohol.
Marihuana prohibition enriches gangs. Small wonder gangs in Canada approve of prohibition, and hope that marihuana remains illegal.
This article has not considered what may be the most significant cost of re-legalizing marihuana -- impact on our trade relationship with the United States. Research should be undertaken to estimate the potential U.S./Canada trade-related costs of re-legalizing marihuana in Canada.
I dont agree with charging the prostitutes but yes for the johns. However there is no reason why prostitution should be made legal, prostitutes are victims of poverty, abuse and drugs, 99% of the time these are THE ONLY REASONS why they are forced to sell themselves. We shouldnt be supporting that but we should be giving them every tool possible to get them out of that lifestyle. Drug abuse help, therapists for mental, emotional and physical abuse, and extra help financially. Its really not that much to give and not to mention costs the taxpayers a hell of a lot less in court costs for preventable crime and generates useful members of society, we need nurses and doctors not prostitutes. Men and women are both victims of prostitution and ive never heard of anyone who had a well off lifestyle and not addicted to drugs say "hey i want to become a prostitute". Why? Because its wrong, degrading and completely unnecessary, and nobody wants their child to grow up to be one. Have sex as much as you want, as long as its free. As soon as money is involved in my opinion consent goes right out the window. Every place with legalized brothels has problems with abuse, drugs, disease and worst of all minors being brought in. Sure its a bit safer to not be on the street doing it and theres a panic button, but guess what theyre still hurt all the time. Violent people arent going to stop being violent because theres a panic button. An STD test takes weeks to come back, condoms do not always stop disease or pregnancy. With all these factors not to mention the fact that you would "lose your job" and have nothing to fall back on when you get a disease, or age past 40, youre not going to get much work when youre older and then what are you going to do?
40% of Canadians voted conservative, including some of my own family. I puke at their choice, but I have to accept it because that 40% is the largest group of like-minded Canadians.
Harper has his own agenda, but those who voted for him don't see it. That agenda is not going to give Cons voters what they thought they would get from Harper's majority power.
Let those who voted Conservative see the results:
- Send their siblings, and their adult children, to jail and they might start to see the light.
- Let them see what an oil spill in the Arctic looks like;
- Let them see what runaway global warming does to their lifestyle!!
- Let them see their bank accounts become worthless as they spend more and more of their savings on health care as they age, and as the bankers and corporations hoard an even greater amount of Canada's wealth.
They still don't get it...
crime is when someone does something questionable to another person!
since when is it ever criminal, or even questionable to do something to yourself?
at the very worst its a medical concern that should be looked at from that angle,
but... pot use as a medical concern is more about access then anything else,
and we've seen numerous court cases supporting this fact.
why are our politicians sticking their collective heads in the sand and ignoring the facts
and passing laws that are themselves criminal enrichment enterprises?
In the end, what this law will do is lock people up for growing their own medicine...
and invalidate all commonsense & medical advancements we have achieved
in the last 5-10 years on numerous research projects...
Marijuana for PTSD in rats? A good experiment. Marijuana cures PTSD in rats, Israeli study shows . The study was released in the publication Neuropsychopharmacology. Marijuana used promptly to rats that suffer emotional stress can effectively block the creation of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). As long as the rodents were addressed with weed within 24 hours of the traumatic encounter, PTSD symptoms were avoided. Well, human beings are different compare to animals. I think that would not be helpful to a human person.
Again the Harper Government wants to put more emphasis on the "victims of crime"... the only victim with the prohibition is the regular person who wants access to the substance, and the only crime is the prohibition itself.
What would be a good starting point to create manifesations in Canada about this omnibus crime bill?
I think that people need to be made aware of all of this, media don't talk about it enough and they clearly don't talk about what party want to do what if people elected a majority conservative government in Canada, it is against most of Canadian values I think, by talking with people and etc. one can clearly understand this.
Also, this crime bill is like going back in time with the same failed strategies the USA used before.
We should just learn with the Portugal and their progressive mind, the USA and their failed policies, etc.
So all in all, will manifestation be held against this bill (and the Internet privacy invasion one)?
If not, how do manifestation start? Is there some guide of guide out there to not get into trouble or anything, and how to create them and get attention?
Nobody wants marijuana to be legalized more than me, but this is just ridiculous. There's no question that pot must be legalized in the United States first, otherwise we'll have a political shitstorm on our hands.
But here's a question for everyone - why don't we push the government to hold a referendum on legalization? If we can do it for the HST, why not pot?
In 1995 and 1996 the media was reporting Toronto’s homeless issues across the world. LovecCry had taken some street kids to city hall for help and that somehow turned into a huge protest that lasted well over a week on the Nathan Phillips Square property. This put LoveCry and me under attack by this media group. They did everything they possibly could to put us out of business and deface us. We are still here. (2011)
During all this Jack Layton came to our home and asked me if these allegations were true.
Upon talking about we proved to him they were not and from that day on Jack guided us through, meetings and phone conversations. Jack listened to what we told him regarding the homeless. We were homeless and not educated enough to even think up the things we were being accused of. Nor did we have time to do any of it. We struggled, sold our newspapers and searched for help for our issues.
I personally had spent thirteen years (prior to founding LoveCry) working with counselors and therapists to get some healing as well as surviving Cancer in order to keep my promise to the Street Kids of 1981, which was to create a healing center for abused kids. Jack knew by what was said and shown to him that our plans and what I personally had already sacrificed to get the healing center going that we were not the total rebels the media had reported we were.
I believe that it was Jack’s guidance back then (1996) in what we were trying to do that lead the way and helped me in particular to learn to speak as opposed to the bipolar way I had started out, and helped me to learn to believe in myself.
I was one of the homeless and was and still am in many ways suffering from the mental and emotional illnesses that come with being badly abused as a child. Jack understood that and showed a great deal of patients to my situation, as he was learning about the actual issues which were abuse and poverty.
Through Jacks guidance LoveCry is now as small replica of what we had dreamed but we are now LoveCry’s Healing Café!
With Jacks faith in the homeless and us we have been here for almost twenty-one years growing learning and getting educated to deal with our issues. All the street kids at that protest at Nathan Phillips Square are off the streets, educated in what they needed for their lives and grown up with children of their own today. Many more after the original LoveCry kids began to heal and did the same. I lost count many years ago of how many kids have gotten help from LoveCry but we keep on working towards getting the proper help for the kids, families and community.
If Jack had not given us the encouragement he did we would not have been able to do this as we have done it against all odds.
It’s a voter approved law, and so many people can’t be wrong. The need of medical marijuana is independent of get stoned and passing out. Why should medical marijuana dispensary applications not be entertained?
This australian online casino that you bet at should be just like this one which has a generous quantity of online casino games to select from specifically in the pokiesarea.
The legalization of marijuana has proven to be like crabgrass in the U.S. Congress; it is extremely hard to wipe out. Bi-partisan legislation sponsored by Massachusetts’s Rep. Barney Frank and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas seeks to get rid of control over cannabis from the federal government's metal grip. States are going to have the ability to legalize cannabis that will open the way for state governments to regulate and tax and control the drug without federal intervention, states Reason. Here is the proof: Frank-Paul pot bill seeks to legalize marijuana
The Kingston Police were called and they were told that a "Break in" had occurred at the Compassion Club....there was no " Break in". There was no Police Raid. The Police were asked to go there, don't blame them for that. They were not wasting resources or trampling on anyones rights, they were only doing their job. There were some legal/criminal questions about one particular individuals actions and what he had posted on internet and what he offered on the internet,.but The Kingston Compassion Club was not RAIDED!!!!!
Earlier this week the Connecticut Senate narrowly passed legislation that decriminalizes possession of small portions of weed. N.Y. lawmakers in the meantime are debating a bill which attempts to repair a loophole in earlier legislation. Even those who support the N.Y. bill have concerns as to its ability to pass before end of the session. Here is the proof: N.Y. and Connecticut lawmakers seek to decriminalize marijuana, newstype.com
Obviously this is something that can work towards the larger benefit of society rather than some people find loopholes and take advantage of the situation. Medical marijuana is meant to help patients, so, let’s keep it that way.
Gambling at this particular online e-casino couldn't be simpler and you really are gonna really enjoy all the bell and whistles in the online casino slot machine games, casino craps and texas holdem tables as well.
Great article - I've been heated about the Harper majority outcome since "that fateful day" as it's been coined, and have been searching for ways to get involved in a resistance against the Harper government ever since. I am really interested in the International Campaign that the author mentioned - Voices; but can't seem to find it online anywhere. Do you know of any avenues to contact the campaign?
I've participated in a lot of actions through Avaaz over the years. This is one of the very few times I've seen Avaaz do anything connected with the drug war. Looking into it, if there's a chance to see positive change in the current political environment, it's this and the medpot bills currently before Congress.
In days, we could finally see the beginning of the end of the ‘war on drugs’. This expensive war has completely failed to curb the plague of drug addiction, while costing countless lives, devastating communities, and funneling trillions of dollars into violent organized crime networks.
Experts all agree that the most sensible policy is to regulate, but politicians are afraid to touch the issue. In days, a global commission including former heads of state and foreign policy chiefs of the UN, EU, US, Brazil, Mexico and more will break the taboo and publicly call for new approaches including decriminalization and regulation of drugs.
This could be a once-in-a-generation tipping-point moment -- if enough of us call for an end to this madness. Politicians say they understand that the war on drugs has failed, but claim the public isn't ready for an alternative. Let's show them we not only accept a sane and humane policy -- we demand it. Sign the petition and share with everyone --if we reach 1 million voices, it will be personally delivered to world leaders by the global commission.
For 50 years current drug policies have failed everyone, everywhere but public debate is stuck in the mud of fear and misinformation. Everyone, even the UN Office on Drugs and Crime which is responsible for enforcing this approach agrees -- deploying militaries and police to burn drug farms, hunting down traffickers, and imprisoning dealers and addicts – is an expensive mistake. And with massive human cost -- from Afghanistan, to Mexico, to the USA the illegal drug trade is destroying countries around the world, while addiction, overdose deaths, and HIV/AIDS infections continue to rise.
Meanwhile, countries with less-harsh enforcement -- like Switzerland, Portugal, the Netherlands, and Australia -- have not seen the explosion in drug use that proponents of the drug war have darkly predicted. Instead, they have seen significant reductions in drug-related crime, addiction and deaths, and are able to focus squarely on dismantling criminal empires.
Powerful lobbies still stand in the way of change, including military, law enforcement, and prison departments whose budgets are at stake. And politicians fear that voters will throw them out of office if they support alternative approaches, as they will appear weak on law and order. But many former drug Ministers and Heads of State have come out in favour of reform since leaving office, and polls show that citizens across the world know the current approach is a catastrophe. Momentum is gathering towards new improved policies, particularly in regions that are ravaged by the drug trade.
If we can create a worldwide outcry in the next few days to support the bold calls of the Global Commission on Drug Policy, we can overpower the stale excuses for the status quo. Our voices hold the key to change -- Sign the petition and spread the word.
We have a chance to enter the closing chapter of this brutal 'war' that has destroyed millions of lives. Global public opinion will determine if this catastrophic policy is stopped or if politicians shy away from reform. Let's rally urgently to push our hesitating leaders from doubt and fear, over the edge, and into reason.
Welcome to WhyProhibition.ca. We are working to repeal the prohibition of cannabis by organizing and educating the public. Sign up to get activism alerts, and access to organizing tools.
It is a great proposal health Canada. I think it is a really very good for the people of Canada. You should carry on this job and I think it is a great inspiration for all whole medical worlds. I wish you will success in your work.
There probably are... you have to sift through it and decide for yourself. For example, I have long thought of the cancer pot relationship. My father had cancer, lung, from heavy smoking apparently. I have also been smoking from teen years, Export A and Players filter... but I have been smoking pot for just as long, about 35 years, yet no lung cancer. So I do have an open mind to the subject. The research I have found has confirmed my beliefs and the truth of the matter is cancer is a huge money maker, for treatment that is. If they found a cure, what would they do... especially if the cure was a free plant? Again you have to look at the money trail.
