Colorado had estimated 70Million in taxes... but only pulled $44M.

Now the question is, will they be smart enough not to overspend on the assumption that the money that they were going to use this for.

Ironically, the article says that the "black market" stuff is still selling, so that peeps don't have to pay those taxes.

It'll be interesting to see if the tax money is allowed to be kept in state? (I didn't know that they had to do this)

Quote:Still, Colorado will likely have to return to voters to ask to keep the pot tax money. That's because of a 1992 amendment to the state constitution that restricts government spending. The amendment requires new voter-approved taxes, such as the pot taxes, to be refunded if overall state tax collections rise faster than permitted

Weird.. but not sure how this is supposed to work?

(02-11-2015 05:47 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Colorado had estimated 70Million in taxes... but only pulled $44M.

Now the question is, will they be smart enough not to overspend on the assumption that the money that they were going to use this for.

Ironically, the article says that the "black market" stuff is still selling, so that peeps don't have to pay those taxes.

It'll be interesting to see if the tax money is allowed to be kept in state? (I didn't know that they had to do this)

Quote:Still, Colorado will likely have to return to voters to ask to keep the pot tax money. That's because of a 1992 amendment to the state constitution that restricts government spending. The amendment requires new voter-approved taxes, such as the pot taxes, to be refunded if overall state tax collections rise faster than permitted

Weird.. but not sure how this is supposed to work?

More incentive to have a consumption tax. It would drag in taxes on the black market sales.

Black market anything still sells.

(02-11-2015 10:00 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 05:47 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Colorado had estimated 70Million in taxes... but only pulled $44M.

Now the question is, will they be smart enough not to overspend on the assumption that the money that they were going to use this for.

Ironically, the article says that the "black market" stuff is still selling, so that peeps don't have to pay those taxes.

It'll be interesting to see if the tax money is allowed to be kept in state? (I didn't know that they had to do this)

Quote:Still, Colorado will likely have to return to voters to ask to keep the pot tax money. That's because of a 1992 amendment to the state constitution that restricts government spending. The amendment requires new voter-approved taxes, such as the pot taxes, to be refunded if overall state tax collections rise faster than permitted

Weird.. but not sure how this is supposed to work?

More incentive to have a consumption tax. It would drag in taxes on the black market sales.

How so?

(02-11-2015 05:47 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Colorado had estimated 70Million in taxes... but only pulled $44M.

Now the question is, will they be smart enough not to overspend on the assumption that the money that they were going to use this for.

Ironically, the article says that the "black market" stuff is still selling, so that peeps don't have to pay those taxes.

It'll be interesting to see if the tax money is allowed to be kept in state? (I didn't know that they had to do this)

Quote:Still, Colorado will likely have to return to voters to ask to keep the pot tax money. That's because of a 1992 amendment to the state constitution that restricts government spending. The amendment requires new voter-approved taxes, such as the pot taxes, to be refunded if overall state tax collections rise faster than permitted

Weird.. but not sure how this is supposed to work?

I guess Colorado isn't experiencing Refer Madness like Oklalittledixie thought they would.

Dogs marrying cats, football becoming soccer, MASS PANDEMONIUM I TELLS YA

Well this proves me wrong when my premise all along been that this would destroy the black market.

(02-12-2015 10:10 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Well this proves me wrong when my premise all along been that this would destroy the black market.

Of course it doesn't destroy the black market. There is a black market for everything.

It won't destroy the black market if the black market is cheaper. It will certainly shrink the black market, however. Most people, I hypothesize, would pay a little more not to commit a crime. At a certain point that gets tossed out the window ($12 per pack cigarettes e.g.). I have no clue what the marijuana industry, legal or street, is at, but I'd rather pay $60 legally than $50 illegally. If I am a complete burnout with a bad habit, it might be a different story. If I am a minor and can't buy it legally, it is a different story.

