More Money for Government? The Ultimate Buzz Kill
Posted on 04/30/2013 9:17:13 AM PDT by Kaslin
Here’s a new edition of my “you be the judge” series.
These are posts designed to explore some of the more challenging aspects of a pro-libertarian philosophy.
Today’s example comes from Colorado, which had displayed a libertarian streak on issues ranging from school choice to drug legalization.
But the latter issue is the source of today’s quandary. Should marijuana be legal if it means more tax revenue that will be used by the political elite to expand the burden of government spending?
Here are the details from the Denver CBS station.
A draft bill floating around the Capitol late this week suggests that a new ballot question on pot taxes should repeal recreational pot in the state constitution if voters don’t approve 15 percent excise taxes on retail pot and a new 15 percent marijuana sales tax. Those would be in addition to regular state and local sales taxes. …Marijuana activists immediately blasted the proposal as a backhanded effort to repeal the pot vote, in which 55 percent of Coloradans chose to flout federal drug law and declare pot legal in small amounts for adults over 21.
If my math is correct, the politicians want a 30 percent special tax on marijuana, which is on top of the regular taxes that would be imposed.
That would be fine with me – if the proposal specified that the additional tax revenue was offset by a tax cut of equal size.
But as I explained in my “starve-the-beast” post, higher taxes usually finance bigger government.
Indeed, some politicians openly admit that they want the new revenue to expand the budget.
Sen. Larry Crowder, R-Alamosa, said the whole purpose of legalizing recreational marijuana was to raise money for education and other programs. “So if there’s no money, we shouldn’t have marijuana,” Crowder said. …In Washington state, the only other place where voters last year approved recreational pot, the ballot measure set taxes at 75 percent, settling the question. Both states are still waiting to find out whether the federal government plans to sue to block retail sales of the drug, set to begin next year.
Though I didn’t realize that the state of Washington imposes a 75 percent tax on marijuana. How…um…French!
More Money for Government? The Ultimate Buzz Kill
So what’s the bottom line? If I lived in Colorado, would I vote to keep pot legal even if it meant more money from the buffoons in the state capital?
Since drug legalization is about 990 out of 1000 in my list of priorities, I’m tempted to say no.
On the other hand, it would be nice to reduce the onerous burden of the War on Drugs, which has been used an excuse to expand the size and scope of government.
What do you think?
P.S. If you want more examples of “you be the judge,” previous editions are listed below.
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
drugs shouldn’t be legalized even if it maens a smaller government.
Anyone who will starting taking drugs if they were legalized please pipe up here.
YES!
If we have any more Government interference in our lives....
I WILL NEED MORE DRUGS!!!!!!
While some government is inherently inimical to liberty, the biggest problem with big government is coercing taxpayers to finance it. So to legalize and tax a previously illegal substance doesn't grow government in an objectionable way, but rather "reduces the onerous burden of the War on Drugs, which has been used an excuse to expand the size and scope of government."
The welfare class approves this message ...
> Anyone who will starting taking drugs if they were legalized please pipe up here.
Not me but I bet the majority of libs are drug users to one degree or another. If legalized it will only up their dosage so expect to see poorer work performance, more theft and burglaries, more accidents, more violent outbursts and left shootings, etc...
The reality of libertarianism/liberalism, is that they lead to larger government.
The gains of libertarians and the left in the last 50 years, has proven that, now conservatism is almost non-existent, and soon to be erased entirely as the left/libertarians use social issues to take over the American vote by destroying our people, communities, culture and nation and moral structure.
Here is the leftists agenda hidden behind the Libertarian Party curtain.
Libertarian Party Platform:
Throw open the borders completely; only a rare individual (terrorist, disease carrier etc.) can be kept from freedom of movement through “political boundaries”.
Homosexuals; total freedom in the military, gay marriage, adoption, child custody and everything else.
Abortion; zero restrictions or impediments.
Pornography; no restraint, no restrictions.
Drugs; Meth, Heroin, Crack, and anything new that science can come up with, zero restrictions.
Advertising those drugs, prostitution, and pornography; zero restrictions.
Military Strength; minimal capabilities.
“drugs”
There all sorts of drugs now that are legal.
My neighbor does not smoke pot, she has said if it is legalized she would try it out.
Ok, that’s only one person but I suspect many more feel like she does.
Are you saying that only welfare recipients use illegal drugs?
If so, you would be wrong.
Make drug testing mandatory to apply for welfare. Ends that problem right there...
Still too many folks on welfare? End welfare. It isn’t in the Constitution...
Problem solved.
My mom told me (1958):
first drugs were ignored
then became unacceptable
then became illegal
then ignored
the problem will arise when they become mandatory
If they tax it that much a black market will develop to avoid the tax.
My personal opinion is that pot should be legal but not harder-core drugs. Pot should be taxed at a reasonable rate that does not create a black market and the taxes should go to fund rehabs and treatment centers. Would that happen? I doubt it, but that is what I would want.
No, I’m not saying that ... but many people on welfare are on welfare because their chief problem is substance abuse.
but can you imagine the howl from the Democrats?
So we legalize pot, the guv gets more money and needs to spend less money for enforcement. Does anyone here think that the guv will reduce the amount of enforcement officers?
stupid question, we have too many dopes taking drugs today and the last thing we need is for more dopes to be walking about and not taking life seriously because in their warped mind it’s all about me and me getting high.
Yep. Kinda makes you giggle a bit inside just thinking about it...
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.