What would currently-illegal drugs look like if produced by corporations?

[Recursion]

This is my main trouble with the idea of legalization.

On the one hand, I'm a fan of regulation in general. But regulation has a history of favoring large corporations over small ones (which is why the large meat packers often support stronger regs: they can afford them and their smaller competitors can't). So assuming we add a regulatory regime to a legalization, I don't see a way around ending up with RJR and companies like them owning 90% of the market and doing to marijuana, cocaine, whatever, what they did with tobacco. The mind shudders.

Not regulating anything is, to me, a non-starter, but maybe it makes more sense to some people. Every shyster with a grow lamp producing God-knows-what treated with God-knows-what. The mind shudders.

[Democracyinkind]

1. It's a valid point - OTHO

There's a reasonable chance that the drug market - once legalized - would not be controlled by corps. I know that my dealers would be legally up and running in a week and I don't believe that any corp. could be that fast (although the copyrights are there, as we all know). Also, I imagine that the whole "illegal" drug culture is generally wary of large corporations and wouldn't want to finance them. I imagine this subset as whole to be very critical of our mega-corporations.

So I don't think it's all that clear that Marlboro et al. would end up cornering the market.

One reason why I'd like to see legalization is that these sick fucks that put all kind of shit into their product could actually be prosecuted. I have a friend who would buy from people he didn't really know and that cost him a significant portion of his eye-sight. This is a real problem of black-markets. You can lace the shit with anything, get away with it and actually become rich by hurting others.

I wrote this post with a particular substance - MJ - in mind. Not sure that these points apply equally to all "illicit" drugs.

[Recursion]

5. But imagine the reality of a regulatory scheme

Your dealer doesn't have a lobbyist, but Merck and RJR do: they'll be the ones meeting with the Congressional committee that sets up the regulatory agency, and then they'll be meeting with that agency as it drafts the regulations. Expect things like "you have to have a hydroponic pool of at least 2 acres" and "only these following (soon to be patented) strains of C. sativa are allowed".

[Democracyinkind]

7. Yes, that's true.

It only goes to show that I've been living in Europe for too long. So long that such things don't come readily to my mind....

[StrayKat]

6. I'm not seeing this.

I think there might be new corps that might start small. But, I think that drugs of any sort are such a lucrative market that it wouldn't take long for small 'dealers' to become big corps or for the big corps to overpower and shut them down. Plus, wouldn't legalized drugs then be subject to FDA regs? I think some of those regs require large sums of money to comply with so staying small wouldn't be an option.

[Democracyinkind]

8. The regs are definitely a valid point, as Recursion expressed above.

And yes, consolidation is a feature of every capitalist market. Maybe I was too optimistic in my post.

From my local perspective - which currently isn't American - I would expect the early market to be dominated by small-scale, local producers.

[Xithras]

10. It's not about getting to market first.

Once upon a time the tobacco and alcohol markets were dominated by small producers who only supplied enough for their towns or neighborhoods. While some small craft producers certainly still exist, they're a tiny part of the corporate controlled mass markets today. Why? Volume!

Your local neighborhood pot grower can probaby maintain a few hundred plants tops, and will likely sell it at the current average market rates of $150-$250 an ounce (depending on strain and market region). They NEED to sell it at that cost in order to cover their production costs and still make enough to support themselves, their workers, and their families. RJR and its affiliated farmers can have 100,000 acres of cannabis planted next month if they really wanted, and would make billions selling it at $25 an ounce (one serious study concluded that the production costs of cannabis could be as low as 62 cents per ounce if it were legalized and grown using modern production methods).

Sure, the local guy down the street will probably grow better stuff, but they won't dominate the market for the same reason that your local microbreweries haven't put Coors out of business. The mass produced stuff will be "good enough" for most people, who are really going to have a hard time justifying the massive price disparity. Is it worth it to buy local pot that is four times the quality, if the cost is ten times as high? Many will say yes, but history tells us that most people will say no.