I have seen may studies like this on different subjects ,some of them are really interesting and some of them are not so interesting like this one but i always have one question that are these studies actually conducted or created using some dummy data
Unless you are talking about total repeal of the prohibition on marijuana, you definately are out of the loop. Google marijuana and cancer, and diabetes, even checkout Holy Annointing Oil... the benefits of this drug goes far beyond a pain killer. New research in England has shown that Cannibinoids can block the receptors that are damaged and prevent cancer! Of course you will not find it in main stream media and the propaganda driven doctors claiming there is not enough research. Truth is big pharma companies refuse to do research because marijuana cannot be patented. No money, no proof, No proof, war on drugs for people taking it medicinally. Imagine the losses of the pharma, pain killers can be grown at home, my god... no more percocets or morphine as patients will consider marijuana the lesser of the two evils. They have to keep us addicted to make money.
We may pretend that we’re all clean but pot use is rampant. I don’t understand how people aren’t alert about the fact that their kids are stoned. Responsibility must begin at home.
Maybe I'm out of the loop, but I don't think it sounds like Marijuana should be used in the medical field. It's interesting to read your standpoint, though!
...as this is still an arguement eminating for and from the so called "medical prohibition authorities" telling me that there are/is risks that go along with Marijuana use and my reply to them is to have them show me the bodies!
because to me, there is not one shread of proof that hemp in any of its forms and uses has ever harmed anybody at anytime... so show me the bodies already, and until you can show me the actual harm pot use has done I will continue to state that prohibition is a lie and as such [to me anyways] its illegal to prosecute any prohibition cases in any court of law in canada... period...
Prohibition is a LIE!...
time to call their bluff and force them to play the hand they've dealt themselves... its all BS!
Bearzerker
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Price of Pot Prohibition
by Peter Jaworski
http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-authors/view/peter-jaworski , on July
22, 2009 | Drug Policy
http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/tag/Drug-Policy
THE ECONOMIC COSTS OF CANADA'S WAR AGAINST CANNABIS
MORAL CASE
A moral case against drug prohibition might take several forms. Milton Friedman, for example, has argued that the war on drugs and prohibition in general offends against our personal sovereignty, and is analogous to the censorship of ideas: "The question is whether the government should have the right to say what you may put in your mouth any more than it has the right to say what you may put in your mind."
1 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-1 We can call this the sovereignty argument, but its pedigree is more easily recognized as the argument from self-ownership.
Alternatively we might insist that while the government does have a "right" to attempt to ameliorate self-caused harms, marihuana just is not sufficiently harmful to be prohibited. Call this the harm assessment strategy. The harm assessment strategy would include criteria for
judging something sufficiently harmful to be subject to prohibition. It is very difficult to believe that marihuana, in any of its forms, would even come close to some rational criteria for prohibition. And if it does not meet the criteria, then putting people in jail, or even giving them a ticket or fine, for smoking pot is harming them for no good reason. Since harming persons for no good reason is immoral, marihuana prohibition according to the harm assessment strategy is immoral.
This article, however, does not attempt to make the above strictly moral arguments against the prohibition of marihuana. Instead, it will focus on the economic costs of keeping marihuana illegal, and attempts to make the economic case for re-legalizing marihuana. This is not to say that an economic case for marihuana re-legalization is not simultaneously a moral case, of course it is. An efficient health care system means fewer deaths. An efficient economic system means people are better off -- they get more of what they need or want, at a cheaper price.
Decisions about how to spend scarce police and legal resources are moral questions. If we spend one dollar on ensuring that Jones does not smoke pot, that's one dollar less to ensure that Smith does not have her car stolen, or gets it back should someone make off with it. Rational public policy requires dealing with the opportunity costs of spending a dollar here rather than elsewhere; rational public policy demands that we deal with trade-offs between policy priorities.
So it is a moral question that we are facing. And there is every reason to believe that keeping marihuana illegal is not just immoral, it's deeply, profoundly irrational. From a rational public policy perspective, marihuana prohibition is, to be charitable, unwise. It may very well be the most unwise public policy around. At least, it is difficult to find public policies that cost so much, benefit us so little, and destroy as many lives as marihuana prohibition. Or so I will argue.
COSTS AND BENEFITS
How much marihuana is being circulated in Canada? The exact numbers are difficult to pin down. What we do have, however, are reports on the amount of marihuana seized in Canada, polling data on use, as well as estimates by various groups, including the 2002 Senate Special Committee Report on Illegal Drugs.
The United Nations issues an annual World Drug Report
<http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/WDR-2008.html> .
The latest 2008 report states that, in 2006, law enforcement in Canada seized http://www.unodc.org/documents/wdr/WDR_2008/SEIZURE_Tables.pdf
13154.075 kg [13.2 tonnes] of cannabis herb,
2 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-2 47594.279 kg [47.6 tonnes] of cannabis plant,
3 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-3 and 27730.066 kg [27.7 tonnes] of cannabis resin.
4 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-4 The Royal Canadian Mounted Police issues an annual Drug Situation Report. The most recent version available is the 2007 Drug Situation in Canada <http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/drugs-drogues/pdf/drug-drogue-situation-2007-eng.pdf> report. According to the report, "an estimated 50,000 kilograms [50 tonnes] and over 1.8 million marihuana plants were seized in Canada" in 2007.
5 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-5 Approximately 90 per cent of the marihuana seized was seized from the provinces of Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia.
Chart 1: Cannabis seizures in Canada http://www.c2cjournal.ca/images/431/30UWnz74jE.jpg
The Drug Report estimates the total street value of all seized cannabis and cannabis derivatives (marihuana plant, marihuana herb, hash, and hash oil) at $2.3 billion dollars. Since the total street-level value of all illicit drugs seized by Canadian law enforcement was estimated at $2.6 billion, marihuana and its derivatives represent the overwhelming majority of seizures.
6 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-6 Relying on the annual Drug Report data, the 2002 Senate Special Committee Report on Illegal Drugs <http://www.parl.gc.ca /common/committee_senrep.asp?language=e&parl=3
7&Ses=1&comm_id=85> concluded that approximately 800 tonnes of cannabis circulates in Canada. The Senate report suggested that approximately 50 per cent of this total is Canadian-made. That yields an annual 400 tonnes of cannabis produced in Canada for circulation. Assuming that these numbers remained constant through to 2007, the ratio of seized to delivered cannabis is 50 out of 800 tonnes, or 6.25 per cent. The Senate report suggested that the amount of cannabis circulating in Canada is greater than the 800 tonnes figure. There are at least two good reasons to believe that the amount of cannabis circulating in
Canada is greater, possibly much greater, than the 800 tonnes cited. For one, the staggering proportion of Canadians telling pollsters that they have tried or continue to use marihuana strongly suggests a larger figure. According to the 2004 Canadian Addiction Survey
<http://www.ccsa.ca/eng/priorities/research/CanadianAddiction/Pages/default.aspx> published by the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, 14.1 per cent of all Canadians reported using cannabis in 2003 -- nearly double what was reported in 1994 at 7.4 per cent -- while 30 per cent of 15- to 17-year-olds, and 47 per cent of 18- to 19-year-olds reported using cannabis in 2004. Nearly half, 44.5 per cent, reported using cannabis at least once in their lifetime. The 2007 UN World Drug Report http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/drugs/users.html had 16.8 per cent
of all Canadians using marihuana in 2006, the highest amongst developed countries.
Secondly, the Senate Report was making calculations on the basis of figures obtained earlier than 2002, when they issued their report. Given the upward trend of use in Canada, as well as an increase in population, this suggests that cannabis availability has increased as well as demand.
COST OF PROHIBITION: LOST POTENTIAL TAX REVENUE
Depending on taste preferences, one gram of marihuana produces between one and three marihuana cigarettes, according to Stephen T. Easton's analysis
http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/marijuanaGrow thinBC.pdf for the Fraser Institute.
7 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-7 That means the average marihuana consumer is willing to spend between $3.33 to $10 per marihuana cigarette, assuming a street value of $10 per gram, as the RCMP does. A standard tobacco cigarette has 0.8 grams of tobacco per cigarette. If all marihuana cigarettes were made just like tobacco cigarettes, that would result in retail prices of $8 for a marihuana cigarette, and $160 per pack of marihuana cigarettes at 20 cigarettes per pack, holding commodity price constant at $10/gram.
Stephen T. Easton has estimated that it costs approximately $4.70 to produce one gram of marihuana using 2002 production methods and techniques, in an illegal market. At wholesale prices, each marihuana cigarette would cost between $1.60 to $4.70 to produce,
8 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-8 or $3.76 at 0.8 grams, the amount of tobacco in tobacco cigarettes. That yields $5.30 in profit for every gram, $4.24 in profit for every 0.8 grams. This amount is available for taxation.
In what follows, I have made use of three different assumptions to estimate the size of the domestic marihuana market, and to generate the amount of revenue open to taxation. The first method is to assume half of the marihuana in circulation is consumed annually; the second is to
update Easton's calculations for the Fraser Institute with more recent data about population size and the proportion of Canadians who use marihuana; while the third takes Jeffrey A. Miron's calculations for the U.S. marihuana market and applies a crude conversion based on population
size to generate potential revenues in Canada. If half of the marihuana in circulation were consumed by Canadians (400 tonnes), and if taxes consumed the profits, that would yield an
astonishing $2.12 billion in revenue every year.
The above estimates of production costs are conservative. It is much more likely that the cost of production would dramatically decrease if marihuana were legalized. Let us conservatively estimate that production costs would be halved. Let us further assume that we don't want increases in consumption, so we adjust the tax to compensate for a decrease in production costs. Using these assumptions, we can expect $3.06 billion in revenue.
Alternatively, we can use the cost of producing medicinal marihuana for Health Canada as our guide. Prairie Plant Systems Inc. produces marihuana for Health Canada, charging the government $328.75 per kilogram (Health Canada charged patients $5,000 per kilogram, or $150 per 30 gram bags, or $5 per gram, a 1,500 per cent markup) in 2007, according to documents http://www.thestar.com/article/203337 obtained under the Access to Information Act by the Toronto Star. That means a cost of $0.33 per gram. At a cost of $0.33, that would yield $3.87 billion in taxable revenue, or $3.95 billion in 2009 dollars.
Easton used different methods http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/marijuanaGrowt... to come to similar usage statistics. Easton took the number
of users of marihuana in Canada and made assumptions about how many marihuana cigarettes they smoked per month (18.7), multiplied that number by the weight of each cigarette (0.4 to 1.0 grams), and, for the year 2000, came up with 159.4 tonnes as the low figure (assuming 0.4
grams per marihuana cigarette), and 413.4 tonnes as the high figure (assuming 1.0 gram marihuana cigarettes). That would yield $1.22 billion (low) to $3.16 billion (high) of revenue open to taxation in 2004 dollars, or $1.33 billion (low) to $3.46 billion (high) in 2009 dollars.
We can adjust Easton's measurements to account for the higher population and usage statistics in 2006. Easton used 7.4 per cent of the Canadian population as having used marihuana, data consistent with 1994 figures. In 2006, however, rates of use in Canada have more than doubled, at 16.8 per cent of the population, according to the UN's World Drug Report.
Since the Canadian Addiction Survey may be a better gauge of use, we will use the 14.1 per cent of all Canadians 15-and-older figure obtained in 2004. Canada's population was 31.9 million http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/demo02a-eng.htm in 2004, giving us 4.5 million users. Per Easton's assumptions, these users smoked, on average, 18.7 marihuana cigarettes per month, giving us a domestic marihuana market of 404.3 tonnes (low) or 1,010.6 tonnes (high). That yields taxable revenue of $3.14 billion (low) to $7.73 billion (high) in 2004 dollars, or $3.44 (low) to $8.46 billion in 2009 dollars.
