A pot monopoly? What’s Kathleen Wynne smoking?

managee said:

I understand that this makes it more difficult.

Trace levels last long in your system, but determining if the amount caused/causes impairment is more art than science at this point. Going from intoxicated to not in under 3 hours requires the sensors to be very sensitive, which they are not. If someone can prove in court their test is/was inaccurate, I believe the equipment is as a good as junk.

Tech in the US is getting awfully close to being verifiable, but I hear it's not there yet.



This kind of testing has been in-demand by law enforcement for at-least 25 years, but MADD drives policy when it comes to driving under the influence.

Where's the testing gear to keep me safe from all those pillhead soccer moms getting behind she wheel of their SUV's?

Click to expand...

jcpro said:

It's funny how before the legalization the cannabis impairment was not an issue.

Click to expand...

Frankfooter said:

Interesting isn't it?
The LCBO makes Ontario money and provides fairly good prices and reasonably paying jobs.
The commercial Beer store makes Ontario nothing and tries to hide all the microbrews.

Gov't run and controlled pot stores could make Ontario more money and keep it relatively safe.

Click to expand...

For nearly 15 years, I and other free-market lunatics have been trying to impress upon Ontarians just how insane our liquor retail system is. Yet we still hear the same ludicrous arguments in its favour. “The LCBO makes tons of money for the province.”

(Alberta makes tons of money from liquor sales too, without owning a single store.)

“Public employees can be trusted to keep booze out of children’s hands.” (The Beer Store isn’t public. Nor are the scores of privately run “agency stores” in rural areas across Ontario.) “The LCBO provides good jobs.” (Not to real product-experts it doesn’t — they would be far better off in a free-market jurisdiction. And if the government’s role is to make good retail jobs, why not nationalize groceries?) “LCBO stores are pleasant. Liquor stores in the U.S. are gross.” (Nope! You’re just going to the wrong liquor stores.)

This hopeless mess is the foundation for Ontario’s new marijuana plan — and we’re hearing the same arguments in its favour. Last week, two columnists in the Toronto Star and one in the Globe and Mail spoke approvingly of the fact it would create “good unionized jobs.” The two Star columnists also mentioned the money that would accrue to the treasury.

“I’m fine with the profits going to the public purse instead of private businesspeople,” wrote one.

“Why wouldn’t the government seek to maximize revenues in the same way that it profits from alcohol and tobacco sales?” asked the other.


Even after all these years, it makes me want to tear my hair out: for the love of heaven, the “high-paying jobs” motive and the “profit” motive are at odds with each other. You cannot claim both as priorities.
One way or the other, the government will take its cut on marijuana sales. The overhead costs of running its own stores, paying its own employees government wages, will simply eat into that cut.

If you can live with Ontario’s liquor situation, but you think your favourite budtender should be able to get a government licence to keep her “dispensary” up and running after legalization kicks in, my sympathy is non-existent. You either support consumer choice or you don’t. Ontario doesn’t, and that will never change until tipplers and tokers take up arms together.

Click to expand...

Aardvark154 said:

if one of the objects of legalization is to eliminate the black market, this is not the way to do it!

Click to expand...

MattRoxx said:

Arguments against your post, from the very conservative National Post:
http://nationalpost.com/opinion/chr...uana-retail-system-they-deserve#comments-area

Click to expand...

(Alberta makes tons of money from liquor sales too, without owning a single store.)

Click to expand...

Frankfooter said:

Copying comments from the comment section of the Post?
Some of those are so wrong its funny.

As in:

Alberta takes in the taxes from liquor sales, Ontario takes in taxes as well as, what is it, $1 billion, from profit from sales.

Which do you think is better?

Click to expand...

“This opportunity is especially important to the smallest producers, who would appreciate being able to garner attention in the local community and expose their products to new customers.”

Click to expand...

Don’t repeat mistakes of alcohol sales with marijuana: Editorial
The Ontario government seems determined to repeat the mistakes of the past by giving a new state-run monopoly total control over the sales of recreational marijuana.