All of the economics suggest that legalized drugs would generally follow the same path as tobacco and alcohol. You'll end up with a handful of massive producers churning out passable product at a very low cost, and a large number of smaller producers crafting higher quality product at a cost premium for more discriminating customers.

[JW2020]

11. I'm not so sure.

There are only certain areas were you can cultivate the ganj. So corporations would try to genetically modify the hell out of plants so they could grow it in places like Kansas. They would also load it up with pesticides and chemicals, not that some pot farmers aren't already doing that. You'd also have to think what effect this would have on existing crops. Are current agri farmers going to stop growing corn so they can grow weed?

[Xithras]

13. Lol

"There are only certain areas were you can cultivate the ganj"

You mean areas like the American South, where RJ Reynolds, Phillip Morris and their affiliated farmers already own vast swaths of land and the climate is so friendly towards cannabis that wild strains of it grow freely in roadside ditches?

As for the farmers, think "tobacco" and not "corn". Tobacco use has been plunging in the US and the cash value of the tobacco crop has been declinining. Many tobacco farmers would happily switch to cannabis farming if it meant more profit in their pockets. Tobacco farmers currently make about $2 per pound...I'm SURE that cannabis farming would make them more.

[RainDog]

34. agri-biz would be smarter to cultivate hemp

with legalization, hemp would also be available as a cash crop.

Hemp and marijuana cannot be grown within at least 50 miles of one another because of cross-pollination issues.

However, hemp has a multitude of industrial uses, requires far less skill, time, fewer employees and regulatory issues than marijuana.

Big tobacco, etc. could grow a product to compete with the petrol industry for everything from plastic bags to car fuel - and car bodies themselves (as Henry Ford's hemp car demonstrated decades ago)

We need a paradigm shift in this nation and, symbolically, legalizing hemp and marijuana (my way of distinguishing between industrial grade and medical/recreational grade cannabis) is a big part of this shift.

Agri-biz would be smarter to challenge the petrol industry, rather than the marijuana industry.

[hunter]

40. Sooner, rather than later, someone would breed a version good for both.

Mow off the top for medicine, harvest for fiber later.

Produced by highly automated methods it wouldn't be great medicine, equivalent to cheap beer, but it'd probably be a profitable crop for industrial scale agriculture.

[RainDog]

41. do you know how many generations you need to produce a stable genetics?

why would anyone bother with this scenario when current law (in places where hemp cultivation is legal) require seeds bred for less than .03% THC?

These hemp seeds are cheap, in comparison to hybrids. Why would anyone bother to create an agriculture that is more labor intensive and expensive rather than less?

Sure, this might be something someone would do... but it seems like a stupid idea when the reality is that production for a legal market would most likely decrease profits on recreational cannabis... so someone is going to work on something that would make hemp more expensive merely to create a poor-quality strain of marijuana that would have to compete in a market that is already geared toward distinguishing the two?

maybe.

but I'd like to see the biz model that could justify the expense of making this happen.

[hunter]

43. "Roundup Ready" Monsanto genetically engineered hemp...

They'll be on it as soon as it's legal. Maybe before that.

[RainDog]

46. you don't know much about this issue, do you?

One of the great values of hemp is that it requires so few pesticides to grow. Hemp is also a valuable crop for phyto-remediation, the use of certain plants to help remove heavy metals from soil. (Sunflowers are another plant useful for this purpose... what sunflowers and hemp share are strong, hollow stems, fwiw.) This argument, to me, is nonsense and displays a basic ignorance of the economics of farming and the actual, productive uses of hemp.

The cost of agricultural production include the costs of things like pesticides... so you have a cash crop that requires LITTLE TO NO pesticides... and you think that farmers are going to want to include pesticides, and more expensive seeds, because.... because this is a scare tactic being used by the anti-legalization neo-liberals?

Hemp is valuable for things like green insulation, for its seed as a food source that could help reduce world hunger, and for its profile as the most complete source of EFAs for humans. Nutritionally, hemp is one of the best products available.

Hemp seed, the product of hemp production and the source of oil and other food products, is created by allowing male and female plants to grow together so that the process of pollination and, thus, seed production, is allowed.

