Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Strictly Business: Legal pot industry sure to be robust
The Columbian ^ | July 13, 2014 | Gordon Oliver, business editor

Posted on 07/14/2014 1:57:15 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

It's rare when any business in Clark County attracts national or even regional interest, so the media throng that greeted last Wednesday's opening of Main Street Marijuana was quite a curiosity.

The clever "weed and weenies" event that accompanied the store's opening, along with the presence of Mayor Tim Leavitt at the ribbon-cutting, captured the attention of media outlets that devour eye-catching visuals. But business likely would still have been brisk at Main Street Marijuana even if it hadn't snagged the free publicity. With a state-imposed limit of just 15 retail outlets for all of Clark County, and with some of those blocked by local government moratoriums, the store is well-positioned to serve the new market of legal marijuana users.

Some customers will be coming over from Oregon, where marijuana sales for non-medical uses remains illegal. Never mind that Oregon residents are breaking the law if they bring the weed back home. We've learned to tolerate these small illegalities in bistate commerce. Washington residents routinely shop in Oregon without paying this state's sales tax, and plenty of Oregon residents trek this way to purchase fireworks that they will shoot off illegally at home.

Oregonians will vote this November on whether to legalize recreational marijuana. Even if the measure passes, it will take years to implement. That opens a window of opportunity for those shrewd enough to run a successful business and lucky enough to have won a retail license in the state lottery.

There's more to this new industry than retail stores and marijuana suppliers. Some entrepreneurs are looking for opportunities to tap into demand for related products.

Mike Bomar, president of the Columbia River Economic Development Council, said his organization has heard from at least a half-dozen people who want to become suppliers of edible marijuana products, specialty soils and paper products. He knows of one manufacturer of glass products used in the marijuana trade who is considering expansion. One local company is developing software for the industry.

But the drug remains illegal under federal law, and the CREDC receives federal funding for some of its work. It's limited in what help it can offer and it's cautious about providing much assistance to the industry, Bomar says. The industry could generate a noteworthy number of jobs once the federal-state legal conflicts are untangled, but CREDC isn't looking at the marijuana trade as a target for a local industry cluster.

Former state legislator Joe Tanner, who is working with others to establish marijuana outlets in La Center and Ridgefield, sees overreach by supporters and opponents about the impact of marijuana legalization. He's heard overwrought fears of truckers and bright lights outside retail stores and grandiose claims about new job creation. The in-between reality, Tanner believes, is that the marijuana industry will be largely discreet and unnoticed, with retail outlets a quiet presence similar the liquor stores of old. As the debate over legalization subsides, he figures, marijuana could easily be legal in every state in a decade.

For now, Washington's newest industry has not yet sorted out winners and losers. While the marketplace performs its harsh magic, our curiosity is certain to stick with us.


TOPICS: Agriculture; Business/Economy; Government; Local News
KEYWORDS: cannabis; legalization; marijuana; oregon; pot; washington; wod

1 posted on 07/14/2014 1:57:16 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Sure to grow like a weed.


2 posted on 07/14/2014 2:05:46 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

If you thought the Zetas were bad...


3 posted on 07/14/2014 2:09:10 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
marijuana could easily be legal in every state in a decade.

De facto legal in parts of Virginia. They will still bust a bigger dealer or maybe a user if they are pissed off at him. But generally there is no enforcement and more importantly a lot of social acceptance. There are some outdoor restaurants with firepits going all summer to cover the smell that can't be easily covered and patrons shuffling around stiff-legged stoned out of their minds.

I am still libertarian-minded about drugs, but i'm afraid along with the general moral decay of America we have a mental decay helped along by drugs both legal and "illegal".

4 posted on 07/14/2014 2:45:45 AM PDT by palmer (This comment is not approved or cleared by FDA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
CA has had defacto legal pot since it voted for medical marijuana in 1996.

Violent crime in CA has plunged by over half since then => http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/cacrime.htm

5 posted on 07/14/2014 3:13:16 AM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Where is the Smoking-will-kill-you crowd? All we heard was “Ban Smoking” for the past 20 years, then they taxed it to oblivion...now not a peep. Smoke is smoke...same carcinogens, what the hell is going on? This is a form of hypocracy beyond belief.