I would consider myself a staunch fiscal conservative, but a relatively lax social conservative. I think the GOP's stance on things like gay marriage, abortion, and marijuana aren't NEARLY as important as fiscal issues.

I don't have a problem with legal recreational marijuana. Any opportunity to steal business from the cartels & create jobs is OK in my book. Especially since marijuana is harmless.

(02-12-2015 11:43 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  It won't destroy the black market if the black market is cheaper. It will certainly shrink the black market, however. Most people, I hypothesize, would pay a little more not to commit a crime. At a certain point that gets tossed out the window ($12 per pack cigarettes e.g.). I have no clue what the marijuana industry, legal or street, is at, but I'd rather pay $60 legally than $50 illegally. If I am a complete burnout with a bad habit, it might be a different story. If I am a minor and can't buy it legally, it is a different story.

One of the points we discussed.. since it was no longer "anti-govt." to buy/smoke pot, did it actually reduce the usage of the drug or not?

I'd be interested to see how that comparison ended up now.

What was Colorado's state fiscal situation like before this new income? Did they have a bunch of debt?

(02-12-2015 12:21 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(02-12-2015 11:43 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  It won't destroy the black market if the black market is cheaper. It will certainly shrink the black market, however. Most people, I hypothesize, would pay a little more not to commit a crime. At a certain point that gets tossed out the window ($12 per pack cigarettes e.g.). I have no clue what the marijuana industry, legal or street, is at, but I'd rather pay $60 legally than $50 illegally. If I am a complete burnout with a bad habit, it might be a different story. If I am a minor and can't buy it legally, it is a different story.

One of the points we discussed.. since it was no longer "anti-govt." to buy/smoke pot, did it actually reduce the usage of the drug or not?

I'd be interested to see how that comparison ended up now.

I think it is likely a wash. There are those like myself... I don't smoke pot. If it was legal, I probably would occasionally. I am married with a 6-year old child. At this point in my life, I just don't have the time or energy to seek and find a black market to tap into. In other words, if I wanted to smoke pot, I'd have no idea where to get it anymore and I wouldn't be willing to put myself and my reputation out there very far to find it. There are also those that wouldn't be as interested if it was legal. I just hope that doesn't mean they'll get interested in something worse like meth or heroin.

The reason the tax revenues arent as high as expected is because it is primarily a cash business.

If the legislature were smart, they would have forced payments to be in the form of money order, check or credit card. That would have been safer and would ensure that they received their full tax revenue. It would have also caused a boom in money order sales, spreading revenue to other avenues.

(02-11-2015 10:00 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 05:47 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Colorado had estimated 70Million in taxes... but only pulled $44M.

Now the question is, will they be smart enough not to overspend on the assumption that the money that they were going to use this for.

Ironically, the article says that the "black market" stuff is still selling, so that peeps don't have to pay those taxes.

It'll be interesting to see if the tax money is allowed to be kept in state? (I didn't know that they had to do this)

Quote:Still, Colorado will likely have to return to voters to ask to keep the pot tax money. That's because of a 1992 amendment to the state constitution that restricts government spending. The amendment requires new voter-approved taxes, such as the pot taxes, to be refunded if overall state tax collections rise faster than permitted

Weird.. but not sure how this is supposed to work?

More incentive to have a consumption tax. It would drag in taxes on the black market sales.

there are a handful that get it....you are one.....

(02-12-2015 12:32 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-12-2015 12:21 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(02-12-2015 11:43 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  It won't destroy the black market if the black market is cheaper. It will certainly shrink the black market, however. Most people, I hypothesize, would pay a little more not to commit a crime. At a certain point that gets tossed out the window ($12 per pack cigarettes e.g.). I have no clue what the marijuana industry, legal or street, is at, but I'd rather pay $60 legally than $50 illegally. If I am a complete burnout with a bad habit, it might be a different story. If I am a minor and can't buy it legally, it is a different story.

One of the points we discussed.. since it was no longer "anti-govt." to buy/smoke pot, did it actually reduce the usage of the drug or not?

I'd be interested to see how that comparison ended up now.

I think it is likely a wash. There are those like myself... I don't smoke pot. If it was legal, I probably would occasionally. I am married with a 6-year old child. At this point in my life, I just don't have the time or energy to seek and find a black market to tap into. In other words, if I wanted to smoke pot, I'd have no idea where to get it anymore and I wouldn't be willing to put myself and my reputation out there very far to find it. There are also those that wouldn't be as interested if it was legal. I just hope that doesn't mean they'll get interested in something worse like meth or heroin.

so many things I could say regarding this....

after reading all the bs on this board over the last handful of years.....every 15 yr old on the planet should be subjected like the is-really-reality army (da jew army)

and people can still alcohol and nicotine......

the ignorance is no longer acceptable IMO.....

(02-11-2015 05:47 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Colorado had estimated 70Million in taxes... but only pulled $44M.

Now the question is, will they be smart enough not to overspend on the assumption that the money that they were going to use this for.

Ironically, the article says that the "black market" stuff is still selling, so that peeps don't have to pay those taxes.

It'll be interesting to see if the tax money is allowed to be kept in state? (I didn't know that they had to do this)

Quote:Still, Colorado will likely have to return to voters to ask to keep the pot tax money. That's because of a 1992 amendment to the state constitution that restricts government spending. The amendment requires new voter-approved taxes, such as the pot taxes, to be refunded if overall state tax collections rise faster than permitted

Weird.. but not sure how this is supposed to work?

How did they come up with an estimate of $70 million? Regardless, the metrics that I think will be really interesting are how legalization effects crime and other drug use. It will be about a decade before we get meaningful numbers on that though.

(02-12-2015 09:32 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 10:00 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 05:47 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Colorado had estimated 70Million in taxes... but only pulled $44M.

Now the question is, will they be smart enough not to overspend on the assumption that the money that they were going to use this for.

Ironically, the article says that the "black market" stuff is still selling, so that peeps don't have to pay those taxes.

It'll be interesting to see if the tax money is allowed to be kept in state? (I didn't know that they had to do this)

Quote:Still, Colorado will likely have to return to voters to ask to keep the pot tax money. That's because of a 1992 amendment to the state constitution that restricts government spending. The amendment requires new voter-approved taxes, such as the pot taxes, to be refunded if overall state tax collections rise faster than permitted

Weird.. but not sure how this is supposed to work?

More incentive to have a consumption tax. It would drag in taxes on the black market sales.

How so?

The taxes on grey and black market profits are scooped up when they are use to purchase anything. Same goes for any evaded taxation. Unless one chooses to live off the grid, somehow figure out how to not have to purchase any good or remove the profits from the US mainland...you pay when you consume.

(02-12-2015 08:51 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  The reason the tax revenues arent as high as expected is because it is primarily a cash business.

If the legislature were smart, they would have forced payments to be in the form of money order, check or credit card. That would have been safer and would ensure that they received their full tax revenue. It would have also caused a boom in money order sales, spreading revenue to other avenues.

But then it becomes record and say Your bank holds credit card or checking account and You wanted to get a home loan and they see You buy a lot of pot. now You might not get approved thinking You might be come a slacker or a health risk since pot is still illegal in most states. Most credit card companies are located in other states from those where pot is legal.

(02-12-2015 10:10 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Well this proves me wrong when my premise all along been that this would destroy the black market.

You are still correct. Having Colorado out on an island surrounded by states that do not allow legal sales has given the black market an incentive to pierce the Colorado marketplace. If national legalization occurs. That incentive is removed and natural market forces come back into play. This is not like what happened when prohibition ended nation wide. Would their still be some "bootleggers"...yes. They would though be few and far between. Most people would choose the safety of the legitimate marketplace(like they have already in Colorado) over the black market and its inherent dangers.