Marijuana Cost VS. GOLD

[Guest]

Show me where supply has increased and demand has leveled off--it is becoming redundant at this point, but the assumptions of a supply/demand model do not apply to this item.

This has been regurgitated several times without evidence. The evidence seems clear--the nominal price has remained relatively stable since the early 1980s (thanks for confirming that Hoosierhash). Now what would cause that? I stand by my previous posts, but would really like to see/hear some contrary opinions that do not rely on a fraudulent abstraction ("supply/demand").

You sound like someone who believes Keynes was an economist.

 

[Guest]

For reference, $140 in 1975 would be about $536 in 2007. That's roughly $33 / 1/4 oz. using 2007 dollars. Contrast that with Hoosierhash's figure of $50 for an 1/4 oz. in 1980

You've got good insight Socio but let me clarify. I started smoking in '75. The $140 I paid for a quarter lb of Acapulco Gold was about 1979. Ounces of good import, Columbian was preferred, were $35 in 1980. Mex could be had but was usually lower quality but some excellent Mex would come through. I lived near New York City so pretty close to the central import location for that area. I lived down in the desert Southwest for awhile, in the early 90's, and I was getting excellent import for about $40 an ounce but that was pretty direct.

 

[socioecologist]

What a fucking clown. You sound like the kind of loon who believes Keynes was an economist. Institutionalism is gone.

Thanks for the thoughtful response (and unsure editing). Is this what you have to resort to when your theories are no longer applicable? For the record, I'm a Marxist political economist, NOT a Keynesian. The trouble with standard economists today is that they are not taught economic history; one look at the classical political economists (Smith, Ricardo, Marx, Schumpeter, etc.) demonstrates that neoclassical economics is built on a faulty foundation (which is why they no longer work).

No need to have an argument over this though--that's the point of using evidence to adjudicate competing claims, right? So provide some evidence instead of derailing a dialogue.

 

[socioecologist]

Nondual--how did the import prices compare to homegrown in the 90s? This is great information, thanks--I have no experience with imported dope.

 

[Guest]

No need to have an argument over this though--that's the point of using evidence to adjudicate competing claims, right? So provide some evidence instead of derailing a dialogue.

It would be nice to keep this as a discussion but maybe not. If you haven't gotten your PhD yet Socio I think this subject might make a good thesis. If you're on track then your doctorate is in the bag otherwise just mental machinations. Theory is nice but what's the real scoop?

 

[Guest]

Nondual--how did the import prices compare to homegrown in the 90s?

Sorry man but really quit smoking in 1980. In the early 1990's, puffed again for a bit, I found myself right on the Mexican border and scored excellent stuff inexpensively but the going rate where I was at. I brought the smoke up to NorCal and took care of a few friends at the price I bought for and they came back for more. I had $40 per oz Mex and 'local' grown was like $400. It was a no brainer. I shoulda gone into business and gotten rich...LOL.

Yes...I've gotten back into smoking and growing lately.

 

[Guest]

The price for quality outdoor, here is at most $2500 a lb. If you have thee best indoor (I mean looks, smells, tastes, smokes good and is super potent) you can still get $3600 a lb.

Sounds dead on however the fall harvest season is a bitch to try and sell into and know some friends who basically sit on stuff when it comes in. So part of what were talking about is the ability to distribute...year round. I know some peeps that turn indoor stuff at $2,900 per lb rain, sleet or snow year round but they're in a solid distribution channel.

 

[ItsGrowTime]

I know that in the 70's, a nice fat oz was $30 all day, every day.
Special reds and golds could get $35-40.
It was a known fact that any 1/4elbo was a flat $115
This was for years and years.

Sometime during the early 80's a paradigm shift was being made.
The previous normal size of street purchase when herb was $30 an oz was either a full oz, or a "lid" which was half oz. The change of the 80's saw the normal street purchase size decrease to 1/4oz, with the price ending up at about $50 1/4oz.
To this day, the going street is $50 1/4oz.
(your area may vary)

The free market and it's dynamics simply do not work in the normal way with herb, since it has not been allowed any freedom. If the tax hungry politicians would figure out just how much state revenue could be gained by simply freeing up herb, there would be far less of a hokey market. And I for one would be glad to be involved with the taxation, in return for the freedom.

