Jump to content
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
"Right here in Steamboat we're dealing with a murder because a couple killed a man for his pot."
I caught hell here for even daring to suggest such an outcome, a coupla years back. Turns out to have been a valid concern. You just keep on posting!
Edibles and concentrates are accidents waiting to happen, both in terms of buildings exploding and tourist trips to the emergency room. Once upon a time, tourists could go to Amsterdam and indulge in space shakes / cakes / bon-bons etc., until it was realized that this was untenable and the laws were changed. There are good reasons why even Amsterdam outlawed edibles, regardless of appearance/packaging. Why CO couldn't learn from that experience and feels the need to re-learn that lesson the hard way, eludes me.
Welcome to the forum, Russell, I truly enjoy your posts.
"What we got here, is a crusader."
Good to know. But, for those of us whose dogs are our children, it would've been nice to see a longer article including some input from a vet. Especially this spring, when I've been more worried about the extended tick season than anything else, where Amiga's concerned. Is doxycycline an approved antibiotic for dogs with ticks? Etc., seeing as how the graphic mentions the "dog tick."
"textbook example of disgraceful rent-seeking"
Thanks, Rob! I've been racking my brain for the term "rent-seeking" since I finished binge-watching CNN's "High Profits" yesterday, regarding the behavior of certain pot-shop owners with Oak Creek connections. The same folks who made such astonishingly misleading, irresponsible, and unrealistic assertions to the people of Oak Creek about job/salary numbers, last summer. Just how high were they when they came up with those figures?
Given the sweetheart deals (subsidized by the local citizenry) the Town Board has afforded these folks and others, I'm curious to know what, if anything, these companies have done to give back to this community in terms of philanthropy? I don't believe everything I see on TV let alone CNN, but given the controversial nature of this nascent industry, I'd rather see them ingratiating themselves to the entire community instead of just those politicians sympathetic to their protectionist cause.
One rubber ducky for Breck?
Let's see now, the multi-million-dollar crop they're growing in Oak Creek is netting six figures of tax revenue monthly for Breckenridge, while our cut is less than $500/mo? Someone please tell me they sponsored our Labor Day festivities or something!
Judging by all the interest in setting up MJ businesses in Oak Creek, it seems the free market could bear charging higher fees, without imposing arbitrary caps on the number of those businesses. Might just lead to less willy-nilly building/redevelopment projects -- weed out those unprofessional outfits whose lack of business acumen threatens Oak Creek, if they go under in mid-project, with having to clean up their messes at taxpayer expense.
If the editorial starts "Our View" then it was written by the Pilot's Editorial Board. ;-)
It is not wrong for government to allow monopolies; in fact, that's the entire premise of copyrights/patents (which are enshrined in the Constitution). What's illegal are anticompetitive practices (see Sherman Anti-Trust Act for clarification) by monopolies, or collusion (price-fixing, etc.) between businesses which don't individually fit the definition of a monopoly.
"Anyone should have the right..."
Selling weed isn't a right -- it's a privilege. Exactly like a liquor license. We're talking about highly regulated businesses, vs. unregulated businesses anyone does have a right to operate. So I get confused by the Pilot's (regulate like liquor stores) and your position (don't allow on every corner), of wanting both unfettered capitalism and regulation at the same time, for MJ shops. :-|
I would say our veterans fought and died for our freedom to self-determine the destiny of our country, i.e. the ability to vote (via direct democracy like ballot issues, or via republican democracy by choosing our representatives) for socialist policies, protectionism, regulations, and so on and so forth. Not capitalism, which the Constitution doesn't mention, let alone endorse or require.
"But protectionism is not how we operate in our free market system."
Since when? Protectionism is why Disney's copyright on Mickey Mouse will never expire, list of examples goes on... Also, since when did the Constitution say anything about our economic system, other than it's whatever we vote it to be, provided the results aren't unconstitutional? So protectionism isn't per-se illegal, in and of itself, and is certainly ingrained into the very fabric of our actual economy.
Back in January '95, I opened Steamboat's first ISP. Some protectionism would have been nice, considering how there were eight (six local, two state-wide) others by the end of the year. More would follow. One was a scammer who took his selling-below-cost, pre-paid-1-yr money and ran. The unregulated market did eventually pick its winners, but not until after local consumers and legitimate business owners were harmed.
Just sayin' there are better ways to run an economy than unfettered capitalism, particularly when said economic system isn't ordained by law. So let's stop asserting that it is, when discussing this issue, please, as that ideology is so far removed from reality.
That being said, our current system is what it is, so a big "BOO HOO" from me when I hear the current dispensaries whining about what might happen to their businesses if they had to compete on a level playing field. Because I can't think of any good reason why the federally-illegal weed-selling market needs to be protected from competition, or subsidized by my tax dollars (looking at Oak Creek).
"Personally, I am offended that the Town Government subsidies marijuana grow operations by charging them less for water and sewer than other businesses which use far less water. That is simply immoral, but Town government is too lazy to utilize water meters or put MJ grows in any rate category other than the cheapest rate charged for commercial offices."
Offended? Let me tell you about offended:
Like I said in the other thread, this is off-topic. And certainly an example of your agenda-driven posts, regarding the actions taken by a Town Board which I, unlike you, have electoral say as to its composition. What I don't have is the luxury of closing down profitable businesses (?!?) as leverage against anything Town Board does which I disagree with.
The fact that you'd rather make no money, than less money, thereby depriving the Town of a revenue stream (regardless of size) in order to wield influence over elected representatives in a town you don't live in and therefore can't influence by your vote, is why I don't post here. Because I'd just be banned for pointing that out, and all the other reasons, whereby I can't abide your meddling in our affairs. Because you're coming from a standpoint of shutting down businesses any number of folks in my neighborhood would be glad to own as a source of income, to feed themselves and their families.
You, OTOH? Cavalierly close down businesses you own, because politics. Damn. I just can't respect that, as an entrepreneur myself.
The rest of us just want to wash our clothes and vehicles. But Nooooo, you won't allow that because you disagree with who we've voted for to represent us? Hard to be polite in response, ya know?
You ought to be sentenced to live in one of your own rentals for a year, or something, before you incessantly comment here about the failures of a town government you otherwise have no say in, for not being a resident.
It's gotten so bad, that I wonder how many Town Board decisions go against you for the sake of going against you, as opposed to being made for the sake of what's best for Oak Creek. So from the bottom of my heart, and not meant as trolling, please, for the love of God, Scott, STFU.
Particularly before you take my side on any issue, as your "support" only discredits me, because nobody (with any sense) trusts you. Again, I say this fully aware that it's beyond the pale of the forum rules. But sometimes, reading your posts, I've simply had more than I can take, vis-a-vis being polite by holding my tongue.
I don't know about any of that. What I do know, is back when the Kayak and Parachute factories were producing those items, Oak Creek was thriving. Now we have lots of empty retail/restaurant spaces. So I'm not seeing the economic revitalization promised by the pot growers. I wish I did -- no schadenfreude here, but it just isn't the case.
Why not, is worthy of discussion, IMO. But we aren't having that debate, are we?
"Locally, our really messed up agency is YVHA. Like Portland Fire, they benefit from general popularity of their purpose and lack elected leaders willing to spend time asking probing questions."
Couldn't get more off-topic. Can't count how many forums I've participated in over the years that would ban Wedel for this sort of thing; not for any one incident, but for a pattern.
Stick to the matter at hand, eh, Scott? Emergency responder article != YVHA by any stretch of the imagination. You have your agenda, which is all fine and good, but keep it where it's relevant instead of spewing it everywhere it isn't.
Last login: Sunday, May 24, 2015
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2015 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.