America - The Official Thread

[Keef]

There's probably truth in his quote, but it still comes back to manufacturing cost. All the facilities left to go to the cheaper manufacturing market and so went the skills. The cost of labour must be rising dramatically in the far East if they're prepared to invest in facilities as well as training.

I would be surprised if it's as easy to take manufacturing equipment out of China's old factories as it is to get it in there.

Machines that would be used to build electronics wouldn't be particularly difficult to handle. Time consuming to disassemble and package but their made of many smaller sections. It's metal-working machines that cause trouble, things like gigantic 1000-ton presses and whatnot. The buildings are effectively built around those, especially the roof.

If you're talking about customs issues, I have no idea. The place I work for has built things for China. We let the transport companies deal with it.

 

[ExigeEvan]

Machines that would be used to build electronics wouldn't be particularly difficult to handle. Time consuming to disassemble and package but their made of many smaller sections. It's metal-working machines that cause trouble, things like gigantic 1000-ton presses and whatnot. The buildings are effectively built around those, especially the roof.

If you're talking about customs issues, I have no idea. The place I work for has built things for China. We let the transport companies deal with it.

I was referring to difficulties with customs officials more than anything.

However, don't underestimate the fragility and demands of clean-room electronic manufacturing kit.

 

[Keef]

He's not talking about printing money, he's talking about borrowing large sums of money from Japan/China and it being spent into the economy. This isn't creating wealth, it's borrowing wealth from someone else, which does increase GDP, and does increase the real value of an economy. Say you have $1000 and you want to buy something for $1250, you borrow $500 from the bank, drop $250 down a storm drain by being careless, and then buy your item for $1250, and never pay the bank back. That's essentially what's happening.

It increases the number, not the value. That's like saying the more a company depends on loans for survival the more valuable it is - it's less valuable because of high liabilities. Good luck finding a buyer for a company the owes everybody everything. These liabilities should be subtracted from the value of our economy - of course the government has a personal interest in making themselves look good so they simply add everything together, including their own profitless spending and liabilities, when they calculate GDP. How is a government expected to control a populace if they tell them the truth, that their broke and the only way they can afford anything is to inflate the currency to pay off loans that were agreed upon in yesterday's dollars?

 

[Keef]

Guess what today is?

Today is the anniversary of when we decided Japan didn't need a real military anymore. Merica.

 

[nobuffalo]

It would prolly be a good idea for those who can to thank a WWII vet and if they're up for it have a talk about the war, I'm sure they have many stories to share. The chances are only getting less and less.

 

[Keef]

The Obama Administration does not believe in States' implied power of nullification afford by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. They issued this statement concerning pot legalization:

The Department of Justice is reviewing the legalization initiatives recently passed in Colorado and Washington State. The Department’s responsibility to enforce the Controlled Substances Act remains unchanged. Neither States nor the Executive branch can nullify a statute passed by Congress. In enacting the Controlled Substances Act, Congress determined that marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance. Regardless of any changes in state law, including the change that will go into effect on December 6th in Washington State, growing, selling or possessing any amount of marijuana remains illegal under federal law. Members of the public are also advised to remember that it remains against federal law to bring any amount of marijuana onto federal property, including all federal buildings, national parks and forests, military installations, and courthouses.

The Tenth Amendment states that any power not specifically given to the Federal government, nor any power not specifically banned from the States, is given to the States and the people therein. The power to control State nullification of Federal law is not given to the Feds, nor is the power of nullification banned from the States. Based on this very simple and logical rationale, we can understand that States' power to nullify Federal law is implicit. Keep in mind that this country was designed, founded, and even named as a collection of States working together, not as a single country separated into regions.

Daily Paul

Yahoo

 

[BobK]

The Obama Administration does not believe in States' implied power of nullification afford by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. They issued this statement concerning pot legalization:



The Tenth Amendment states that any power not specifically given to the Federal government, nor any power not specifically banned from the States, is given to the States and the people therein. The power to control State nullification of Federal law is not given to the Feds, nor is the power of nullification banned from the States. Based on this very simple and logical rationale, we can understand that States' power to nullify Federal law is implicit. Keep in mind that this country was designed, founded, and even named as a collection of States working together, not as a single country separated into regions.