A big part of that paradigm shift was because of the drug war. It got much riskier to have anything to do with cannabis once federal laws got much harsher, the DEA showed up, and long mandatory minimum sentences were enacted. The hippy days of freely (relatively) smoking pot were gone hence prices had to go up to reflect the risk involved. In the end, the price of cannabis is high because of the risk. No other reason IMHO. The prices have stayed steady because the risk is no greater or less than it has been for the last 15 years. And its not really run (mj economy overall) in a traditional business sense so things like inflation aren't factored in. You cant get snitched on for selling a toilet seat so I think many people keep prices steady just for security reasons. Jacking up prices will piss some people off. There is a comfort zone that we have to work with.

 

[Grizz]

It's perhaps what they taught you in school of commerce socioecologist, but explain to me; how does it "especially" not apply to cannabis prices?

On the contrary, cannabis prices is the simplest of market economies, except for old fashioned trading.
It is exempt from the rest of the market economy - as an illegal product - and fly under the radar of the structure and mechanisms that regulate prices in society. The only 'external' regulation involved are the laws that forbid it, and what you risk if you brake them. Neither taxing nor social charges, interest rates, the stock market in Hong Kong or Alan Greenspan's predictions are going to play directly on the Cannabis market and it's prices.

What can make prices fluctuate? Big drug busts might give some clever cash croppers the idea to raise prices, if they see competition go out of business, but that's only going to work momentarily and prices will auto-regulate themselves eventually.

There's plenty of money in the buyer's pockets - in general - so that's not going to explain why the prices do not rise (in level with gold), if they don't.
If prices aren't rising, someone's doing something right.

If it was entirely an import product, like opium and cocaine, you would see a whole different scenario, I believe.

At the same time, drive over to the other side of the border, in Canada and Mexico, and see how prices drop dramatically.

You are so right Rosy. All this inflation talk and other bull shit dont mean nothing. If theres no weed to buy and a market for it and you have some name your price. supply and demand control it plain and simple.As ass wipe Mr. C says up in canada they have a over supply so prices are cheaper. here in the states the price is higher because the supply cant keep up with the demand. If the supply gets shorter the prices will go higher.

 

[socioecologist]

Joesy--how do you name your price?

Edit: Let me be more specific. Scarcity pushes prices up and abundance pushes them down--no shit. That's a short term phenomenon. The historical range of prices for homegrown looks pretty consistent in nominal terms (i.e. $400 / oz. in 1989 and 400 / oz. in 2008). So what causes sellers to set the prices in this consistent of a range while its real value (controlled for inflation) declines? The point here is that the price RANGE is consistent even during times of scarcity/abundance.

The question is: "What causes you to name a specific price?" You say it is "supply and demand" (without elaborating what that really means in the case of the cannabis market, which is an asymmetric market, which thereby invalidates any use of traditional supply/demand micromodels); I say it is you (and your buyer) reflecting on what the going rate has been, in your experience(s), during a time of scarcity/abundance/normalcy? Do you see how that is very different from your response?

This micro-level interaction spills over to the macro-level prices; unless growers start a union and a critical mass demand more money for their work (someone already mentioned this), you will end up with prices staying in their historical range--which has been declining in real terms due to that "inflation bullshit".

 

[Grizz]

simple, set it high, if no one buys come down untill it does sell. If its dank and people like it they will pay. if its shit they won't pay as much, If no one else has any its going to sell at the price you set, name your price, supply and demand

 

[socioecologist]

Joesy--you say "set it high"; what's a high price? How do you know that its "high" price? Do you see what I'm saying?

 

[guineapig]

I have thought about this topic relentlessly and i would love to read a Phd thesis on the relationship between all things cannabis and all things economic.....

It seems that the price of gold (and oil for that matter) is running up sharply while the cost for an ounce of premium cannabis flowers has not increased at the same rate, at least in certain markets......as the loony (canadian dollar) achieved parity with the american dollar, it has become less and less profitable for the big bags of Beasters (canadian-grown indoor cannabis) to cross the border into the USA and affect the price......

Maybe there are separate markets for schwag (mexican-border-crossing buds) and Beasters and finally top-shelf elite flowers......

Also, with the decline of the worth of the dollar, i think a barter system (where cannabis flowers are directly traded for goods or services) will become more and more popular, at least in the usa......maybe socioecologist can chime in on any of these issues....

I would for sure read a book on this subject!!! Great thread!!!

kind regards from guineapig

 

[Guest]

Where im from in 03' a oz was easily found for 300 and supply was much more limited. Now it is so easy to buy any amount of bud but the prices have gone up. Everyone is selling a oz for 400+. So I dont think that supply and demand applies to my area. Even shawgg was 20 bucks a quarter, now I don't see that dirt selling for less than 35 a quarter.

 

[Rosy Cheeks]

It seems that the price of gold (and oil for that matter) is running up sharply while the cost for an ounce of premium cannabis flowers has not increased at the same rate, at least in certain markets......

Also, with the decline of the worth of the dollar, i think a barter system (where cannabis flowers are directly traded for goods or services) will become more and more popular, at least in the usa......

I think we really should stop comparing Cannabis to gold, it's two different animals and it's partly what makes this thread confusing.

Cannabis is a crop produce, and a commodity product. A commodity product is by definition a physical substance, such as food, grains, and metals, which is interchangeable with another product of the same type, and which investors buy or sell. The price of the commodity is subject to supply and demand.

The problem with gold is that it is not only a commodity product, it is also a currency (used to be during the days of gold standard, and still is in the private sector), and an investment object.

Since currencies today are investments objects, investors buy dollars when the dollar is strong, and when the dollar is weak, they turn to other "currencies", such as gold, real estate or oil. Dollar goes weak, gold go strong. It doesn't explain exactly how economics work, but it's one factor that sticks out.

I don't believe we're going to see an intricate barter system develop in the US. Look at poor countries all over the world, what do they do when their currencies drop in value? They simply turn to the dollar as a currency. So if the dollar drop below accepted levels, use another 'stronger' currency, such as the Euro.

But of course, if someone wants to trade a goat, a cow or a hard-working woman (that can plow the fields and handle a shotgun) against a bag of weed, I've got one sitting right here.

You should all check out High Times THMQ (Trans-High Market Quotations) index, which lists average pot prices all over the US:

http://www.hightimes.com/ht/home/content.php?page=thmq_0807

First thing you'll notice is that pot prices are widely different in all states, just as prices vary tremendously between strains. If you follow that index over the time, you'll see that prices fluctuate and evolve, and I for one cannot discern any trend in overall evolution of pot prices whatsoever.

In general, sellers have the impression prices do not rise enough in relation to value, and buyers think everything is getting too expensive, no?

 

[Grizz]

Joesy--you say "set it high"; what's a high price? How do you know that its "high" price? Do you see what I'm saying?

Yes I see what you mean, but I don't totaly agree, guess im to hard headed, To my way of thinking if there wasent any weed around within this say 3000 miles and you have all these peps wanting weed you could charge 1000 dollors a oz and someone with cash is going to buy it and probably smoke some and break it down and sell some for even a higher price, and then if by some kind of miricle our goverment ligelized growing and everyone was growing there own the price would fall to practicly nothing.

 

[Guest]

Thanks for the thoughtful response (and unsure editing). Is this what you have to resort to when your theories are no longer applicable? For the record, I'm a Marxist political economist, NOT a Keynesian. The trouble with standard economists today is that they are not taught economic history; one look at the classical political economists (Smith, Ricardo, Marx, Schumpeter, etc.) demonstrates that neoclassical economics is built on a faulty foundation (which is why they no longer work).

No need to have an argument over this though--that's the point of using evidence to adjudicate competing claims, right? So provide some evidence instead of derailing a dialogue.

\

The evidence: Soviet Russia and Maoist China among the forefront of Marxist implementation in the world: one industrialist the other agrarian and both of them work about as well as the lunacy you're barking.

What you are is a fool. Keynes' ignorance is one step away from Marxism and you sounded exactly like a fool Marxist, I just couldn't let go and admit how stupid you actually had to be. What you'd better do is go get an education; then start in with the 'tautologies', and other bullshit that deconstructionist idiots like you use to obscure the fact you can't believe how things actually work, so you make up rules out of thin air- and when they don't work, declare the need for 'more study'.

ALL buying and selling is supply and demand- ESPECIALLY smuggling, and it galls clowns like you that it could be so simple and so brutal: which is why people invent ''theories'' of economics: to try to take some of the brutality out of it.
You're too weak to face the fact that in the HUMAN animal world, a large percentage never get off the ground, just like in the lower animal world, most of the time; and Marxism is the weakest of all fairy-tale 'theories'. It's what Islamic Fundamentalism is to philosophy: a way to reduce a civilization to rubble as exhibited by your ''Bros'' in Russia and China.

The only people who talk as much illucid shit as Marxists are Keynesians and both are a sure fire way to lie, lie, lie, until a currency isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

Whatever education you claim to have, it's worth as much to economics as studying in a Madrassa for 25 years is to sociological 'progress': a convoluted, denial-based trip back to the stone age.

You're dismissed as what you are: a Marxist idiot.

 

[jipedestran]

I have thought about this topic relentlessly and i would love to read a Phd thesis on the relationship between all things cannabis and all things economic.....

It seems that the price of gold (and oil for that matter) is running up sharply while the cost for an ounce of premium cannabis flowers has not increased at the same rate, at least in certain markets......as the loony (canadian dollar) achieved parity with the american dollar, it has become less and less profitable for the big bags of Beasters (canadian-grown indoor cannabis) to cross the border into the USA and affect the price......

Maybe there are separate markets for schwag (mexican-border-crossing buds) and Beasters and finally top-shelf elite flowers......

Also, with the decline of the worth of the dollar, i think a barter system (where cannabis flowers are directly traded for goods or services) will become more and more popular, at least in the usa......maybe socioecologist can chime in on any of these issues....

I would for sure read a book on this subject!!! Great thread!!!

kind regards from guineapig

Brother,
Your thoughts are mine.....This is just the type of discussion I was hoping for from this thread.

My own background:
early 80's---weed cost me 20 1/8 40 1/4 (no matter whatt it was, pressed, or as we used to call it Red Hair Sinse)
sometime a few years later it went up to 25/50 (150z)

Then around 1988-90 we found something called The Kind.....Blueberry, Northern Lights, Skunk.....this stuff was the real deal, domestic finery, and it commanded double the price. 50 1/8, 100 1/4 400zip no breaks.....

Sometime in the mid 90's Beasters hit the scene. I used to call them pseudo-kind bud. All show no go. Cost the same though. 50/100 Garbage

Highest prices I ever saw were in NYC Delivery Services 97-00 I think they got 50 bucks for like 2 grams in a plastic container. At least it was quality, not beaster crap.

I do not sell. I don't have a scale. I personally believe that I could command $1000.00 for a full jar of Mothers Finest or Lifesaver. (the large 4 cup size
I also put a very fine trim on my buds....

thanks to all who have responded so far. But do me one favor. Keep the name calling down. No need and it takes away from the majesty of your argument. (kingmaker I am talking to you)

peace
jip

 

[Guest]

Then around 1988-90 we found something called The Kind

Heh heh...premium cannabis demands premium prices. Back then it was a bit different though and a bit easier to get maximum $. Not too many years back a friend was getting $5000+ for very good, definitely not great, indoor but that's down to about $3k now for basically the same quality.

So it appears the first wave of price increases happened about the tail end of the government greatly slowing the flow from places like Columbia and Mexico and the second wave happened when breeders started putting out manipulated genetics trying to optimize strength, bag appeal, fragrance and flavor. Since that was also sinse had to have something to do with it.

 

[Grizz]

\

The evidence: Soviet Russia and Maoist China among the forefront of Marxist implementation in the world: one industrialist the other agrarian and both of them work about as well as the lunacy you're barking.

What you are is a fool. Keynes' ignorance is one step away from Marxism and you sounded exactly like a fool Marxist, I just couldn't let go and admit how stupid you actually had to be. What you'd better do is go get an education; then start in with the 'tautologies', and other bullshit that deconstructionist idiots like you use to obscure the fact you can't believe how things actually work, so you make up rules out of thin air- and when they don't work, declare the need for 'more study'.

ALL buying and selling is supply and demand- ESPECIALLY smuggling, and it galls clowns like you that it could be so simple and so brutal: which is why people invent ''theories'' of economics: to try to take some of the brutality out of it.
You're too weak to face the fact that in the HUMAN animal world, a large percentage never get off the ground, just like in the lower animal world, most of the time; and Marxism is the weakest of all fairy-tale 'theories'. It's what Islamic Fundamentalism is to philosophy: a way to reduce a civilization to rubble as exhibited by your ''Bros'' in Russia and China.

The only people who talk as much illucid shit as Marxists are Keynesians and both are a sure fire way to lie, lie, lie, until a currency isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

Whatever education you claim to have, it's worth as much to economics as studying in a Madrassa for 25 years is to sociological 'progress': a convoluted, denial-based trip back to the stone age.

You're dismissed as what you are: a Marxist idiot.

DAMN YOU SAID A MOTH FULL BRO. Good old straight arrow talk. THE TRUTH, Take it or leave it, I take it.