PPP Weed Poll

[Chef Jim]

And outside of taxation, they messed up American cigarettes how?

 

You need more than taxation as proof they messed up cigarettes?

 

I'm talking regulation as in making sure the stuff used is pure and not laced with dangerous crap, which happens more often than you'd think. If it's going to be produced, and sold wide spread, it'd be to society's benefit to make sure it's safe to consume.

 

Like cigarettes you mean?

[Dorkington]

What percentage of (xyz) do you allow weed to be laced with before it's no longer just weed? This is an important question if we're going to debate legality.

Edited September 4, 2013 by Dorkington

[Azalin]

Like cigarettes you mean?

people's heads would explode of they knew what kind of crap goes into most cigarette tobacco. the good stuff is used for cigars (american cigars aren't anything to write home about either), pipe tobacco, and higher-end cigarettes like American Spirit. the normal 'class A' cigarettes use the lowest grade, and often scrap, tobacco....at least as far as I understand it. there's all kinds of chemicals added to make it taste better, sulphur to make it burn better (ever see a tiny cigarette 'flare up' as someone is holding a lit cigarette? that's the added sulphur), etc.

 

as an unrelated side note, thanks to the new vaporizers, (like an e-cigarette on steroids) I have gone over 5 weeks without a cigarette after smoking for 39 years. I'm starting to feel a hell of a lot better, and both my doctor and my cardiologist are happy with the change, saying that the nicotine isn't my health worry, all the bullcrap I'm no longer inhaling in the cigarette smoke was.

[Chef Jim]

people's heads would explode of they knew what kind of crap goes into most cigarette tobacco. the good stuff is used for cigars (american cigars aren't anything to write home about either), pipe tobacco, and higher-end cigarettes like American Spirit. the normal 'class A' cigarettes use the lowest grade, and often scrap, tobacco....at least as far as I understand it. there's all kinds of chemicals added to make it taste better, sulphur to make it burn better (ever see a tiny cigarette 'flare up' as someone is holding a lit cigarette? that's the added sulphur), etc.

 

as an unrelated side note, thanks to the new vaporizers, (like an e-cigarette on steroids) I have gone over 5 weeks without a cigarette after smoking for 39 years. I'm starting to feel a hell of a lot better, and both my doctor and my cardiologist are happy with the change, saying that the nicotine isn't my health worry, all the bullcrap I'm no longer inhaling in the cigarette smoke was.

 

My wife worked for a law firm years ago and one of their clients was Phillp Morris. She won't tell me what she knew because of client confidentiality but she said it was horrific. Congrats on giving up that awful habit.

 

What percentage of (xyz) do you allow weed to be laced with before it's no longer just weed? This is an important question if we're going to debate legality.

 

I can't answer that but knowing our government it will be laced with all sorts of stuff. Most in the name of "safety and consumer protection."

[Azalin]

What percentage of (xyz) do you allow weed to be laced with before it's no longer just weed? This is an important question if we're going to debate legality.

none. but then again, it doesn't need to be laced with anything. most europeans who smoke hashish mix it with tobacco. I'm sure some people still lace weed with other drugs, but with the ultra-high quality marijuana grown in peoples' homes nowadays, no one needs to lace it with anything. the stuff from my high school days ('72-'76).....even the legenday stuff.....doesn't come close in potency to what people smoke now.

 

My wife worked for a law firm years ago and one of their clients was Phillp Morris. She won't tell me what she knew because of client confidentiality but she said it was horrific. Congrats on giving up that awful habit.

thanks! it caused me to develop a 99% blockage in my left anterior descending coronary artery and I had a stent placed to open it back up (just like GW just had). it still took me 5 years to get away from cigarettes. nicotine is by far the most difficult thing to quit that I ever tried, and if not for the newest e-cig technology, I'm sure I'd still be smoking.

Edited September 5, 2013 by Azalin

[IDBillzFan]

thanks to the new vaporizers, (like an e-cigarette on steroids) I have gone over 5 weeks without a cigarette after smoking for 39 years.

 

I wish this stuff was around to help when I finally quit.

[ExiledInIllinois]

I'm talking regulation as in making sure the stuff used is pure and not laced with dangerous crap, which happens more often than you'd think. If it's going to be produced, and sold wide spread, it'd be to society's benefit to make sure it's safe to consume.