9 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-9 A third method might be to use U.S. consumption and expected revenue figures, and adjust them for Canada. Jeffrey Miron estimated http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/miron/files/budget_2008.pdf that the U.S. government could expect annual revenue from taxes at US$6.7 billion. Miron arrived at this figure by using the 2000 estimates of total expenditure on marihuana by Americans provided by the Office of National Drug Control Policy, and assuming a tax rate similar to taxes
levied on alcohol and tobacco. The ONDCP estimates http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/pdf/american_users_spen... that US$10.5 billion was spent by Americans on marihuana in 2000 [p. 3], which would be US$12.6 billion in 2006, after adjusting for inflation. Meanwhile, taxes represent 24.5 per cent of total alcohol cost, and 61 per cent of tobacco costs [Miron, p.14]. Miron therefore assumes that taxes would account for 53.2 per cent of the total cost of marihuana. Assuming rates of use for Canada and the U.S. were identical, Canada could expect revenue of US$670 million per year, or CAD$717 million (U.S. expected tax revenue divided by 10), or CAD$748 million adjusted for inflation.
This last method may significantly underestimate the potential tax revenue in Canada. For one, Miron assumes that expenditure on marihuana has remained constant from 2000 through 2006. This is unlikely.
Secondly, Canadians consume more marihuana than Americans. According http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/factsht/druguse/ to the ONDCP, 12.6 per cent of Americans reported using marihuana in 2001, compared to 14.1 per cent of Canadians in 2003, and 16.8 in 2006 (the highest rate amongst all developed nations). Finally, there is some reason to believe that Canadians will tolerate higher tax rates.
Assuming taxes accounted for 76.5 per cent of total costs (as we earlier assumed after production costs were halved), we could expect $1.06 billion in revenue, or $1.11 billion adjusted for inflation.
That gives us a range of $748 million to $8.46 billion in potential revenue open to taxation. The lowest and highest numbers are very unlikely. Excluding those (as well as the $3.95, $3.46, and $3.44 billion figures, to be conservative), we have a range of $1.33 to $3.06 billion in annual revenue open to taxation. This number does not include potential additional revenue from increased tourism, which would be very likely (especially from the U.S.). Since we excluded the highest number, which assumed increased consumption, we are also not accounting for any possible increase in consumption, which is also likely. This range is conservative. It can be restated as: $2.195 billion +/- $865 million.
Chart 2: Expected revenue
http://www.c2cjournal.ca/images/431/47WLuq25xZ.jpg
(Inflation calculator:
http://www.bankofcanada.ca/en/rates/inflation_calc.html )
Some might object that fewer people will consume marihuana purchased in the legal, taxed environment, and will continue to use black market, or illegal marihuana, or grow their own. There is no reason to believe this. First, we have assumed black market prices at $10/gram. Given the option of buying regular or black market marihuana at the same price, there is no reason for someone to choose the black market. While people could grow their own marihuana, there is no reason to believe that this would take up anything but an insignificant proportion of the whole. People can currently grow their own tomatoes and cucumbers, but few do.
Similarly with tobacco, which is a weed just like marihuana. The most obvious comparison is to alcohol, which saw a switch from home-made booze to professionally-produced alcohol almost immediately after repeal of prohibition. With the assurance of quality and the decrease in
potential violence that comes from a legal regime, we can assume that nearly all marihuana will be purchased in the legal and taxed environment, rather than in the illegal, or homegrown, and untaxed market.
COST OF PROHIBITION: ENFORCEMENT TRADE-OFF
In addition to expected tax revenues of between $1.33 to $3.06 billion per year, we would see significant law enforcement savings as well.
It is difficult to estimate the total cost of enforcing marihuana laws in Canada. There are many reasons for this. It is difficult, for example, to estimate the percentage of time a regular police officer spends on marihuana-related enforcement activity, compared with her other police activities, when out on patrol.
But we have to do the best we can, with the evidence we have at our disposal. In 2001, the Auditor General of Canada estimated that federal law enforcement agencies spent $450 million between 1999 and 2000 on drug control, enforcement, and education, with 95 per cent of the costs attributed to enforcement alone. For enforcement only costs, the Auditor General reported http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/att_0111xe06_e_11634.html
the following break down by enforcement activity:
Canada Customs and Revenue Agency: $10 to $32 million Correctional Services Canada: $169 million Department of Justice: $71 million National Parole Board: $4 million
RCMP: $168 million Total enforcement cost: $422 to $444 million. Further, according
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/att_0111xe02_e_11630.html to the Auditor General, 34,347 persons were charged with cannabis-related crimes -- including possession (21,381), trafficking (8,112), importation (157), and cultivation (4,697) -- out of a total of 49,585 persons charged under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in 1999. Cannabis-related charges therefore represent 70 per cent of all persons charged in 1999.
Assuming an efficient distribution of enforcement expenditure to persons charged, we would expect that federal law enforcement agencies spent 70 per cent of their law enforcement budget on cannabis-related crimes. That would yield a total of $295.4 to $310.8 million in cannabis-related enforcement costs in 1999, or $8,600.46 to $9,048.83 per person charged.
This figure includes the estimated annual cost of housing prisoners, which is approximately
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/LegislativeSummaries/Bills_ls.asp?lang=... $57,000 per year in provincial jails, and $88,000 per year in the federal system. Adjusted for inflation, we get a total enforcement cost of $363.7 to $382.7 million, or $10,590.19 to $11,942.29 per person charged in 2009. Assuming a constant cost-per-person-charged rate, we can estimate more recent costs of cannabis enforcement. According to Statistics Canada http://cansim2.statcan.ca/cgi-win/cnsmcgi.exe?Lang=E&RootDir=CII/&am... ,
the number of persons charged with cannabis-related offences under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act has fluctuated significantly from 1999 to 2007, 2007 representing the most recent data available. From a high of 41,128 persons in 2002, to a low of 29,503 in 2005. In 2007, 32,472 persons were charged with cannabis-related charges. At $10,590.19 per person charged, we get $343.9 million in cannabis-related enforcement costs in 2007, and at $11,942.29 per person charged, we get $387.8 million. The following chart provides us with detailed figures http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/legal14a-eng.htm for all cannabis-related charges from 1999 until 2007, as well as estimated cannabis-specific law enforcement expenditures using the above crude estimate (notice that Statistics Canada provides a different number for persons charged in 1999 than the Auditor General's report. I am not sure which numbers are correct).
