Which drugs do you think should be legal for personal use? Part II

[RI]

Ideally none of them, but realistically, I don't really care as long as they aren't used in public or in places where children could be susceptible to their effects. I'm not an expert on drugs, so for me to pick and choose from that list would be intellectually irresponsible.

[RI]

If we tax it, we'll pay off the debt.

lol. There's no way we could possibly get that much money from a marijuana tax. Besides, if we tax it at too high of a rate, it would only encourage the same type of black market behavior we see now.

[RI]

If we tax it, we'll pay off the debt.

lol. There's no way we could possibly get that much money from a marijuana tax.

You don't know America.

You obviously don't know math. Every person in the US would have to pay almost $50,000 in marijuana taxes to offset the US debt.

[RI]

If we tax it, we'll pay off the debt.

lol. There's no way we could possibly get that much money from a marijuana tax.

You don't know America.

You obviously don't know math. Every person in the US would have to pay almost $50,000 in marijuana taxes to offset the US debt.

Eh, what?  I don't recall saying this would pay off the debt entirely.  It would certainly help in paying it off.

Even so, at best a marijuana tax would bring in maybe a few billion dollars (and that's being generous) if impemented nationally, assuming people rush to buy the product with a heavy tax on it instead of just continuing to buy it illegally. Not exactly a panacea for our debt or deficit problems.

[RI]

Using your numbers:

$14.1 billion savings by not fighting marijuana (and other drugs, so this number is higher than the savings if only marijuana was legalized)
+$778.2 million in new tax revenue
=14.8782 billion total to government

2011 budget deficit: $1.3 trillion
2011 total debt: $14.7 trillion

New revenue+savings as percentage of deficit: 1.14%
New revenue+savings as percentage of total debt: 0.102%

Whether or not marijuana should be legalized on moral grounds, the argument that it will even represent a drop in the bucket as far as the deficit/debt is concerned is at best, shall we say, optimistic and, at worst, an outright lie. We would be better off fiscally if we confiscated all of Bill Gates's money than if we legalized and taxed marijuana.

That said, if for some reason marijuana is legalized nationally (not likely any time soon), it should be heavily fettered with sumptuary taxes, but the goal in that case would not be the money raised, but the disincentivization of usage.

[RI]

Using your numbers:

$14.1 billion savings by not fighting marijuana (and other drugs, so this number is higher than the savings if only marijuana was legalized)
+$778.2 million in new tax revenue
=14.8782 billion total to government

2011 budget deficit: $1.3 trillion
2011 total debt: $14.7 trillion

New revenue+savings as percentage of deficit: 1.14%
New revenue+savings as percentage of total debt: 0.102%

Whether or not marijuana should be legalized on moral grounds, the argument that it will even represent a drop in the bucket as far as the deficit/debt is concerned is at best, shall we say, optimistic and, at worst, an outright lie. We would be better off fiscally if we confiscated all of Bill Gates's money than if we legalized and taxed marijuana.

That said, if for some reason marijuana is legalized nationally (not likely any time soon), it should be heavily fettered with sumptuary taxes, but the goal in that case would not be the money raised, but the disincentivization of usage.

But the question is, then, would you rather continue to spend endlessly on drug prevention programs and locking people up, or would you rather legalize it and tax it as a small step toward debt reduction?  For the third time, now, I've said that this won't pay off the entire debt, but it would help.  And let's keep in mind, those numbers come from state-by-state marijuana consumption, as it is presently illegal.  If it is legalized, then, as I have also said, demand will go up, which would concurrently increase tax revenues.  There are millions of things the government could do to reduce the debt and deficit, but I don't think you quite understood my argument.

I understand your argument; I just disagree with your assumptions. Deriving taxes from marijuana is no more of a first step toward fiscal balance than defunding NPR or Planned Parenthood is. I don't think that such things should be pursued under that line of reasoning because unless further steps are implemented, as all such an argument is good for is patting yourself on the back, making yourself feel noble, and hiding that ideology is the sole reason behind the action; if there were no moral element to your vindiction, fighting for 1% of the deficit and calling it a good first step would be foolish and not something taken seriously.