Recreational cannabis as it currently exist is based upon SEEDLESS production of female plants that produce buds BECAUSE they are not pollinated.

If you think that people are going to choose to purchase "round-up" recreational cannabis - you're incredibly...lacking in knowledge of the entire subculture. People who are part of cannabis culture tend to have healthier diets and weigh less than people who spend their time demonizing cannabis. Stereotypes of junk food to the contrary, this has been the profile that arose from studies that actually looked at users, rather than relied on those who engage in propaganda.

That's why I say your fear is a reflection of ignorance.

Or propaganda.

[hunter]

49. Um...

... you are talking to a biologist organic gardener guy who makes his own beer in two liter pop bottles and would happily grow certain pharmaceuticals if it was legal.

[RainDog]

50. um...

well, then, it's certainly strange that you expressed the opinion that you did and, so I'll just assume you didn't think about the actual properties and cultivation needs of hemp vs. recreational cannabis.

One of the most important reasons to legalize is to open up the market for American farmers and manufacturers to produce and utilize a crop that can reduce America's dependence on foreign oil, and to provide greener (affordable) products for industrial uses.

The public relations buzz surrounding a hemp-body car that runs on hemp fuel would propel a huge market in America that despises big oil, etc.

for me, this isn't so much about the legality of recreational cannabis - although that's an important part.

for me, this is about the American govt. getting its head out of its ass.

[hunter]

52. Hemp paper, awesome, better than tree paper...

... and with modern enzyme treatments hemp clothing fabrics are now as gentle as cotton .

But just as soon as it's legal big corporate USA will flood the market with cheap hemp crap.

But there will always be a market for the good stuff.

Personally, I want good affordable jeans that will last decades.

Cars suck. I want a world where I can walk or take public transportation anywhere.

[RainDog]

54. Grow your own...car

for the present, we live in a culture that requires and values private transportation - so, if that's the case, why not create a nearly carbon-neutral car?

This idea is better than a Prius, in terms of environmental impact.

And your bus can be made out of hemp and run on hemp fuel, as well.

[Democracyinkind]

12. Surely a valid point.

But ultimately consumer choices can go a long way. I am an occasional smoker (tobacco) and have no need for the Phillip Moriss' of this world. The conpany I buy fromm is relatively small but striving in a market dominated by quasi-monopolies. It's not as if the outcome is pre-ordained. Consumer choice matters.

[StrayKat]

2. Yes, I've wondered this myself.

I was going to ask this yesterday when someone posted about a new study finding that 70% of Americans are on prescription drugs.

Progressives tend to be in favor of legalizing illicit drugs, but against big pHarma. What's the system look like that removes the unevenly applied penalties and stigma for drug use without pouring more money into the hands of big pharmaceutical companies and still maintains a reasonable amount of safety?

[geckosfeet]

3. Back room treatments have always been serious issues for illegal drugs.

Unscrupulous or indifferent dealers cut their drugs to extend it or make a crappy batch more effective. Al to make more $$$.

Problem is they sometimes use fatally poisonous ingredients.

So i have to say i favor regulation and taxation.

[Erose999]

16. Theres not really a way to "cut" mj though. At least not if you want repeat business.

[geckosfeet]

51. ? I am sure plenty of weed has been soaked or sprayed with something nasty.

It may be to enhance the high to make crappy weed "better". It may be herbicide sprayed by law enforcement, or insecticide sprayed by farmers.

I think it needs at least need fda regulation - especially if it grown and sold for medicinal purposes.

[1-Old-Man]

4. I believe in Colorado the sellers must grow at least 70% of the weed they sell

And if I'm right about that - and I might not be, this information only comes from hearing about it on Cspan - that would effectively cut the large manufacturers out of the show, or at least most of it.

[RainDog]

9. Versus 800,000 arrests a year

for possession.

and asset seizure laws

and three strikes laws that can put people in prison for LIFE for possession of a plant.

and people with health issues unable to safely and easily procure a substance that helps them deal with their illnesses.

frankly, the cost will likely drop with legalization. I don't think big tobacco will want to get in on the market because the shift will be away from the producer to the state - as far as revenues generated - by taxes rather than the costs that arise from illegality.

The comparison to craft beer is more accurate.

That entire subculture already exists in this nation.

I know this "big marijuana" argument is popular among those who oppose legalization, like Patrick Kennedy, but it's a stupid argument to make when the opposite is a criminal market and laws that are able to put people in jail for life for possession.

[Egalitarian Thug]

35. Well yeah, sure. But that isn't nearly as entertaining as an OP. n/t

[Erose999]

14. I once heard that Big Tobacco had trademarked common trade names like "Northern Lights" and "Kush"

in anticipation of legalization. I expect the product to go to shit if that happens. I've seen how cigg's are made. Its some fucked up shit... a cigg is like 50% ground up old ciggs, 40% paper sprayed with tobacco juice, 8% tobacco stems, and maybe 2% real tobacco.

[RainDog]

15. You guys are really pushing this fake talking point

because, of course, products are never regulated.

Colorado's law provides, as mentioned above, a way to keep this within the realm of a "craft beer" market.

No one, NO ONE wants Mexican brick when hydro bud is available.

I just have to assume those who are posting about this are ignorant.

Or have an agenda.

[Recursion]

19. It's the regulations that make the huge corporations possible

Regulations are good, but they have a long history of being used by big players to stop smaller ones.

[RainDog]

23. LOL

Have you looked at Colorado's regulations concerning this issue?

Or are you just regurgitating Patrick Kennedy anti-legalization talking points?

[Recursion]

24. I have, and they won't last a second once growing pot becomes legal

I think you're ignoring that basic fact: Colorado has grower-sellers because it's still illegal to grow pot so RJR can't do it.

Once they can, they will shut down the Colorado growers in a heartbeat.

[RainDog]

27. Fear-mongering is always a strategy

when you don't have public sentiment or reality on your side.

But, honestly, why don't you address the facts about this issue that I posted, above.

These realities:

800,000 arrests a yearfor possession.

and asset seizure laws

and three strikes laws that can put people in prison for LIFE for possession of a plant.

and people with health issues unable to safely and easily procure a substance that helps them deal with their illnesses.

And Florida making bongs illegal. And Indiana increasing the penalties for possession... and both of these legislative pieces of b.s. coming from FOR PROFIT PRISON demands to keep facilities at 90% capacity.

Explain how your unsupported fear of "big tobacco" is more important than civil liberties.

[Recursion]

29. If I supported keeping it criminal, you would have a point

As it is, since I agree, I'm not sure why you keep saying that. It shouldn't be criminal. It also shouldn't be legal. Not sure how to square that circle.

[RainDog]

30. Why shouldn't a plant be legal?

Poppies that are the basis for opium are legal to grow in your garden in this nation.

The entire basis for the law is racist and grounded in ignorance.

The only people I know who oppose legality are those who have a financial interest in keeping cannabis illegal - and those are people involved in the alcoholic beverage industry

current illegal growers who fear their profits will evaporate when people can legally grow themselves

certain law enforcement agencies who count on the DEA to fluff their budgets

and people who want to force Americans into a fake "substance abuse" paradigm for cannabis when the reality is that cannabis is no more harmful than caffeine.

the reality is that it is ENTIRELY possible to regulate in such a way that big tobacco is kept out of the mix.

As Jimmy Carter showed, opening the craft brew industry greatly improved the market for beer - in terms of quality - but, just as now with marijuana, the alcoholic beverage industry opposed this change in the law.

Prior to prohibition, cannabis was a safe and legal product for 5000 YEARS.

But you're trying to claim the last 70-plus years of prohibition makes this an impossible scenario now... because... fear.

[RainDog]

39. Decriminalization keeps marijuana illegal

just fwiw.

You want to keep production illegal but possession as a misdemeanor, it seems.

This entirely leaves out the medical cannabis market. There are valid medical reasons for marijuana use. It's not all about recreational use.

Sativex has lobbyists from the Drug Czar's office who have left govt. to lobby to keep marijuana illegal while their product is allowed in the U.S.

The reason for this is that they cannot afford to produce Sativex and charge outrageous prices on the American market when there are other, less expensive outlets.

The Sativex lobbyists, Andrea Barthwell, former Drug Czar liar, is one, pretend that Sativex isn't whole-plant cannabis that has been suspended to create a liquid... it's ludicrous for them to make this claim, but they do.

They're making this claim to massage the dicks at the DEA in order to make their product legal while locally-produced cannabis is illegal. So, so far, the reality is that big biz wants cannabis to remain illegal. I haven't heard any word from big tobacco in support of legality, tho.

And, again, the other big biz that really opposes legality is the alcoholic bev industry. The reason for this is that legal marijuana impacts their sales - and, btw, also results in fewer drunk driving accidents.

But I've yet to see any big biz making noise about entering the market on the pro-legalization side.

[Rod Walker]

17. Legalize all drugs, let them be marketed the same as any other drug.

Let the market decide.

[Recursion]

18. No thank you on that

Let the market decide.

Not just no, but hell no.

[Rod Walker]

20. It's a largely moot point. While marijuana is (slowly) being legalized, I don't think you'll see

heroin and crack for sale at Rite-Aid anytime soon.

[StrayKat]

28. We already have opioid and heroin derivatives in wide use.

So, I could imagine it might be possible, even if it is not probable. It might take the form of something that can only be administered in a hospital setting. Doesn't Sweden do something like this for addicts?

http://sciencenordic.com/heroin-clinics-improve-addicts-lives

[Rod Walker]

31. Something along those lines might well develop in the future.

Still, I don't think we'll see anything such as the scene I recall from a science fiction novel, "The Probability Broach", set in an alternate history that's a Libertarian utopia, where a character remarks something to the effect of:

"You look terrible...you look like the 'before' picture in a cocaine commercial."

[MicaelS]

21. Well the various governments could tax the shit out of them.

Which I'm all in favor of, since that would that bring in a boatload of money. There would still be a place for you to grow your own tax-free cannabis for your own use, just like you can make your own beer and wine. Otherwise, if you're that eager to smoke it, then you can pay the price for it, just like with alcohol or tobacco.

Harder drugs, I don't think you would be allowed to make your own harder drugs.

I see anything beyond cannabis or hash being sold only in pharmacies, without any branding or copyrights, for a nationwide fixed price.

[Nye Bevan]

22. Like bathtub gin was always more fun than Gordon's (nt)

[Locrian]

25. so the solution is to keep them illegal?

I'll take my chances - I do agree there could be a lot of "Weed Walmat" type of operations.
But I can choose to support my 'local' micro grower.

[Recursion]

26. You think your local micro grower will be allowed to stay open?

Not a chance. The lobbyists will make sure the regulations only allow huge corporate farming and production.

I think unofficial decriminalization is the least bad idea, but that raises equal protection problems.

[RainDog]

32. How are craft beer markets able to stay open?

Because Carter regulated the industry to make it possible for them to exist.

[Recursion]

33. And that took decades

Yes, 50 years after legalization, we might have some easing of the private market. Possibly. It's still nearly impossible to do indie tobacco legally.

[RainDog]

38. Cannabis is more like beer than tobacco

Cannabis is not a high-volume use product.

The quality of the bud, the hybrid from which is it grown, the conditions (flushing fertilizer out of the soil, using organic methods) are considerations for people.

With legalization, people would have accurate information about the percentages of cannabinoids (particularly THC and CBD) for various strains, and would be able to purchase different varietals for different reasons.

You are making claims that have NO BASIS in reality.

Those who are already part of this business have a foothold. As I noted, above, big tobacco would be MUCH SMARTER to focus on hemp rather than cannabis, as far as costs of production versus return on yield.

You are creating a false analogy to compare cannabis to tobacco, with the long histories of both products.