Chart 3: Cannabis-related charges http://www.c2cjournal.ca/images/431/91HKmu88wL.jpg
http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/legal14a-eng.htm In total, a legal marihuana regime would see cannabis-related enforcement cost savings for federal law enforcement agencies between a low of $312.4 million (using 2005 estimates) to a high of $491.2 million (using 2002
estimates) per year. That money could be diverted to other law enforcement priorities (most likely), spent on other priorities like health or education (less likely), or returned to taxpayers in the form of tax cuts (unlikely). These numbers should be treated with some caution. This is because many costs associated with cannabis are dealt with at the provincial level, and we can anticipate continued costs, like roadside testing for drugged driving. The significance of this cost
to the total, however, is likely negligible.
SOCIAL COSTS OF LEGAL MARIHUANA
To accurately assess the economic case for marihuana legalization, we need to look not just at potential tax revenue and potential law enforcement savings, we need to also assess the potential social costs of marihuana use.
According http://www.ccsa.ca/2006%20CCSA%20Documents/ccsa-011332-2006.pdf to
the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse's The Cost of Substance Abuse 2002, the social cost of substance abuse, including alcohol, tobacco, licit and illicit substances, is approximately $38.9 billion dollars,
10 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-10 or $44.5 billion in 2009 dollars. They break these costs down as follows. Indirect costs, in terms of productivity loss, amount to $24.3 billion, or 61 per cent of the total cost. Direct health care costs amount to $8.8 billion, or
22 per cent of the total. Direct law enforcement costs are set at $5.4 billion, or 14 per cent, while other direct costs are estimated to be $1.3 billion, or three per cent.
According to the study, tobacco accounted for $17 billion of the total cost (42.7 per cent), while alcohol accounted for $14.6 billion of the total cost, (36.6 per cent), leaving $8.2 billion (20.7 per cent) attributable to all illegal drugs. We will adjust for inflation after figuring out the numbers in 2002 dollars. We need to know what proportion of the $8.2 billion ($8,224.3 million) in social costs is attributable to marihuana, and what cost we could expect if marihuana were re-legalized. Direct law enforcement costs from all levels of law enforcement (including federal) come to $2,335.5 million, according to the study. If marihuana were re-legalized, cannabis-specific enforcement costs would be negligible. Subtracting the total law enforcement costs from $8,224.3 million gives us $5,888.8 million, or $5.9 billion still to be distributed.
Direct health care costs amount to $1,134.6 million for all illegal drugs. In a separate study using the same data as The Cost of Substance Abuse 2002 study, the Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse revealed http://www.ccsa.ca/2007%20CCSA%20Documents/ccsa-011350-2007.pdf the cannabis-specific health care costs as $73 mi llion per year, while all
other illegal drugs accounted for $1,061.6 million, or $1.06 billion (a surprising ratio of 14.54 to 1).
11 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-11 Of the $5.9 billion total social costs still to be distributed, we can eliminate $1.06 billion as a health care cost due to non-cannabis illegal drugs, while putting aside $73 million as a definite health care cost of cannabis. Subtracting both numbers from the total, we get $4,754.2 million, or $4.8 billion still to be distributed.
Productivity loss caused by all illegal drugs is $4,678.6 million. The study uses two primary methods of inferring productivity loss -- death and morbidity (potential years of life lost plus acute care hospital days). The most significant portion of this figure is due to "long-term
disability" at $4,408.4 million, with "premature mortality" at $248.5 million. Apart from driving-related deaths, no death has ever been attributed to the use of cannabis. We can use the direct health care cost numbers as a proxy for indirect productivity loss due to "long-term disability." At a constant ratio of 14.54 to 1, we get $303.2 million as a result of "long-term disability" for cannabis only. We can assume that this is the only significant cost in terms of productivity loss due to cannabis only.
These findings are consistent with the conclusions of the 2002 Senate Report, which surveyed the findings from the 1992 study by the Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse, and concluded that, "Except in the case of traffic fatalities, cannabis is not a cause of death and involves none
of this type of social cost. Morbidity corresponds to losses attributed to problems caused by drug use as measured by the difference between the average annual income of users and of the population in general. Here, two further observations about cannabis should be noted. A large proportion of cannabis users are young people who are not yet part of the workforce; and cannabis use involves none of the addiction and attendant problems that follow from heroin or cocaine use. It is, therefore, the costs that can be attributed to cannabis in this regard
are likely minimal. If one accepts the methodology of the authors, cannabis in itself entails few externalities, which are the main measures of the social cost of illegal drugs."
12 http://www.c2cjournal.ca/blog-articles/#FOOTNOTE-12>
We are now left with $75.6 million after subtracting the total productivity loss costs from the remaining $4,754.2 million. This amount falls into categories like awareness, education, and research, thus it is not possible to further break down this figure.
The total cannabis-only social costs, then, are $376.2 million, plus some proportion of $75.6 million. $451.8 million represents the absolute upper bound in terms of social costs, assuming that all of the "other costs" were cannabis-specific. Adjusting for inflation, we get a total of anywhere between $430.65 to $517.19 million.
Chart 4: Expected social cost of legal cannabis
http://www.c2cjournal.ca/images/431/19AGmj24wN.jpg
CONCLUSION
Maintaining prohibition of marihuana costs the Canadian government $1.33 to $3.06 billion in lost taxable revenue (or, $2.195 billion +/- $865 million), and approximately $400 million in law enforcement costs.
Meanwhile, the social costs of marihuana are minimal, estimated at between $430.7 to $517.2 million per year. Considering only domestic costs and benefits, the decision to continue to keep marihuana illegal is, from an economic point of view, profoundly irrational.
Adding to the irrationality is the fact that, currently, criminal gangs are seeing the benefits of marihuana prohibition through an enormous revenue stream provided by the prohibition on marihuana. We could expect the same devastating impact on criminal gangs with marihuana
re-legalization as we witnessed after the re-legalization of alcohol.
Marihuana prohibition enriches gangs. Small wonder gangs in Canada approve of prohibition, and hope that marihuana remains illegal.
This article has not considered what may be the most significant cost of re-legalizing marihuana -- impact on our trade relationship with the United States. Research should be undertaken to estimate the potential U.S./Canada trade-related costs of re-legalizing marihuana in Canada.
I dont agree with charging the prostitutes but yes for the johns. However there is no reason why prostitution should be made legal, prostitutes are victims of poverty, abuse and drugs, 99% of the time these are THE ONLY REASONS why they are forced to sell themselves. We shouldnt be supporting that but we should be giving them every tool possible to get them out of that lifestyle. Drug abuse help, therapists for mental, emotional and physical abuse, and extra help financially. Its really not that much to give and not to mention costs the taxpayers a hell of a lot less in court costs for preventable crime and generates useful members of society, we need nurses and doctors not prostitutes. Men and women are both victims of prostitution and ive never heard of anyone who had a well off lifestyle and not addicted to drugs say "hey i want to become a prostitute". Why? Because its wrong, degrading and completely unnecessary, and nobody wants their child to grow up to be one. Have sex as much as you want, as long as its free. As soon as money is involved in my opinion consent goes right out the window. Every place with legalized brothels has problems with abuse, drugs, disease and worst of all minors being brought in. Sure its a bit safer to not be on the street doing it and theres a panic button, but guess what theyre still hurt all the time. Violent people arent going to stop being violent because theres a panic button. An STD test takes weeks to come back, condoms do not always stop disease or pregnancy. With all these factors not to mention the fact that you would "lose your job" and have nothing to fall back on when you get a disease, or age past 40, youre not going to get much work when youre older and then what are you going to do?
And dont even get me started on sex trafficking
I give up.
40% of Canadians voted conservative, including some of my own family. I puke at their choice, but I have to accept it because that 40% is the largest group of like-minded Canadians.
Harper has his own agenda, but those who voted for him don't see it. That agenda is not going to give Cons voters what they thought they would get from Harper's majority power.
Let those who voted Conservative see the results:
- Send their siblings, and their adult children, to jail and they might start to see the light.
- Let them see what an oil spill in the Arctic looks like;
- Let them see what runaway global warming does to their lifestyle!!
- Let them see their bank accounts become worthless as they spend more and more of their savings on health care as they age, and as the bankers and corporations hoard an even greater amount of Canada's wealth.
They still don't get it...
crime is when someone does something questionable to another person!
since when is it ever criminal, or even questionable to do something to yourself?
at the very worst its a medical concern that should be looked at from that angle,
but... pot use as a medical concern is more about access then anything else,
and we've seen numerous court cases supporting this fact.
why are our politicians sticking their collective heads in the sand and ignoring the facts
and passing laws that are themselves criminal enrichment enterprises?
In the end, what this law will do is lock people up for growing their own medicine...
and invalidate all commonsense & medical advancements we have achieved
in the last 5-10 years on numerous research projects...
in summation;
I'm left wondering if the Harper minions ever read anything not approved!
http://c2cjournal.ca/2009/07/the-price-of-pot-prohibition/
& this article was published in 2009, so they DO know about it!
Marijuana for PTSD in rats? A good experiment. Marijuana cures PTSD in rats, Israeli study shows . The study was released in the publication Neuropsychopharmacology. Marijuana used promptly to rats that suffer emotional stress can effectively block the creation of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). As long as the rodents were addressed with weed within 24 hours of the traumatic encounter, PTSD symptoms were avoided. Well, human beings are different compare to animals. I think that would not be helpful to a human person.
Again the Harper Government wants to put more emphasis on the "victims of crime"... the only victim with the prohibition is the regular person who wants access to the substance, and the only crime is the prohibition itself.
http://whyprohibition.ca/blogs/jacob-hunter/whyprohibitionca-activism-to...
I think that everything needed is right here in fact.
My bad for not looking before posting!
What would be a good starting point to create manifesations in Canada about this omnibus crime bill?
I think that people need to be made aware of all of this, media don't talk about it enough and they clearly don't talk about what party want to do what if people elected a majority conservative government in Canada, it is against most of Canadian values I think, by talking with people and etc. one can clearly understand this.
Also, this crime bill is like going back in time with the same failed strategies the USA used before.
We should just learn with the Portugal and their progressive mind, the USA and their failed policies, etc.
So all in all, will manifestation be held against this bill (and the Internet privacy invasion one)?
If not, how do manifestation start? Is there some guide of guide out there to not get into trouble or anything, and how to create them and get attention?
Thanks,
Dc03
Nobody wants marijuana to be legalized more than me, but this is just ridiculous. There's no question that pot must be legalized in the United States first, otherwise we'll have a political shitstorm on our hands.
But here's a question for everyone - why don't we push the government to hold a referendum on legalization? If we can do it for the HST, why not pot?
In 1995 and 1996 the media was reporting Toronto’s homeless issues across the world. LovecCry had taken some street kids to city hall for help and that somehow turned into a huge protest that lasted well over a week on the Nathan Phillips Square property. This put LoveCry and me under attack by this media group. They did everything they possibly could to put us out of business and deface us. We are still here. (2011)
During all this Jack Layton came to our home and asked me if these allegations were true.
Upon talking about we proved to him they were not and from that day on Jack guided us through, meetings and phone conversations. Jack listened to what we told him regarding the homeless. We were homeless and not educated enough to even think up the things we were being accused of. Nor did we have time to do any of it. We struggled, sold our newspapers and searched for help for our issues.
I personally had spent thirteen years (prior to founding LoveCry) working with counselors and therapists to get some healing as well as surviving Cancer in order to keep my promise to the Street Kids of 1981, which was to create a healing center for abused kids. Jack knew by what was said and shown to him that our plans and what I personally had already sacrificed to get the healing center going that we were not the total rebels the media had reported we were.
I believe that it was Jack’s guidance back then (1996) in what we were trying to do that lead the way and helped me in particular to learn to speak as opposed to the bipolar way I had started out, and helped me to learn to believe in myself.
I was one of the homeless and was and still am in many ways suffering from the mental and emotional illnesses that come with being badly abused as a child. Jack understood that and showed a great deal of patients to my situation, as he was learning about the actual issues which were abuse and poverty.
Through Jacks guidance LoveCry is now as small replica of what we had dreamed but we are now LoveCry’s Healing Café!
With Jacks faith in the homeless and us we have been here for almost twenty-one years growing learning and getting educated to deal with our issues. All the street kids at that protest at Nathan Phillips Square are off the streets, educated in what they needed for their lives and grown up with children of their own today. Many more after the original LoveCry kids began to heal and did the same. I lost count many years ago of how many kids have gotten help from LoveCry but we keep on working towards getting the proper help for the kids, families and community.
If Jack had not given us the encouragement he did we would not have been able to do this as we have done it against all odds.
Angel Femia-Richmond
Dorector of LoveCry
The Homeless Corporation!
It’s a voter approved law, and so many people can’t be wrong. The need of medical marijuana is independent of get stoned and passing out. Why should medical marijuana dispensary applications not be entertained?
The legalization of marijuana has proven to be like crabgrass in the U.S. Congress; it is extremely hard to wipe out. Bi-partisan legislation sponsored by Massachusetts’s Rep. Barney Frank and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas seeks to get rid of control over cannabis from the federal government's metal grip. States are going to have the ability to legalize cannabis that will open the way for state governments to regulate and tax and control the drug without federal intervention, states Reason. Here is the proof: Frank-Paul pot bill seeks to legalize marijuana
Dale 150, you are the Rat.
The Kingston Police were called and they were told that a "Break in" had occurred at the Compassion Club....there was no " Break in". There was no Police Raid. The Police were asked to go there, don't blame them for that. They were not wasting resources or trampling on anyones rights, they were only doing their job. There were some legal/criminal questions about one particular individuals actions and what he had posted on internet and what he offered on the internet,.but The Kingston Compassion Club was not RAIDED!!!!!
Earlier this week the Connecticut Senate narrowly passed legislation that decriminalizes possession of small portions of weed. N.Y. lawmakers in the meantime are debating a bill which attempts to repair a loophole in earlier legislation. Even those who support the N.Y. bill have concerns as to its ability to pass before end of the session. Here is the proof: N.Y. and Connecticut lawmakers seek to decriminalize marijuana, newstype.com
Obviously this is something that can work towards the larger benefit of society rather than some people find loopholes and take advantage of the situation. Medical marijuana is meant to help patients, so, let’s keep it that way.
Great article - I've been heated about the Harper majority outcome since "that fateful day" as it's been coined, and have been searching for ways to get involved in a resistance against the Harper government ever since. I am really interested in the International Campaign that the author mentioned - Voices; but can't seem to find it online anywhere. Do you know of any avenues to contact the campaign?
Thanks!
Sam
I've participated in a lot of actions through Avaaz over the years. This is one of the very few times I've seen Avaaz do anything connected with the drug war. Looking into it, if there's a chance to see positive change in the current political environment, it's this and the medpot bills currently before Congress.
The petition is at: www.avaaz.org/en/end_the_war_on_drugs/?rc=fb&pv=27
More information: ( full reports, etc.) http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/
In days, we could finally see the beginning of the end of the ‘war on drugs’. This expensive war has completely failed to curb the plague of drug addiction, while costing countless lives, devastating communities, and funneling trillions of dollars into violent organized crime networks.
Experts all agree that the most sensible policy is to regulate, but politicians are afraid to touch the issue. In days, a global commission including former heads of state and foreign policy chiefs of the UN, EU, US, Brazil, Mexico and more will break the taboo and publicly call for new approaches including decriminalization and regulation of drugs.
This could be a once-in-a-generation tipping-point moment -- if enough of us call for an end to this madness. Politicians say they understand that the war on drugs has failed, but claim the public isn't ready for an alternative. Let's show them we not only accept a sane and humane policy -- we demand it. Sign the petition and share with everyone --if we reach 1 million voices, it will be personally delivered to world leaders by the global commission.
For 50 years current drug policies have failed everyone, everywhere but public debate is stuck in the mud of fear and misinformation. Everyone, even the UN Office on Drugs and Crime which is responsible for enforcing this approach agrees -- deploying militaries and police to burn drug farms, hunting down traffickers, and imprisoning dealers and addicts – is an expensive mistake. And with massive human cost -- from Afghanistan, to Mexico, to the USA the illegal drug trade is destroying countries around the world, while addiction, overdose deaths, and HIV/AIDS infections continue to rise.
Meanwhile, countries with less-harsh enforcement -- like Switzerland, Portugal, the Netherlands, and Australia -- have not seen the explosion in drug use that proponents of the drug war have darkly predicted. Instead, they have seen significant reductions in drug-related crime, addiction and deaths, and are able to focus squarely on dismantling criminal empires.
Powerful lobbies still stand in the way of change, including military, law enforcement, and prison departments whose budgets are at stake. And politicians fear that voters will throw them out of office if they support alternative approaches, as they will appear weak on law and order. But many former drug Ministers and Heads of State have come out in favour of reform since leaving office, and polls show that citizens across the world know the current approach is a catastrophe. Momentum is gathering towards new improved policies, particularly in regions that are ravaged by the drug trade.
If we can create a worldwide outcry in the next few days to support the bold calls of the Global Commission on Drug Policy, we can overpower the stale excuses for the status quo. Our voices hold the key to change -- Sign the petition and spread the word.
We have a chance to enter the closing chapter of this brutal 'war' that has destroyed millions of lives. Global public opinion will determine if this catastrophic policy is stopped or if politicians shy away from reform. Let's rally urgently to push our hesitating leaders from doubt and fear, over the edge, and into reason.
We all should keep working to finally trow down th prohibition.
proyectocannabis.blogspot.com