Skip to comments.‘Green rush’ cropping up Pot industry expected to boom in Bay State
Posted on 11/28/2012 6:12:22 AM PST by BlatherNaut
Expect a pot boom like the gold rushes of old as not just dispensers, but pastry chefs, lawyers and even vending machine salesmen all lunge for their piece of the multimillion-dollar medical marijuana business that is about to explode on the scene in Massachusetts, experts said.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonherald.com ...
What is the difference between a drunk and a stoner at a stop sign? The drunk guy runs it and the stoner waits for it to turn green!
And remember kids, don't eat marijauna, or you'll get a 'pot belly.'
Laugh or cry.
Now watch. As more people turn into stoners they will become even less productive and demand even more handouts for their sloth.
We are so doomed.
how many stimulas grants will be given to prop up green pot growing industry?
You have just nailed my #1 reason to oppose pot legalization.
It causes people to drop-out of being productive members of the economy.
I was a member of the Cheech and Chong generation (though truly, I didn’t inhale, thanks to massive amounts of fear instilled in me by my parents. But I was in a small minority).
Most of those guys today in middle age, if they are employed at all, are hanging on at the edges as dishwashers, cab drivers and the like. They spent their most productive years in their 20’s sitting around and getting high rather than pursuing education and establishing careers.
Does not matter what I think though. Full legalization is bound to happen, because the Under 30 crowd appears to be all for it.
Actually, our population has decreased, causing us to lose one of the idiots we send to the House of Representatives.
I smoked pot as a teen in the late 60’s- early 70’s. Being dumb and stupid is sooo yesterday. Can’t imagine smoking dope these days. The Spirit would highly convict me anyway. Have Zero desire anyway. No smoke in the lungs for me no mo
Most of those guys today in middle age, if they are employed at all, are hanging on at the edges as dishwashers, cab drivers and the like. They spent their most productive years in their 20s sitting around and getting high rather than pursuing education and establishing careers.
I love how everyone takes personal, anecdotal evidence, then mixes in a dab or two of pre-conceived notions, puts it in the oven for 30 seconds, and bakes a grand, sweeping, iron-clad conclusion cake.
Hey, what do you expect me to believe? My own eyes watching this stuff progress with people I actually know over 3 or 4 decades, or some academic theories being cut/pasted onto a web forum?
To make such a generalization from your experiences, I can only infer that you must've hung around with or known some real losers over the past three or four decades. Because what I've seen with my eyes over three decades, closing in on four, is not the same as yours.
So who's right and who's wrong?
We're not far from seeing the story come true, IMHO
Since booze is legal, pot legalization can’t be far off.
FWIW I agree with Buckeye McFrog. I have seen many careers in the military (70's-80's) and civilian world "self terminated" by pot use.
So, by that logic, we could conclude that any activity, behavior, characteristic, noun, adjective, or verb with the potential to diminish, in a practical sense, a person's ability to engage in a career of some sort, should be made criminal, no?
is pot legal in MA now??
I knew people who could pull straight 'A's in college stoned in difficult subjects. Me, if I smoked, I couldn't figure out which end of the book to open. As a result, I haven't smoke that stuff in ages.
As adults, I knew people who smoked every evening and got up and did productive and professional jobs in the days. And I knew stoners who were burn-outs.
Likewise, some people can drink moderately their entire lives. Whereas in my family, alcohol is the usual shipwreck on both sides of the family.
It's really up to the individual to figure out their own life, and for society to set limits as to when someone is out of control and causing harm. But top-down bans usually end up causing their own host of problems, witness Prohibition. There are no good answers, only bad and worse. But prohibitions also create very bad problems with black markets, while doing little to dimish availability of the prohibited substances, only raising the prices to the benefit of organized crime.
That must be why this debate keeps going on. We’re all different and we know or knew different people.
...so it comes down to whichever group has more votes where you live. At least freepers agree that the fed govt should not be involved.
Who got to define the vices?