Ontario’s Liberal government deserves a lot of credit for finally loosening up the province’s antiquated and paternalistic system for selling wine and beer. It’s made it easier for consumers to purchase alcohol safely and responsibly, while also being treated more like actual adults.

Now, though, the government seems determined to repeat the mistakes of the past by giving a new state-run monopoly total control over the sales of recreational marijuana when it becomes legal next July.

The government’s “safe and sensible approach” to regulating and selling cannabis, rolled out on Friday, involves setting up a subsidiary of the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO) that will have the exclusive right to sell marijuana, online and through a new chain of standalone stores.

Forty storefronts are scheduled to open by next summer, with about 150 planned by 2020. The illegal “dispensaries” that have popped up all over Toronto and elsewhere will be driven out of business.
...
It’s right to plan a crack-down on impaired driving. And restricting consumption to private homes makes sense. Few people want to be subjected to others smoking pot on sidewalks and other public spaces.

Still, none of these laudable goals require turning over all retailing to a government monopoly. It’s wrong to set up the choice as one between the safe, secure LCBO and unscrupulous private pot shops ready to sell cheap weed to underage kids.

There ought to be room for responsible private retailers to share this new and lucrative market with government outlets. Adult consumers have a right to choice, and killing the illegal market will be a lot trickier if buying cannabis is made too difficult or awkward.

Ontario went through all this with booze, which by all the evidence is more dangerous than cannabis to both users and the general public. For decades the LCBO (and the Beer Store) made buying alcohol feel like a furtive, shameful experience. It’s taken years to make LCBO outlets open and friendly and to bring in a welcome measure of private competition.

The sky didn’t fall when that happened, and there’s no reason to believe that well-regulated, properly run private outlets would compromise the safety or health of Ontarians. U.S. states that have legalized pot have gone that route, without negative effects. Those who break the law by, for example, selling to minors risk losing their licence, and therefore their livelihood.

It’s understandable that Ontario might opt for a straight-up public monopoly at the beginning. The provinces and territories are under the gun to meet the deadline for legalization set by the federal government. It’s a big job to draft the rules and set up a distribution system by next July.

So it may not be possible to figure out all the details of a parallel private system as well within the time allowed. If that’s the case, the government should at least make clear now that there will be private options not too far down the road.

And to be clear, that would not mean turning over windfall profits to private operators. The government can set licensing fees, prices and taxes to make sure it collects whatever level of revenue it wants from all outlets, public or private.

The real point is to ensure choice and accessibility, so adult Ontarians who choose to exercise their new legal right to consume cannabis aren’t treated like guilty children and the black market is not allowed to thrive.

The government says it wants to take a similar approach to regulating cannabis as it does to alcohol. If that’s the case, it should follow its own example and not give a government agency exclusive control over sales of marijuana.

Click to expand...

MattRoxx said:

You are so wrong it's not funny.
Alberta's model is much better for treating people as adults and providing consumers with choice and without gouging.

Click to expand...

Frankfooter said:

Have you bought liquor in Alberta before?
Prices are no better, stores are smaller with less choice dependant on the tastes of the owners.
The only thing better is that you don't have to walk as far to find one and they stay open later.

And I'd rather the Ontario gov't get that $1 billion in profit from the LCBO then have a store that 'treats me like an adult', whatever that's supposed to mean.

Click to expand...

MattRoxx said:

...
Alberta's model is much better for treating people as adults and providing consumers with choice and without gouging. ...

Click to expand...

lomotil said:

Experienced pot smokers may still go to their "guy" a maybe just for a while still. The black market will primarily likely be for the minors. A new crop of pot neophytes who do not have experience with illegal drug dealers will be happy to go to the government drug dealer. The price point will not be significant for most, the illegal dealers will become fewer and fewer with increasingly less and less profit incentive and high risk. However the native reserves should give the government a run for their money.

Click to expand...