Perhaps I should clarify then? Tobacco farmers goes back generations and make up a significant part of the traditional economy. They are taxed heavily and contribute a lot to the local and national economies. In general, marijuana farming goes back about generation, is not taxed (for obvious reasons) and very few people who grow marijuana really on it for there sole income. Enough of it is imported so that it is not really seen as 'American.' Maybe I'm biased, being from Virginia and having friends and associated who are small time tobacco farmers (and are nothing like the faceless monsters you see on anti-smoking adds,) But the relationship of tobacco to the economy, and the relation of marijuana to the economy are different, both in function and in perception (which is what really matters.)
BTW, your link is fixed.
------------------------
Edit: That article emphasized my point.
Which isn't that one is good or the other is bad, but the relationship of either to our economy is different. While production of marijuana is increasing, most of it is controlled and distributed by groups that are considered foreign, like the Mexican mob for example. In fact, a great deal of it is grown by recent immigrants whose families are being held hostage in their home countries.
Needless to say this could change in light of legalization, but it's current stature is what plays a key role right now. As it stands, the people who get rich off of marijuana aren't Americans.
So while legalization of Marijuana may benefit society monetarily, there is no particular interest group that stands to get rich or on which the government already depends. This was even more true at the time of the original criminalization. It's a matter of why, not whether. I've stated elsewhere that I believe marijuana ought to be legal and I'm stating here why it isn't and tobacco is.
I mentioned small tobacco farmers for a different reason. Taxes, restrictions and lawsuits against tobacco increase everyday and everyday small tobacco farmers loose ground to larger tobacco firms which can deal more efficiently with the restrictions. As the restrictions increase, small tobacco will go out of business and if criminalize, the larger firms will give way to cartels every bit as troublesome as the Mexican mob. Legalize either and their's no guarantee that either will come back as a wholesome industry. (Given prohibition, it seems likely, but isn't a given.)
So those that oppose one and support the other aren't necessarily hypocrites so much as tunnel visioned. Which is all I really have to say.
Marijuana has a long history too. If it were legalized, the industry would be taxed just like tobacco. If tobacco was outlawed there would be underground tobacco farmers just like we have today with weed.
It's silly to say tobacco is good because the farmers are good people who had parents who did the same thing. Their crop kills thousands of people. Weed kills no one. I'm for legalization of both, but by the numbers tobacco is the one we should be worried about.
It's silly to say tobacco is good because the farmers are good people who had parents who did the same thing.
That's good, because I didn't say that. I said that it's legal because tobacco farmers are a more established part of the economy; that it's legal for historical reasons.
Marijuana has a long history too. If it were legalized, the industry would be taxed just like tobacco.
If Marijuana were allowed to establish itself as an open industry, sure. But it hasn't, or rather, it hadn't at the time of the first drug laws against it. Which is the whole point. I don't know why you're having trouble with this.
Their crop kills thousands of people. Weed kills no one.
BS, smoking weed has the exact same effects on your health as smoking tobacco and plenty of people have died smoking weed.In terms of danger they are around the same. The difference in numbers has more to do with relative popularity and the openness people have with their habits.
BTW, your link is fixed. ------------------------
Edit: That article emphasized my point.
Which isn't that one is good or the other is bad, but the relationship of either to our economy is different. While production of marijuana is increasing, most of it is controlled and distributed by groups that are considered foreign, like the Mexican mob for example. In fact, a great deal of it is grown by recent immigrants whose families are being held hostage in their home countries.
Needless to say this could change in light of legalization, but it's current stature is what plays a key role right now. As it stands, the people who get rich off of marijuana aren't Americans.
So while legalization of Marijuana may benefit society monetarily, there is no particular interest group that stands to get rich or on which the government already depends. This was even more true at the time of the original criminalization. It's a matter of why, not whether. I've stated elsewhere that I believe marijuana ought to be legal and I'm stating here why it isn't and tobacco is.
I mentioned small tobacco farmers for a different reason. Taxes, restrictions and lawsuits against tobacco increase everyday and everyday small tobacco farmers loose ground to larger tobacco firms which can deal more efficiently with the restrictions. As the restrictions increase, small tobacco will go out of business and if criminalize, the larger firms will give way to cartels every bit as troublesome as the Mexican mob. Legalize either and their's no guarantee that either will come back as a wholesome industry. (Given prohibition, it seems likely, but isn't a given.)
So those that oppose one and support the other aren't necessarily hypocrites so much as tunnel visioned. Which is all I really have to say.