6 posted on 07/14/2014 3:28:34 AM PDT by ThePatriotsFlag ("There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." - Thomas Jeffersonill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThePatriotsFlag

One joint has the tar of a whole pack of filtered cigarettes.


7 posted on 07/14/2014 3:54:59 AM PDT by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ThePatriotsFlag

Should marijuana remain illegal because smoking is bad for you?


8 posted on 07/14/2014 3:58:26 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

I am not pro-legalization, because I think wide-spread pot use is bad for people and society.

At the same time I do recognize the horrors of the War on Drugs, the militarization of police and the shredding of the constitution.

But I’m not posting this link for any other reason than it seems to be one of the more fairly recent links on the subject of pot smoke and cancer:

http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-help/about-cancer/cancer-questions/does-smoking-cannabis-cause-cancer


9 posted on 07/14/2014 4:07:22 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

maybe it should be as controlled and socially unacceptable as nicotine


10 posted on 07/14/2014 4:07:28 AM PDT by silverleaf (Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

That works for me.

BTW, the “one joint =” thing is a myth.

This hoary old favorite comes back again and again, seemingly impervious to the onslaught of the real world.

Prohibitionists earnestly tell us that smoking just one joint “equals a pack of cigarettes.” Or maybe it’s 16, or maybe just four cigarettes; they seem a little unclear on the exact number.

This fallacious conclusion is derived from a study by Dr. Donald Tashkin in which the UCLA researcher examined airflow resistance in the lungs of tobacco smokers compared to that in the lungs of marijuana smokers. Dr. Tashkin did find that daily pot smokers experience a “mild but significant” increase in airflow resistance in the large airways, greater than that seen in persons smoking 16 cigarettes per day.

But what they don’t tell you is that, ironically, Dr. Tashkin also found – in the largest study ever of its kind – other, more important markers of lung health, in which marijuana smokers did much better than tobacco smokers. In the four years since Dr. Tashkin’s latest study results were announced, I’ve never heard a single anti-marijuana speaker mention this.

They also never seem to have time to mention that Dr. Tashkin’s study unexpectedly found that smoking marijuana – even regularly and heavily! – does not lead to lung cancer.

Dr. Tashkin said these results “were against our expectations.”

“We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use,” Dr. Tashkin said. “What we found instead was no assication at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect.”

- See more at: http://newsjunkiepost.com/2010/02/27/five-things-you-may-%E2%80%98know%E2%80%99-about-marijuana%E2%80%A6-that-aren%E2%80%99t-true/#sthash.wU1wHNV7.dpuf


11 posted on 07/14/2014 4:23:42 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

you wont ever find me supporitng MJ legalization

my darling only boy went through that gateway MJ advocates refuse to admit exists, and his being disappeared into a drug culture that ultimately took his precious life

in 7 years of attempted drug rehab mostly with teenagers we never met a precious child who did not start with MJ. The marketing of this so-called harmless social recreational addiction is aimed at kids.


12 posted on 07/14/2014 4:31:20 AM PDT by silverleaf (Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: palmer

“De facto legal in parts of Virginia.”

Interesting how that correlates with VA becoming less and less conservative.


13 posted on 07/14/2014 4:46:41 AM PDT by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

“CA has had defacto legal pot since it voted for medical marijuana in 1996.”

For longer than that, really.

Remember the late 70’s Steve Martin joke where he said, I wouldn’t smoke marijuana in CA, you could get a ticket!

And we see what has become of CA.

It quickly went from a conservative state to what it is now.


14 posted on 07/14/2014 4:52:39 AM PDT by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

I’m guessing they all started with beer, but I won’t argue. People get into trouble with all sort of substances. That’s no reason to put me in a cage.


15 posted on 07/14/2014 5:30:45 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
we never met a precious child who did not start with MJ.

Did you ever meet one who did not start with alcohol or tobacco?

The marketing of this so-called harmless social recreational addiction is aimed at kids.

What "marketing"?

16 posted on 07/14/2014 6:25:44 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
I am not pro-legalization, because I think wide-spread pot use is bad for people and society.

Is wide-spread alcohol use bad for people and society?

17 posted on 07/14/2014 6:27:22 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
Should marijuana remain illegal because smoking is bad for you?
Well that's what they told us for years ... you tell me!
18 posted on 07/14/2014 10:13:06 AM PDT by ThePatriotsFlag ("There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." - Thomas Jeffersonill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
California has had no such thing as de facto legal marijuana since 1996. There has been some legal medical marijuana since sometime after that, depending on the locality, but it's isolated and subject to back and forths. There's still plenty of arrests, plus the vast majority of it is not from legal sources.