But, obviously, that hasn't stopped you from doing this over and over and over in this thread.

[Locrian]

36. I agree you have a really valid concern...

I just think it's better than keeping it illegal. And recognize we still have to fight corporate take over - on this and a much grander scale.

I'm actually more concerned with other industries being to powerful than the pot industry....

[Recursion]

37. It is better than keeping what we have now, I agree

Though I also think that about cocaine and heroin, which puts me in a minority. I guess I'm just being cantankerous.

[RainDog]

42. Here's the reality of the big biz market for cannabis products

At this time there are quite a few venture capitalists who are looking at the medical cannabis market.

This market revolves around the pharmaceutical uses of SYNTHETIC cannabinoids, produced in a lab, that mimic the properties of whole-plant cannabinoids.

Because of the basic scientific model for research, single, synthetic cannabinoid molecules are the only route pharma cos can take with this product that will create a return on investment, unless cannabis is illegal.

The ability to reproduce a synthetic is basic to the requirements necessary to meet standards for "medical use" in the regulations set up by the CSA. No plant will ever meet those requirements - it's impossible to do so. This is also why Sativex pretends its product is something other than the exact same "cannabis elixir" that was in every doctor's medicine bag for a hundred years in this nation. (Sativex is also, btw, virtually the same product as "Rick Simpson oil," which he has given away to help people.)

The uses for these synthetic products are in areas related to cancer treatment, pain-relief from cancer treatment, neuro-degenerative and auto-immune diseases like MS, CP, epilepsy, Parkinsons, arthritis, alzheimiers, diabetes... this is the market for cannabis-inspired, not cannabis itself, big biz products on the American market.

In order to develop a product, a company must spend millions of dollars on testing.

If a cheap, legal product exists, companies fear their product would have competition and they are reluctant to spend money on outlay for R&D. As Dr. Lester Grinspoon has noted - aspirin would not be a product that pharma cos would bother to bring onto the market today because the costs of making it available are so large, compared to the profits for something so cheap to produce.

This, again, is why GW Pharma, in Great Britain, and Bayer (the distribution outlet for GW in the U.S.) have a vested interest in opposing legalization of natural cannabis.

We should allow R&D into synthetic and natural cannabinoids to continue. Who knows, in the future people may have synthetic cannabinoids injected into the sites of tumors to shrink them and to stop cell growth in cancer cells - whose life cycles are disrupted by both THC and CBD molecules. Cannabis may offer a new treatment model for cancer.

Early tests indicate this is the direction for cannabis within the pharma side of this issue.

If current prohibition continues, however, such R&D occurs outside the U.S., and other nations derive the benefit from grants and investments in this emerging market. So, prohibition hurts innovation in this nation, as well as deprives citizens of their right to be left alone by the govt. regarding natural cannabis.

[yurbud]

44. it would be tough to monopolize a "weed" that could grow almost anywhere

which is probably one of the reasons it's been illegal this long.

The other reason is you don't have to pay taxes on illegal business, and banks make beaucoup bucks laundering the money.

[SomethingFishy]

45. +1.. it's about the easiest damn thing in the world to grow..

and I bet that eventually most smokers will be growing their own. I have a couple plants going in Colorado.. the two favorite words of a stoner... Free Weed!

[yurbud]

55. legalization would also save lives in Mexico. Nobody gets beheaded over beer turf

[MineralMan]

47. In pain? Unbearably sad? Try Obliviatine from BigPharm Drugs.

Ingredients: Heroin 5 mg.

Check with your physician for a free single-day trial pack. Remember: At BigPharm, the first dose is always free.

[MineralMan]

48. Sluggish? Unmotivated?

Bayer Wiredimanab (cocaine USP, 10 mg) will perk you up and get you going. Ask your doctor if Wiredimanab is right for you.

[upaloopa]

53. In Vietnam during the war we could buy weed rolled in Parliament

cigarette paper because of the hard paper filters. They would empty out the tobacco and replace it with weed reclose the pack and put the packs in the carton box. It looked just like a carton of Parliament cigarettes