Daily Paul

Yahoo

That's not just the opinion of the Obama administration; it's been the federal government's position since at least 1861.

Besides, this is all stuff from the Constitution. We don't use that any more. Unless it's convenient for the government.

Personally I'd like to know just how it's any of the Feds' business what somebody grows on their own property and what they do with it.

 

[Gazumagi]

The Obama Administration does not believe in States' implied power of nullification afford by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. They issued this statement concerning pot legalization:



The Tenth Amendment states that any power not specifically given to the Federal government, nor any power not specifically banned from the States, is given to the States and the people therein. The power to control State nullification of Federal law is not given to the Feds, nor is the power of nullification banned from the States. Based on this very simple and logical rationale, we can understand that States' power to nullify Federal law is implicit. Keep in mind that this country was designed, founded, and even named as a collection of States working together, not as a single country separated into regions.

Daily Paul

Yahoo

It sounds to me like they're just reminding people to not smoke pot on federal property (which, afaik, isn't state property) because federal law says it's still illegal. Could be wrong though ^^;

 

[FoolKiller]

It sounds to me like they're just reminding people to not smoke pot on federal property (which, afaik, isn't state property) because federal law says it's still illegal. Could be wrong though ^^;

The Feds have raided medical dispensaries in states where that is legal, but have not pursued individual users to date.

It is safe to assume that if Obama feels he cannot let this happen he will give the go ahead on this too.

 

[Danoff]

The Feds have raided medical dispensaries in states where that is legal, but have not pursued individual users to date.

It is safe to assume that if Obama feels he cannot let this happen he will give the go ahead on this too.

I'm not actually sure Obama needs to have anything to do with it. I'm sure whatever agency is in charge of controlled substances can just raid, arrest, confiscate, etc. as much as they want as long as they believe they are enforcing federal law. It would be up to the courts to overturn those actions.

 

[Johnnypenso]

America is in for a real fun ride over this. State vs. Federal government. Individuals vs. Federal government. It could turn into a real mess but it'll be fun to watch it play out over the next few years.

 

[Liquid]

but it'll be fun to watch it play out over the next few years.

It's been going on for over 150 years so far.

 

[FoolKiller]

I'm not actually sure Obama needs to have anything to do with it. I'm sure whatever agency is in charge of controlled substances can just raid, arrest, confiscate, etc. as much as they want as long as they believe they are enforcing federal law. It would be up to the courts to overturn those actions.

While the presidency should be hands off and neutral on the enforcement of federal laws, the heads of the Justice Department and DEA are appointed by the president and if they do not act in the best interest of the administration's agenda they will be looking for jobs.

 

[GTsail]

I'm not actually sure Obama needs to have anything to do with it. I'm sure whatever agency is in charge of controlled substances can just raid, arrest, confiscate, etc. as much as they want as long as they believe they are enforcing federal law. It would be up to the courts to overturn those actions.

Couldn't Congress, (who passed the Controlled Substances Act of 1970) if it so desired, or the DEA (after some additional medical research/studies) reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I drug to Schedule IV or Schedule V drug, and this would allow marijuana to be prescribed for any and all medical uses?

Respectfully,
GTsail

 

[arora]

Here is some information regarding how the state medical marijuana laws are being treated by the doj. Something Big happen after the second memo was sent out, first there were dispensaries being forced out of leased offices by landlords being threatened by the doj(there is lots of info on this if you google California dispensaries) second, they went after any large scale farming regardless if those farms where in state law compliance or not. They didn't like it when they saw large dollars being made. I would assume they'll treat the recreational use in Co and Wa in a similar fashion.

As for the President's role, I'm not sure, our government has gone off the deep end with power hungry people. It would not surprise me at all if Obama is having meetings or in some way expressing his interests to the doj. If congress where to change the drug classification the fight between the states and the feds might diminish greatly. As it stands federal laws are going to be enforced as they see fit, if there is big money, or transport, or guns involved, they'll prosecute.

The Ogdon memo from 2009

The prosecution of significant traffickers of illegal drugs, including marijuana, and the disruption of illegal drug manufacturing and trafficking networks continues to be a core priority in the Department's efforts against narcotics and dangerous drugs, and the Department's investigative and prosecutorial resources should be directed towards these objectives. As a general matter, pursuit of these priorities should not focus federal resources in your States on individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana. For example, prosecution of individuals with cancer or other serious illnesses who use marijuana as part of a recommended treatment regimen consistent with applicable state law, or those caregivers in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state law who provide such individuals with marijuana, is unlikely to be an efficient use of limited federal resources. On the other hand, prosecution of commercial enterprises that unlawfully market and sell marijuana for profit continues to be an enforcement priority of the Department. To be sure, claims of compliance with state or local law may mask operations inconsistent with the terms, conditions, or purposes of those laws, and federal law enforcement should not be deterred by such assertions when otherwise pursuing the Department's core enforcement priorities.

A clarification memo from 2011

A number of states have enacted some form of legislation relating to the medical use of marijuana. Accordingly, the Ogden Memo reiterated to you that prosecution of significant traffickers of illegal drugs, including marijuana, remains a core priority, but advised that it is likely not an efficient use of federal resources to focus enforcement efforts on individuals with cancer or other serious illnesses who use marijuana as part of a recommended treatment regimen consistent with applicable state law, or their caregivers. The term "caregiver" as used in the memorandum meant just that: individuals providing care to individuals with cancer or other serious illnesses, not commercial operations cultivating, selling or distributing marijuana.

 

[Dotini]

Couldn't Congress, (who passed the Controlled Substances Act of 1970) if it so desired, or the DEA (after some additional medical research/studies) reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I drug to Schedule IV or Schedule V drug, and this would allow marijuana to be prescribed for any and all medical uses?

Respectfully,
GTsail

I think the elephant in the room is the potential legalization of hemp.
This substance, in broad, is far more important than just the smoking weed. It is clothing, it is bio-fuel, it is food, it is plastics, it is pharmaceuticals, it is construction materials, and it is more. Legalization of natural, organic, industrial hemp would threaten all these traditional monopolies of synthetic, patented industrial products. Legalization of the smoking weed would be the proverbial camel's nose under the tent flap, and totally unacceptable to the mighty industrial giants that have arisen since industrial hemp was banned at their behest. What could possibly make you think it is time for the little guy to threaten the giants?

Respectfully,
Steve

 

[Izzyracer97]

^Legalize it and tax the heck out of it. boosts economy and allows the people who use it to not get arrested. Everyone wins and problem solved

 

[Ganon83]

^Legalize it and tax the heck out of it. boosts economy and allows the people who use it to not get arrested. Everyone wins and problem solved

Then it would be too easy
The main hurdle to jump through, I reckon, is simply who has the power to regulate it: State or Federal government? If you get through that, than you have all of these anti-smoking people who would be chomping at the bit to attack weed like they have smoking (Even higher taxes, just look at how much a pack of smokes costs in downtown NY. Even more ridiculous regulations as well).

 

[BongRipz]

The main hurdle to jump through, I reckon, is simply who has the power to regulate it: State or Federal government?

Its not quite that complicated. It would be the same as alcohol. The main problem is that the United States Government's Influence is one of the reason its illegal in alot of other countries.

 

[Izzyracer97]

Then it would be too easy
The main hurdle to jump through, I reckon, is simply who has the power to regulate it: State or Federal government? If you get through that, than you have all of these anti-smoking people who would be chomping at the bit to attack weed like they have smoking (Even higher taxes, just look at how much a pack of smokes costs in downtown NY. Even more ridiculous regulations as well).

In my opinion higher taxes for people who smoke is the price they pay for threatening not only their lives but others as well.

 

[ExigeEvan]

^Legalize it and tax the heck out of it. boosts economy and allows the people who use it to not get arrested. Everyone wins and problem solved

You wouldn't really do any good taxing hemp out of the market, as it's mostly used for textile, fibre and bio-oil.

The reason it is banned is because it contains THC, though I read a claim you'd need to smoke a telegraph pole full before you'd even approach a high.

It's a good alternative to cotten in some instances and could probably replace or at least help diversify the bio-oil market (I believe dominated by rape seed).

 

[Dennisch]

The reason it is banned is because it contains THC, though I read a claim you'd need to smoke a telegraph pole full before you'd even approach a high.

Uuuuuh. Better not try that whenever one of you is in the Netherlands.

 

[xXKingJoshXx]

So I guess someone with a 978 year sentence in jail tried to assassinate Justin Bieber.

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/entertainme...nner-ruane-mark-staake-plan-thwarted-cops-say


And they messed up... 👎 But at least since it did fail, I'll be able to take my final exams without being distracted by melodramatic girls crying.

 

[Northstar]

The president will have to answer about a proposed Death Star.

Well, it would surely make the Nuke situation end quickly.

 

[Johnnypenso]

^Legalize it and tax the heck out of it. boosts economy and allows the people who use it to not get arrested. Everyone wins and problem solved

This is not a justification for anything. You could legalize and tax the heck out of crack cocaine or heroin but we're not likely to see that are we?

As for it's boost to the economy, remember the trade is already going on now in marijuana so it's effect on the economy is already there. Legalizing it and taxing it could very well reduce the trade because it'll be more expensive, and therefore it's impact on the economy could be reduced, not increased. Additionally, one would assume that through legalization, the money will be flowing through fewer and fewer hands and you could potentially have many of the available outlets for marijuana in the hands of a very limited number of individuals or corporations, further reducing the spread of the revenue and the number of people benefitting from legalization.

 

[FoolKiller]

This is not a justification for anything. You could legalize and tax the heck out of crack cocaine or heroin but we're not likely to see that are we?

As for it's boost to the economy, remember the trade is already going on now in marijuana so it's effect on the economy is already there. Legalizing it and taxing it could very well reduce the trade because it'll be more expensive, and therefore it's impact on the economy could be reduced, not increased. Additionally, one would assume that through legalization, the money will be flowing through fewer and fewer hands and you could potentially have many of the available outlets for marijuana in the hands of a very limited number of individuals or corporations, further reducing the spread of the revenue and the number of people benefitting from legalization.

I think you are missing a couple of variables. The majority of drugs sold are brought into the country from somewhere else. So the majority of the money leaves without benefitting the US economy.

And then the stuff that is grown domestically is done so illegally, thus meaning that it must be done in a way that isn't noticed. Not sure if you've ever done gardening, but many plants do best with natural light, naturally replenished and well-drained soil, and natural irrigation. When you have to hide it you have to simulate ideal growing conditions. You also have a limit to your crop size. A legal industrial farm could be hundreds of acres on ideal growing conditions, increasing efficiency, boosting output, and allowing for better hybridization to produce higher quality. The ultimate result would be lower prices (pre-taxes), better and safer products, and a larger portion of the money remaining in the domestic economy.

And the final thing is, prisoners are not functional members of society or the economy. Thousands of drug possession convictions, prison sentences, and employers refusing to hire them based on a felony conviction alone. Those could be anything from day laborers to college graduates that eventually become president or heads of business.

 

[David]

.

 

[livemusic]

Decriminalize it and don't tax it. Problem solved.

 

[David]

.

 

[Joel]

Unless the tax and regulations are insanely high, economies of scale will bring down the price. As FK mentioned, growing 10 plants in your garage won't compare to growing acres upon acres with the hilariously efficient farming methods we have today.