 

Well it won't be safe to consume. But, I agree... Regulated so it isn't cut w/something else or a wrong weight. Weights and measures is one of the bigger areas of honest trade.

[B-Large]

I wish this stuff was around to help when I finally quit.

people's heads would explode of they knew what kind of crap goes into most cigarette tobacco. the good stuff is used for cigars (american cigars aren't anything to write home about either), pipe tobacco, and higher-end cigarettes like American Spirit. the normal 'class A' cigarettes use the lowest grade, and often scrap, tobacco....at least as far as I understand it. there's all kinds of chemicals added to make it taste better, sulphur to make it burn better (ever see a tiny cigarette 'flare up' as someone is holding a lit cigarette? that's the added sulphur), etc.

 

as an unrelated side note, thanks to the new vaporizers, (like an e-cigarette on steroids) I have gone over 5 weeks without a cigarette after smoking for 39 years. I'm starting to feel a hell of a lot better, and both my doctor and my cardiologist are happy with the change, saying that the nicotine isn't my health worry, all the bullcrap I'm no longer inhaling in the cigarette smoke was.

 

Quitters......

[OCinBuffalo]

Baloney. The Kennedy's still profit from every single imported bottle of Irish whiskey that comes into this country and other former outlaw importers (Canadian) still thrive; yet the strongest business comes from early domestic producers (think Buorbon County, and Tennessee mash).

 

Business springs from many founts.

Double Baloney. Now...for those of you sorry turds who use the term "straw man argument", but don't know what it means? Here it is:

 

The straw man here is pretending that Irish whiskey and Canadians and/or early domestic producers is where most alcohol in this country comes from. See his little hands and feet? Yes, let's make a pretend little man, and argue that he's where most of the alcohol comes from, therefore, my argument? Obfuscated. Let's call this little man: Snuffy Smith. Yes, you know your history(or at least, your old comics): Snuffy ended up selling Moonshine to all 50 states, because he already had the means of production and distribution and he was able to.....BS!

 

The reality is that most of the alcohol in this country comes from massive, corporate oufits that produce it by the 10,000s of tons per day, which is why you can buy a six pack for $5.99 most places, and none of these producers were established prior to Prohibition. I wonder then: what ever happened to the old speak easy distelleries and brewerys that were all over the country? What happened to Snuffy? Yeah, they got trucked by good old American capitalism, no different than the Drug Cartels would be.

 

Next he'll try to tell me that Budweiser, prior to Prohibition = Budweiser of today.

 

No. The simple fact is that if you apply corporate America to drug production, no different that it already has been, you get a cheap, and more importantly, clean, product whose quality would literally destroy the drug cartels in a matter of months. Every gangbanger: broke. Every inner city Democrat politician? Broke a few months after. There's simply nothing left to support the stores/pay the rent. Everybody would have to go get a real job, because, most street dealers are already on some form of assistance. Legalizing drugs would put Detroit in an even bigger hole, and that's a good thing. No constant cash infusion from the suburbs left to support bad ideas and bad politicians.

 

Imagine Wal-Mart selling weed for $10/oz. And, don't fool yourself: they would. They sure as hell aren't gonna let K-Mart have all that action.

Edited September 6, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[TakeYouToTasker]

The problem is that you underestimate the resources and business accumen of the people running the cartels. You also don't understand the underlying fundamentals of the business of liquor distribution; or the difference between the beer market, the wine market, and the spirits market; and have managed to conflate all three, and constructed your poorly reasoned argument on that bed of sand.

[Azalin]

if it was legal to grow your own marijuana for personal use and illegal to sell, the vast majority of people who partake would simply grow their own. cartels & dealers would take a huge hit to their revenues, there would be less drug related crime, no government involvement involvement or taxation whatsoever.imho, the question of legality should not in any way be based on trying to establish a regulated industry.

[Chef Jim]

if it was legal to grow your own marijuana for personal use and illegal to sell, the vast majority of people who partake would simply grow their own. cartels & dealers would take a huge hit to their revenues, there would be less drug related crime, no government involvement involvement or taxation whatsoever.imho, the question of legality should not in any way be based on trying to establish a regulated industry.

 

And this is the argument that I'm been ridiculed for making. You really think that legalizing marijuana is going to cause the drug cartels to fold up their tents and sell Mary K? No, they're going to find something else to push and probably something a hell of a lot more distructive. So I see drug crime not decreasing one bit. I actually see it getting much more violent.

[OCinBuffalo]

The problem is that you underestimate the resources and business accumen of the people running the cartels. You also don't understand the underlying fundamentals of the business of liquor distribution; or the difference between the beer market, the wine market, and the spirits market; and have managed to conflate all three, and constructed your poorly reasoned argument on that bed of sand.

No the problem is that I understand all of these things, but, you don't understand your history or the sheer power of a real multinational outfit. You think a bunch of pissant drug lords can compete with ADM? Idiocy. I've run projects for 5 multinationals so far. How many have you done?

 

Get a F'ing grip. Are you that dumb that you don't think companies like ADM have distribution in place, today, that is 50x more efficient than some cartel guy who rents a U-haul? Are you that silly that you think Pfizer won't finish first with the FDA, long before the cartel people can even hire the lawyers and technical people? My assumption there is based on making all drugs legal. I don't think we need FDA approval for weed, we simply apply the same regulations for beer, wine, whiskey, and leave all of that up to the states.

 

Moving on to another of your inanities: Are you saying that the post-Prohibition Mafia didn't have resources? In those dollars, they had every bit of the resources, and probably 3x the resources of the cartels. The Black Hand was a 2-bit outfit before Prohibiton. It became a international organization we know as the Mafia directly due to Prohibition. However, the other transition? They turned from being nothing but killers and thieves, into something more like businessmen. The smart guys moved up. The dumb guys were removed.

 

And, what happened once Prohibition ended? These smart businessmen moved their assets out of what was now clearly a losing play, and into a winning one: Las Vegas and Cuba. Sure they ended up losing Cuba. But for 20 years? They made a crapload of money there. They made a killing off of Vegas, and are still involved one way or another. The other thing they moved their money into? Drugs Yes, the business model still worked. Imagine that, all they had to do was trade bathtubs for hydroponics, and then run everything the same.

 

Only an idiot can't see the truth here. Spread your ingorance of history elsewhere. The ONLY reason any of this has occurred: dopes making things illegal, and pretending that was going to stop anything. And, dopes preventing American Big Business from doing business, in favor of losers and scumbags.

 

All drugs being illegal does is keep real, "kick your ass out of the market", competition away.

Edited September 7, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[TakeYouToTasker]

I stopped reading when you said: "I've"

 

Shut the !@#$ up.

 

People hire you to fix broken IT models. That's the end of your expertise. That's not to say you're an !@#$ or an idiot, but we've gotten to the point where I'm unimpressed, and you defer to me.

Edited September 7, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker

[OCinBuffalo]

I stopped reading when you said: "I've"

 

Shut the !@#$ up.

 

People hire you to fix broken IT models. That's the end of your expertise. That's not to say you're an !@#$ or an idiot, but we've gotten to the point where I'm unimpressed, and you defer to me.

Yeah, yeah, because you know your answer is: 0

 

Go ahead and share your experience on creating real time analytics for distribution on an international scale. Perhaps I can learn something more than I already have: in doing that 5 times.

 

People hire me to change their entire philosophy of how the communcate their work effort, enterprise wide. And, they have, for years.

 

IT is merely a part of that. This is what being an enterprise, full service consultant is all about. I don't stop at delivering 3 ring binders full of "advice". I do the whole job...because I can.

 

EDIT: And, I can't help but wonder why you got past the "you don't know your history" part...but then decided to end at "I've". Seems like you're ducking the history part. Or, do you actually know it?

Edited September 7, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

Yeah, yeah, because you know your answer is: 0

 

Go ahead and share your experience on creating real time analytics for distribution on an international scale. Perhaps I can learn something more than I already have: in doing that 5 times.

 

People hire me to change their entire philosophy of how the communcate their work effort, enterprise wide. And, they have, for years.

 

IT is merely a part of that. This is what being an enterprise, full service consultant is all about. I don't stop at delivering 3 ring binders full of "advice". I do the whole job...because I can.

 

EDIT: And, I can't help but wonder why you got past the "you don't know your history" part...but then decided to end at "I've". Seems like you're ducking the history part. Or, do you actually know it?

Businesses bring in consultants when their model is broken . They bring in specialized consultants when problems become technical. I eat, drink, live, breathe, and sleep business models, and I rape complex supply chains into lean logistics like you masturbate over. I'm the guy they pay to make sure you have a system to emulate.

 

You're after market. I'm factory !@#$ing Ferrari S.p.A. 1947, and they aren't producing any !@#$ing more of me.

 

You understand what you specialize in. And by all indications, you're good at it, but trust me when I tell you that you don't understand a business model. Because trust me when I tell you that I do.

 

Fin.

 

[OCinBuffalo]

Businesses bring in consultants when their model is broken . They bring in specialized consultants when problems become technical. I eat, drink, live, breathe, and sleep business models, and I rape complex supply chains into lean logistics like you masturbate over. I'm the guy they pay to make sure you have a system to emulate.

 

You're after market. I'm factory !@#$ing Ferrari S.p.A. 1947, and they aren't producing any !@#$ing more of me.

 

You understand what you specialize in. And by all indications, you're good at it, but trust me when I tell you that you don't understand a business model. Because trust me when I tell you that I do.

 

Fin.

Let's see....53 projects before I started my own thing...all dependent upon me having a laser focus and complete understanding of the business model...at every level, and across 30+ divisions...my specific specialization in the proper application of CRM, workflow, analytics and supply chain, to the point that I still am asked to speak about it...

 

Yeah, I don't understand business models.

 

Actually, you're right, but not in the way you think. One of the premises for starting my group is that: even with all my ability(whatever that is), there's no way I'm ever really going to get it right. Yeah, and for all the $500/hr bills I've dropped on people, there was always a better than average chance that my understanding of their business was merely functional in many areas, and nowhere near the level it needed to be to speak at a real philosophical level.

 

I found this to be annoying, and a rip-off for clients. Make no mistake, I could still be running with that. I chose not to. Thus, first I created a philosphy that says: "we are going to be wrong about this business model, both now, and especially when things change, so let's not focus on building off the assumption we have it right, let's focus on minimizing the consequences of being wrong, and, moving rapidly, or not (depending on readiness), towards getting it right". Then, I built code around that and other premises.

 

EDIT: Emphasis for the turds: my entire ethos in this is predicated on the fact that I am probably wrong, at least someplace, if not completely F'ed, and, even worse, that I have led both my people and my client down the wrong path. Yes, mind boggling...for some of you.

 

But, in order to have that vision, I had to be standing at the peak, or, down in the lowest gutter, depending upon your interpretation. I didn't get there because I don't know businsess models. I got there because I learn quick, and listen well, and: because you think you're special, when you're not.

 

I've seen you 20 times already this year...5 times this past month. You may have some variance, but that's all it is: variance. Sorry, but if I had $50k for every time I've had to listen to guy tell me how much better his model is than the next guy's?

 

Oh...wait...we did get $50k every time I had to listen to that. That was the pre-analysis phase. Never mind.

 

EDIT: So I guess we can forget about you ever coming clean on how post-Prohibition Mafia exactly = post-Drug Legalization Cartels....

Edited September 7, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Azalin]

And this is the argument that I'm been ridiculed for making. You really think that legalizing marijuana is going to cause the drug cartels to fold up their tents and sell Mary K? No, they're going to find something else to push and probably something a hell of a lot more distructive. So I see drug crime not decreasing one bit. I actually see it getting much more violent.

no, I don't think drug dealers or cartels will fold up shop if weed was made legal. as long as there's a demand for illegal drugs of any kind, they'll be there to provide them. my point is that marijuana is the most prevelant, the most used, and the most benign by far of all the illegal drugs, and while the cartels, the mob, & other associated 'bad guys' will carry on just fine without it, you will be taking pot away from them, allowing users to invest their money in a home hydro system and a couple of sodium vapor lamps, and maybe a bong or two. nobody would be profiting off the backs of the veritable army of benign stoners in the US....not cartels, not dealers, not law enforcement, and not the government.

 

concerning drug cartels and organized crime, I really don't know the best thing to do to combat them. making existing laws more harsh only serves to make the business more violent and drive the drug prices up. to allow complete free and legal use of any and all drugs would put a huge burden on an already too large welfare state. my personal belief is that in a free society, every individual has the responsibility to pull their own weight, and nobody can meet that responsibility indefinitely if they're a cocain freak or addicted to opiates or methamphetime. the larger problem of illegal drugs and addiction is beyond my ability to address, but I do believe that we can take marijuana out of that classification and not suffer as a society for doing so.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Let's see....53 projects before I started my own thing...all dependent upon me having a laser focus and complete understanding of the business model...at every level, and across 30+ divisions...my specific specialization in the proper application of CRM, workflow, analytics and supply chain, to the point that I still am asked to speak about it...

 

Yeah, I don't understand business models.

 

Actually, you're right, but not in the way you think. One of the premises for starting my group is that: even with all my ability(whatever that is), there's no way I'm ever really going to get it right. Yeah, and for all the $500/hr bills I've dropped on people, there was always a better than average chance that my understanding of their business was merely functional in many areas, and nowhere near the level it needed to be to speak at a real philosophical level.

 

I found this to be annoying, and a rip-off for clients. Make no mistake, I could still be running with that. I chose not to. Thus, first I created a philosphy that says: "we are going to be wrong about this business model, both now, and especially when things change, so let's not focus on building off the assumption we have it right, let's focus on minimizing the consequences of being wrong, and, moving rapidly, or not (depending on readiness), towards getting it right". Then, I built code around that and other premises.

 

EDIT: Emphasis for the turds: my entire ethos in this is predicated on the fact that I am probably wrong, at least someplace, if not completely F'ed, and, even worse, that I have led both my people and my client down the wrong path. Yes, mind boggling...for some of you.

 

But, in order to have that vision, I had to be standing at the peak, or, down in the lowest gutter, depending upon your interpretation. I didn't get there because I don't know businsess models. I got there because I learn quick, and listen well, and: because you think you're special, when you're not.

 

I've seen you 20 times already this year...5 times this past month. You may have some variance, but that's all it is: variance. Sorry, but if I had $50k for every time I've had to listen to guy tell me how much better his model is than the next guy's?

 

Oh...wait...we did get $50k every time I had to listen to that. That was the pre-analysis phase. Never mind.

 

EDIT: So I guess we can forget about you ever coming clean on how post-Prohibition Mafia exactly = post-Drug Legalization Cartels....

I suppose all that's left is to put our money where our mouths are, yes?

 

Let's figure out how to do at.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Let's see....53 projects before I started my own thing...all dependent upon me having a laser focus and complete understanding of the business model...at every level, and across 30+ divisions...my specific specialization in the proper application of CRM, workflow, analytics and supply chain, to the point that I still am asked to speak about it...

 

Yeah, I don't understand business models.

 

Actually, you're right, but not in the way you think. One of the premises for starting my group is that: even with all my ability(whatever that is), there's no way I'm ever really going to get it right. Yeah, and for all the $500/hr bills I've dropped on people, there was always a better than average chance that my understanding of their business was merely functional in many areas, and nowhere near the level it needed to be to speak at a real philosophical level.

 

I found this to be annoying, and a rip-off for clients. Make no mistake, I could still be running with that. I chose not to. Thus, first I created a philosphy that says: "we are going to be wrong about this business model, both now, and especially when things change, so let's not focus on building off the assumption we have it right, let's focus on minimizing the consequences of being wrong, and, moving rapidly, or not (depending on readiness), towards getting it right". Then, I built code around that and other premises.

 

EDIT: Emphasis for the turds: my entire ethos in this is predicated on the fact that I am probably wrong, at least someplace, if not completely F'ed, and, even worse, that I have led both my people and my client down the wrong path. Yes, mind boggling...for some of you.

 

But, in order to have that vision, I had to be standing at the peak, or, down in the lowest gutter, depending upon your interpretation. I didn't get there because I don't know businsess models. I got there because I learn quick, and listen well, and: because you think you're special, when you're not.

 

I've seen you 20 times already this year...5 times this past month. You may have some variance, but that's all it is: variance. Sorry, but if I had $50k for every time I've had to listen to guy tell me how much better his model is than the next guy's?

 

Oh...wait...we did get $50k every time I had to listen to that. That was the pre-analysis phase. Never mind.

 

EDIT: So I guess we can forget about you ever coming clean on how post-Prohibition Mafia exactly = post-Drug Legalization Cartels....

You are hilarious.

 

You insist that that cartels, who run not only many legitimate mega businesses, but also directly control north, central, and south American governments, have no mechanisms in place for legal marijuana grow opps?

 

You're the dumbest smart person I've ever spoken with.

 

Nice work with your "business analysis".