The drop in violent crime started before 1996, is nationwide in scope, and is attributed to other sources. You are claiming that the nationwide drop in violent crime since the early 90s in the entire United States has been caused by California allowing a tiny amount of legalized marijuana since the late 1990s? I'd love you to flesh out your evidence.

Once the government sees how much revenue it will get from marijuana, it will have every reason to increase usage. Cigarette smoking was declining in California, until the government started making a lot of tax money from it, then it rebounded. California makes more money off tobacco than any tobacco company in the world.

19 posted on 07/14/2014 12:20:23 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

Why should I be forced to pay for it?


20 posted on 07/14/2014 12:21:31 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
You are claiming that the nationwide drop in violent crime since the early 90s in the entire United States has been caused by California allowing a tiny amount of legalized marijuana since the late 1990s?

I am claiming no such thing. The point is that marijuana laws have dramatically loosened in the last 20 years in the US and crime has plunged. It shoots in the butt the theory that loosening pot laws will lead to more crime.

BTW, CA collects $100M in taxes from $1B in medical mj sales. It's a booming business. So yes, there is defacto legal pot in CA.

21 posted on 07/14/2014 1:05:26 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

You con’t pay a dime for me, so leave me alone.


22 posted on 07/14/2014 1:13:16 PM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

The question is why you won’t ;leave me alone. Stop imposing your big government and stealing my money with dependency programs.


23 posted on 07/14/2014 2:01:10 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
The point is that marijuana laws have dramatically loosened in the last 20 years in the US and crime has plunged.

The point is marijuana law have dramatically loosened in the last 20 years in the U.S. and the size of government has grown exponentially. But that was your point all along.

24 posted on 07/14/2014 2:03:43 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
The point is marijuana law have dramatically loosened in the last 20 years in the U.S. and the size of government has grown exponentially. But that was your point all along.

No it wasn't and it's dishonest to say so. You originally said "If you thought the Zetas were bad..." I countered with a few facts about crime and marijuana laws.

No one said or implied a thing about the size of government until you introduced it. Now if you want to go that route, let's talk about the fraudulent New Deal Commerce Clause, which allowed fedgov to expand into every corner of our lives, including the EPA, fedgov control of health care and the War on Drugs.

So do you support the New Deal Commerce Clause, or do you support the Tenth Amendment?

25 posted on 07/14/2014 2:34:38 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
I countered with a few facts about crime and marijuana laws.

No, you responded with a couple of totally misleading claims that no one would support you on. Worse than global warming.

26 posted on 07/14/2014 2:43:24 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Why are you supporting a Government so big it can lock you up for smoking a plant?


27 posted on 07/14/2014 3:10:01 PM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
The only misleading claims were your characterizations of my arguments.

You did not address the question about the fraudulent New Deal Commerce Clause that your Drug War depends on, nor how it tramples the Tenth Amendment. Don't be timid now, let's hear your thoughts.

28 posted on 07/14/2014 3:49:14 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
The only misleading claims were your characterizations of my arguments.

You did not address the question about the fraudulent New Deal Commerce Clause that your Drug War depends on, nor how it tramples the Tenth Amendment. Don't be timid now, let's hear your thoughts.

29 posted on 07/14/2014 3:49:14 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

-just damn-


30 posted on 07/14/2014 3:50:09 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

Alcohol integrates well with Western Civilization. Pot not.


31 posted on 07/14/2014 4:36:26 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
I am not pro-legalization, because I think wide-spread pot use is bad for people and society.

Is wide-spread alcohol use bad for people and society?

Alcohol integrates well with Western Civilization. Pot not.

Evidence?

32 posted on 07/14/2014 4:38:23 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

You asked me what I think. That’s what I think. The evidence that it is what I think is that I typed it out.

I’m not arguing, just saying what I think.


33 posted on 07/14/2014 4:47:30 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
You asked me what I think.

No, nobody asked you that.

34 posted on 07/14/2014 5:17:09 PM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

Well, anyway, that’s what I think.


35 posted on 07/14/2014 6:51:37 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson