ICMAG Administration endorses The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010

[JackTheGrower]

So now you're voting no because it discriminates against the poor in your opinion????

You're really reaching now.

How do you know how I am voting?

I am just here for the conversation and offing opposing arguments as I see them.

Again are any of you doing any volenteering to register people? Campaigning on the streets with signs encouraging folks to vote yes?

Get off your asses and do something friends!

Nothing will be solved in this forum..

Let me read how each of you signed up 100 people to vote today!

 

[JackTheGrower]

Cheech Marin Endorses Prop 19

Cheech Marin Endorses Prop 19

Cheech Marin Endorses Prop 19

Vote! Just vote, because if everyone thinks marijuana should be legalized, it'll pass with flying colors," says Top CelebStoner "Cheech" Marin about Prop 19, the measure that would tax and regulate marijuana in California this November. "I'd like to see marijuana legalized," the stoner comic adds.

“If I want to sit home and smoke a joint and play guitar or watch TV, I should be able to do that.”

Cheech & Chong kick off their Get It Legal Fall Tour in Redding, California on Sept. 24 . Check out the tour dates here.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

Yup but before all is said and done... peoples lives will be ruined in the process. I guess that is ok for some... but not from me. It is one thing to get busted at the state level but it is another to get busted at the federal level and many will before anything is done about it as the federal government will try and make an example out of people. Remember... like I said before the way this is writen... it will not stop arressts and will further incarceration. I thought it would only be at the state level but it looks like it will be at the federal level. I guess there is bound to be casualties but it looks like it is going to be at a heavy cost as federal offenses are no joke.

If Feds are gearing up (which I highly doubt) does it matter if it's 19 or 215? It's all illegal in there eyes so what difference would it make? With 19 it would be much harder for the fed prosecutor to convince a jury to convict since mmj cannot be used as a defense.

Riddle me this?

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

So you are against people growing Pot..

Wow..

Nope, I'm just against fear mongering assholes like yourself....

 

[vta]

No one is going to be safe

Full of FEAR you are.

Prop19 playing with the big boys... federal pen vs jail time. I sure hope you guys know what you are doing

More bullshit fear mongering.

and like I said... this is the main reason I am voting no... it will not keep people out of jail

GA...I know we have been over this many many times with you. People go to jail for growing pot, 19 legalizes it dummy. You spew the same bullshit lie over and over even when your proving wrong. Stupid is what stupid does I guess.

and with pro19 passing soon it will be like shooting fish in a barrel.

Ah...the feds don't mess with rec users or people that grow under a 100 plants. So take your FEAR mongering somewhere else.

Yup but before all is said and done... peoples lives will be ruined in the process.

FEAR again!!!!! Oh and I guess the 80,000 people arrested each year don't have their lives ruined at all.

Remember... like I said before the way this is writen... it will not stop arressts and will further incarceration. I thought it would only be at the state level but it looks like it will be at the federal level. I guess there is bound to be casualties but it looks like it is going to be at a heavy cost as federal offenses are no joke.

Remember like you said??? All you have ever said is bullshit. Sorry I don't usually get up in people, but your a complete idiot. Like you said, shit. You have not presented a valid argument...ever. You say "Nobody is going to jail now" "The only people going to jail have more than an ounce" blah blah blah.... What about growers...you know the main subject of this site. Growing pot in Cali is a Felony. Do you know what that is? Smart Guy.

 

[Kalicokitty]

How do you know how I am voting?

I am just here for the conversation and offing opposing arguments as I see them.

!

I guess I don't really, I can only draw my own conclusions from the tone of your posts.

 

[binaryfission]

The Highlights.

The Highlights.

2. Your cop example is fear mongering and we are not falling for it. We know what cops do here in Ca, both down south and up north. So do the courts. I would LOVE to have a groundbreaking prop 19 case brought into court by a cowboy cop!

-BBB

MMJ is not the cash cow that recreational is. My city can't seem to come up with a ordinance for MMJ but the City manager said he could have an ordinance ready in 2 months for recreational if 19 passes. Half our city council is against MMJ but show interest in recreational...it's all about money.

I can't tell if we got alot of teabaggers in icmag, or if this is just a pathetic attempt to act like they care about others, when really it's just a mask for the ME ME ME growers and dealers who'd rather see people in jail then their untaxed profits diminished...

This is about setting a prescedent that we as a people will no longer accept persecution for enjoying cannabis. We all have the right as responsible adults to consume and enjoy cannabis without fear if persecution.

In short, mj legalization will NOT be the catalyst for tax law reform.

im working on starting up again....

ive got a new breeding project in mind..RHB (Red Hair Bud)

remember back home in october growing up every year about fair time the old school "red hair bud" would roll into town? all neon green and red "hairs" (pistils) all over it. smelled like somebody beat a skunk to death on a pine stump scraped up the skunk tinged pine sap and put it in a sammich bag.

yeah that

we call that "topflight." or christmas tree. pistils look like ornaments on the good good. mmm good schwag.

One month after MPP and an ideologically diverse coalition of drug policy reformers and advocacy groups called on President Obama to withdraw Michele Leonhart as his nominee for DEA administrator, a spokesperson for the White House has declared that the president is confident that the Bush holdover is the “right” choice for the job.

Mike Riggs has the story in The Daily Caller:

Obama is confident that Leonhart is the right choice, the White House staffer said, and that as of Friday the president wasn’t considering anyone else for the position. In other words, the response from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. to a chorus of concerns boils down to: Leonhart or bust.

MPP and others – including FireDogLake’s Jane Hamsher and the states-rights group the Tenth Amendment Center – pointed to Leonhart’s interim leadership of the DEA, which has included federal raids on state-legal medical marijuana providers and the denial of medical marijuana research applications, as evidence that she is continuing Bush-era policies that Obama promised to end. During the campaign, and in an October memo from the Department of Justice, the president and his administration pledged to end federal raids on state-legal medical marijuana providers.

But when Riggs asked the feds whether recent raids in California violate the spirit of the October memo, spokespeople for both the White House and DOJ seemed to backtrack on the president’s pledge.

But the White House and the Justice Department both told TheDC that Holder’s memo does not give dispensaries carte blanche to grow or sell marijuana, and that recent raids don’t conflict with what Obama expressed while campaigning.
Advertisement

“I wouldn’t say the memo ‘discourages’ certain raids,” a DOJ offical told TheDC. Rather, “it talks about prioritizing resources most efficiently.” And both the White House and the DOJ argued that the gist of the Holder memo was that the DEA would “not focus its limited resources on individual patients with cancer or other serious diseases.”

One can’t help but wonder, with the nomination of Leonhart, the ongoing raids, and this type of public about-face on the issue, if President Obama is now reneging on his campaign pledge to approach medical marijuana issues differently than his predecessor.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs thinks it’s absurd to even suggest such a thing. “I hear these people saying he’s like George Bush,” Gibbs said recently. “Those people ought to be drug tested. I mean, it’s crazy.”

Crazy is exactly right, Mr. Gibbs. I mean, it’s not like President Obama picked the same person George W. Bush did to lead the DEA, and has insisted on standing by her while she employs the same policies that were in place under Bush. Oh wait …

^^^^ this sets up this VVVVVVVV

Obama will have to make a decision Federally regarding Cannabis if this Bill passes.The timing couldn't be better.

If Obama allows the Feds to step in and bust people it would severely hurt his chances for re-election. Cali has a lot of electoral votes and if Obama goes back on his word to allow States to decide the Cannabis issues themselves, then he loses Cali and possibly the election.

Could be interesting forcing him to make a decision......

he'll make the pro-states right play and say yes for rec use. Then he'll let her implement the strategy to go after "illegal gangs of marijuana producers." These people will be the greedy ones taking advantage, not filing paperwork, stealing power etc who will get hunted down with new r.i.c.o./conspiracy indictments.
He'll be able to say he made the popular anti-Federalism play, and he'll have a bush appointee as an "attack dog." Brilliant. Cash for everyone.

The second thing is this only property owners discriminates against the poor.

o rly?

Jack you have been grasping at straws for a while now....

please stop jack. I applaud you for all you do but if your spreading this propaganda as truth please stop. Allowing home owners the ability to prevent renters from destroying their property is not discrimination. What you are advocating would be a reason to never own anything. Why buy when you can burn down your landlord's?

its a liability issue.

 

[nomaad]

No way the majority of California democrats are going to vote for a Republican, Fox-backed candidate over Obama because of his stance on ganja, regardless of what it is. Just sayin.

 

[localhero]

its pretty well understood that if you rent an apt, you will be at the owners mercy. now, then, whenever. even if they had a stipulation that allowed you to grow no matter what, owners would still find a way to boot you.

its stupid to argue here why its such a bad idea to grow in your apt/home. i mean look what happens, it puts the community in the position of arguing how damaging growing can be.

its simple, if the real intention of the prop were safety reasons in the first place, then it would have either:

1- not allowed indoor growing.
2- created limits on indoor space/wattage and outdoor space seperately.

the intent was to make growing inconvenient so that we would all buy from commercial sources.

 

[vta]

QUOTE=JackTheGrower
You don't understand. When you rent it is your property for the duration of the rental.

You don't seem to understand. I don't care if I rent to Jesus, It's still MY property. How can you say such a thing? When you rent, you have certain rights but you don't get to 'use' that house anyway you want. Your saying the same thing as if an owner doesn't want pets and your saying that they have no say in the matter, that if you want a pet then by God and all the founding fathers and freedom this and liberty that I have the right to have a hamster even if my landlord says no! Just as a landlord has the right to forbid pets, they have the same right to forbid grows of pot or carrots or whatever...It's THEIR house not yours.

The Landlord has no right to enter without permission and all.

Not true. A landlord can in Cali just needs to give you 24 hour notice before they need access.

The second thing is this only property owners discriminates against the poor.

Not really sure what the hell that says, sorry.

This discontent is at mainstream media level now so beating up on me will do you no good.

Got a link on this "discontent"...not sure what your referring to. If your referring about "growers needs landlords permission to grow" I'm thinking, how mainstream could it really be?

And for crying out loud Prop 19 isn't legalization! It is Decriminalization.

It may not be in your mind but hey. Also, pot is already decriminalized. It has been most of my life. Semantics....I know. Only just one thing. pssst prop19 legalizes personal cultivation. It also legalizes possession. So now instead of getting a misdemeanor conviction, because of the whoe legality thing...now you get nothing. That's right! You will now be able to LEGALLY carry pot with you and grow it! jack, it's a truly wonderful thing, you should check it out. You can read all about it here http://www.taxcannabis2010.org/




Wow Just try to have a garden larger than 5x5 and you will see how legal it is.

WOW...try it now and see!


I know full well the difference between True Legalization and Prop 19. There is no way for me to change the fanatical on a mission if they cannot change themselves.

Sometimes you come off as if your trying to be some Paul Revere type riding his horse yelling to the townspeople about the fighting for TOTAL cannabis freedom! All I can say is Freedumb. I know this has been pointed out to you before but even prop19 itself, as 'restrictive' as it is, is struggling at the polls...to think that an all out free for all legalization prop would pass is just crazy...asinine even. We need this first step...PEOPLE ARE GOING TO JAIL AS I TYPE THIS for pot. Wheres your Freedumb in that!

You guys did notice the new Felonies yes? Legalization wouldn't do that.

No I didn't...Hey lets take a look at 19 to see just what the hell your talking about...

(c) Every person 21 years of age or over who knowingly furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer or give, any marijuana to a person aged 18 years or older, but younger than 21 years of age, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of up to six months and be fined up to $1,000 for each offense.

(d) In addition to the penalties above, any person who is licensed, permitted or authorized to perform any act pursuant to Section 11301, who while so licensed, permitted or authorized, negligently furnishes, administers, gives or sells, or offers to furnish, administer, give or sell, any marijuana to any person younger than 21 years of age shall not be permitted to own, operate, be employed by, assist or enter any licensed premises authorized under Section 11301 for a period of one year.

OK Jack...that is ALL that is new law. 19 does reference these ALREADY ON THE BOOKS laws...

(a) Every person 18 years of age or over who hires, employs, or uses a minor in transporting, carrying, selling, giving away, preparing for sale, or peddling any marijuana, who unlawfully sells, or offers to sell, any marijuana to a minor, or who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give any marijuana to a minor under 14 years of age, or who induces a minor to use marijuana in violation of law shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, five, or seven years.

(b) Every person 18 years of age or over who furnishes, administers, or gives, or offers to furnish, administer, or give, any marijuana to a minor 14 years of age or older shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a period of three, four, or five years.

So...those last 2 ARE ALREADY CALIFORNIA LAW. So...where are your "New Felonies" When you find them, let me know. So..."They" are trying to make pot legal, like booze. Do you get that? The whole 21 year old thing? Well...the new penalty for giving pot to a 18-21 year old, wait for it, wait for it,...now the same as if you gave that same person a shot of jack. Ha..so if that is a big deal to you...bringing pot in line with the booze laws...then I don't know hat else to say except keep dreaming! No way in hell would voters pass such a thing.


All this is covered with the Rental/Lease contract. There was no need to have it in Prop 19.

Common sense will tell most people that when voters are handed a proposition, they reason factors including what it will mean for them. Well if you 'read' news you would know that 'grow houses' are a menace that cost homeowners money to fix. Growers cut holes through walls, mold everywhere...you of all people should know how they like to twist FEAR. This helps homeowners feel more comfortable with the law.

By Prop 19 having this in it it targeted the poor for discrimination.

lol

As for workplace discrimination being over with.. I doubt it.

I'm sure you do...but it is a start. For one employers will not be able to fire someone for what they did on Saturday..3 weeks ago. I understand your all negative and all but this part of the law gives us the most rights without court tie ups.

So Fine guys are we now at the point where folks bringing a contrasting opinion to the discussion gives the gang the rights to beat up on those who dare confront?

Just debate...I agree that after 3,000 posts people get testy when the same old fear mongering crap gets brought back up again and again and again. Contrasting opinion and straw grabbing are two totally different things.

Do any of you have a Vote Buddy?

Is that like a butt buddy?

Do something in reality to aid your cause.[/QUOTE]

This kind of is reality...you see people read crap and believe it and vote not knowing the facts. So when people pull shit out of their ass we are here to lay out the facts to 'aid our cause' because we want that vote.

 

[JackTheGrower]

Nope, I'm just against fear mongering assholes like yourself....

You are not even reading yourself.

It's a sign that one has lost their position when they resort to labels and name calling.

Rather immature.

Way to go.

 

[echo_chamber]

Voting yes here. This bill does everything to help the average smoker, and hurts the commercial grower to a degree. All laws are amendable, so voting no on this is kinda pointless.. Voting yes is gonna let every Californian carry an ounce on their person, keeping them out of jail. That is MOST important, i could care less about the money issue.. No corporation is gonna touch Marijuana until its federally legal...

 

[GanjaAL]

I do not have to worry at this moment in time. I feel sorry for those who are being suckered in to the pharce that prop19 will set them free. I am a mmj user and get my meds from a local mom and pop collective. Why do I have to fear... they are not coming after mmj users... only the rec users and mass production of mmj.

I love the insults the fuel me to get more people than I already have to vote no... if you are the mark as to what legalization is about... we are in for a long and hard fight to get it legalized.

There is one thing Mr. Lee said that I respected... do not shove it in the face of the DEA.

They are better funded, nastier and willing to do what is necessary to prove you wrong.

Also... you need to pic your battles as going to jail for something stupid is not worth it. Not when you can play their own game.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

Ouch, another anti 19 playing the victim? Taken right from the Glenn beck playbook. Classic. I guess it's no problem to lie and purposely misinterpret just as long as we don't call names.

But I figure if it walk like a duck and quacks like a duck, I'm going to call it a duck.

So you are against people growing Pot..

Wow..

You are not even reading yourself.

It's a sign that one has lost their position when they resort to labels and name calling.

Rather immature.

Way to go.

 

[JackTheGrower]

Ouch, another anti 19 playing the victim? Taken right from the Glenn beck playbook. Classic. I guess it's no problem to lie and purposely misinterpret just as long as we don't call names.

But I figure if it walk like a duck and quacks like a duck, I'm going to call it a duck.

I am arguing opposing concepts. That is all. I am old enough to have two or three different concepts in play in my mind and entertain even yet another.
I do not have a single mental focus where I have to make everything into a do or die situation.

Until the Vote we all need to read all we can. Explore all we can and be sure our Yes or No vote is the correct one.

What you need from me I don't get. I'm not sure you know what you need from me.
Still we have spun this wheel for many months here at ICMag and I know what i have learned.
The linking this privilege to property ownership is a Far Right concept dating back to the founding of our Country.
That means Prop 19 people deliberately aimed to put poor people at a disadvantage. Aiming I would guess to increase the Consumer base rather than the Producer base.

It is really simple and it's a truth.

So hey.. If this is pissing you all off I can go. No problem.

 

[Snowberry]

Landlord/Tenant Myths Debunked

Landlord/Tenant Myths Debunked

Folks,

I have to chime in on more misinformed obvious renters who sincerely believe they pay rent in order to do as they wish with other people's property.

First off, let's get it straight....if you are renting, you are buying time, that's it.

The landlord is just that...Lord of the land being rented. That is unless the landlord has a mortgage and most will because of tax reasons like a deductible expense of income property.
In which case a Lender will hold an equity stake in said property along with the landlord in a registered legal contract, much like a rental agreement or lease.

Another thing to consider is the fact most every lender who has an equity stake in any property with a registered lien (debt) will spell out in the contract a property insurance clause, requiring proof of insurance for continuance of the agreement.

In other words, the bank wants to make sure it can recover at least the value of the entire outstanding debt owed in case of foreclosure.

So if your landlord has a mortgage he/she is bound by contract to not only protect their own interest in the property but the banks as well.

If you are growing on somebody else's property without a contract or undertaking, you will at the very least get kicked to the curb if not arrested and incarcerated for the legal implications of illegal cultivation of cannabis.

The bottom line is even if you are a homeowner with a mortgage, the same reality will apply if you are risking the bank's equity stake without their express authorization stated clearly within the mortgage documents.

The true full meaning of Landlord simply put means the person who has free title to a property clear of liens or encumbrances (debt).

So, I have to agree with VTA on page 207 of this thread post # 3105.

Bottom line ....if you don't own it outright, it ain't yours.

I hope this clears the B.S. fumes lurkin....Snowberry

 

[Chief Rbud]

Today if I smoke in front of my children in my house nothing can be done as they are 18 yrs old or over. Now if they were under 18 the police may not have much to say as no penal codes would be being broken as I`m a legal med user,but CPS has sometimes brought up complaints. I`m a little worried under todays laws about my kids having problems with CPS if I smoke when my grandkids are here.

Under Prop 19 I`m worried that even having my married children who are not 21 yrs old around when I need medication could be a problem! Now some people have stated that many people in Cali are not really disabled and are using medical marijuana laws just to sneek by.Maybe, but that is clearly not the case with me! I am considered permenently disabled and am on social Security for life (not welfare,Not SSI) I qualify because of my age at this point anyway!

As for size of grow.215 doesn`t set a size of grow and AB 420 was struct down by the courts.I can grow as much as I need for my condition under state law.Under fedral law it is still a crime to grow or have any marijuana how ever.But because the only thing I have is my Doctors recomendation I`m afraid that prop 19 would limit my grow area or plant count to 5x5 which would not come close to my needs.I use 2-3 oz a day on my good days and have been able to stop taking most of my other medications because of that including the morphine sulfate. I also sometimes need to carry much more than an oz if I have to be away for any amount of time.Some times when I`m in pain or the inflamation from my illness, not being in remission I have been known to vape over 5 oz at a time in order to try to keep my illness under control! And that is dank stuff also Tahoe OG Kush, Banana OG kush, Herijuana, hash,ect. and many other strains as well as Sativa strains so I can get up and about.If this law has a wisper of a chance of limiting my needed consumption I`m a dead man! I have already out lived 3 of 4 doctors who have each given me less than a month to live. Because of smoking marijuana from early youth I`m still here! An other reason I am dead against limiting youth from smoking marijuana! Ok admittedly maybe that`s why I get away with leo knowing I have an M-16 and grow/smoke marijuana I have yet to find a Leo who will arrest me for anything in the condition I am in! And I do very much enjoy out shooting them at the range! Makes them feel stupid to carry a gun and not be able to out shoot a dam dope smoking old Hippie that has on foot in the grave and the other in Hell! LOL!

Jesus man, you need to start making oil and eating it. noone should smoke or vape that much. 85% of its medicinal value literally goes "up in smoke" when you smoke or vape it. if im not mistaken i believe prop 19 will allow extractions, you should be the 1st one that votes yes, then you wont have to have so much on you in order to get by when you arent at home. i know he's banned, but i figure he's probably still readin it or joined under another name, and i hope he sees this post in order to help him.

 

[dagnabit]

I am arguing opposing concepts. That is all. I am old enough to have two or three different concepts in play in my mind and entertain even yet another.
I do not have a single mental focus where I have to make everything into a do or die situation.

Until the Vote we all need to read all we can. Explore all we can and be sure our Yes or No vote is the correct one.

What you need from me I don't get. I'm not sure you know what you need from me.
Still we have spun this wheel for many months here at ICMag and I know what i have learned.
The linking this privilege to property ownership is a Far Right concept dating back to the founding of our Country.
That means Prop 19 people deliberately aimed to put poor people at a disadvantage. Aiming I would guess to increase the Consumer base rather than the Producer base.

It is really simple and it's a truth.

So hey.. If this is pissing you all off I can go. No problem.

protecting the property owners rights somehow transmutes int an attack on the poor in your mind?

i guess it is just a difference in perspective really.

so it's not that "simple" nor is it "a truth."

you approach this from the idea of the collective and the greater good.

i am viewing this as an individual liberty issue.
to tell a home owner he must allow any activity is a usurpation of his BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS to do with his property as he so chooses.

but im a bit of a hawk that way.... im opposed to the FHA as far as that goes (i believe the cultural ramifications are such that anyone discriminating in whom they rent to will be punished by the market)

like i said perspective...im a landlord.

but to say of something so based on your own perceptions that "It is really simple and it's a truth." is simply not the truth.

 

[BiG H3rB Tr3E]

I am arguing opposing concepts. That is all. I am old enough to have two or three different concepts in play in my mind and entertain even yet another.
I do not have a single mental focus where I have to make everything into a do or die situation.

Until the Vote we all need to read all we can. Explore all we can and be sure our Yes or No vote is the correct one.

What you need from me I don't get. I'm not sure you know what you need from me.
Still we have spun this wheel for many months here at ICMag and I know what i have learned.
The linking this privilege to property ownership is a Far Right concept dating back to the founding of our Country.
That means Prop 19 people deliberately aimed to put poor people at a disadvantage. Aiming I would guess to increase the Consumer base rather than the Producer base.

It is really simple and it's a truth.

So hey.. If this is pissing you all off I can go. No problem.

I'm not rich and I don't own a house and I don't feel in anyway this will prevent me from growing nor do I feel it is an attack on my personal rights.

Like many others have said you can't force everyone to confirm to what you think your rights should be. If it was written like that, 19 would have had as much of a chance of making it as a sky diver with no parachute.

I'm all for an opposing arguments, but you seem to be grasping at straws to dissuade any voter possible with these ridiculous claims and your holier than thou freedom fighter tone in your posts.

...and to markscastle claiming he need 2-5oz a day for his condition....? I don't believe it for a minute. Ice smoked with thousands upon thousands of people and have never seen consumption like that. Sounds like you are growing and selling illegally under 215. 5 oz a day ... Hahaha wadda joke.

 

[CrazyCooter]

"The linking this privilege to property ownership is a Far Right concept dating back to the founding of our Country."

Jack,

This concept goes back far beyond this. Capitalism, feudalism, socialism, etc. all concentrates land "ownership" into the hands of the few and creates slaves out of the humans who were born without their "god given right" to land.

Land + Labor + Capital = Wealth

Without land, the laborers compete for a place to live and drive up rents to the highest possible values. Labor must be sold for the lowest wage possible. Capital is able to compete for outrageous interest when used. And wealth ends up in the hands of the small percentage of the population. All of this is based on the ability of our "modern" society to make land access artificially scarce for the majority of the population.

"Progress and Poverty" by Henry George does a good job of explaining these concepts if interested.

"The true full meaning of Landlord simply put means the person who has free title to a property clear of liens or encumbrances (debt)."

Snowberry,

I don't have a reference for this, but my brother-in-law told me that the word "landlord" in very old english comes from a similar sounding word that means literally, "bread giver". Who made the bread that the "landlord" is so graciously giving to the workers who dare to try to live on the land that they cannot use themselves?

"protecting the property owners rights somehow transmutes int an attack on the poor in your mind?"

Dagnabit,

property rights and the current lack of access to land for the majority of the workers, not administrators, owners, or "landlords" is what keeps all the "-isms" is what keeps this repressive system working.

"so it's not that 'simple' nor is it 'a truth.'"

Land + Labor = Wealth

If you have no access to land, you end up working for wage and the landlords and capitalists end up with the wealth. The workers do all the work, and the administrators end up with the wealth. A very good system of modern slavery.

Herb,

How old are you?

Do you think that "legalizing" a schedule 1 drug will reduce interference and persecution from the federal government for patients like myself?