What's new

What Killed Prop. 19?

Status
Not open for further replies.

krunchbubble

Dear Haters, I Have So Much More For You To Be Mad
Veteran
i worked at three and was co director of one.....

overhead is nothing.......

at the one i was co director of, we were able to pull the total months bills within the first couple days of the month.....

just saying......
 

echo_chamber

Active member
Prop 19 was killed by the massive turnout of elderly and tea party voters that normally are not polarized to vote no on anything remotely progressive or liberal.
 

kmk420kali

Freedom Fighter
Veteran
i worked at three and was co director of one.....

overhead is nothing.......

at the one i was co director of, we were able to pull the total months bills within the first couple days of the month.....

just saying......

Is that including all the Meds??
 
Is that including all the Meds??

product wouldn't be calculated as overhead, traditionally.

:2cents:

Prop 19 was killed by the massive turnout of elderly and tea party voters that normally are not polarized to vote no on anything remotely progressive or liberal.

That's not really true. Turnout was average for most California elections; less than half of the registered voters voted. SO turnout was normal. Now if, half of the 18-34 age group actually registered and then half of those folks actually voted, instead of staying home, the bill could have passed.
Its not about their turnout out, its about our lack of one.
Apathy is our problem.
Explaining why more Iraqis vote than Americans is our problem.
 

kmk420kali

Freedom Fighter
Veteran
product wouldn't be calculated as overhead, traditionally.

:2cents:

Yeah, I wasn't sure...because with this business, it is a li'l different, since your complete inventory is subject to getting snatched up by LEO at any time--
Just to clarify for Krunch, this was an inquisitive question, not meant as inflammatory--:tiphat:
 
True. So goes the plight of the farmer, in one way or another.

Think Krunch will tell how large their inventory was? I assume not, but i would love to find out what those figures were. on average, Gross and Net sales.
 

Fear

Member
Harborside for example sells 7-8 pounds a day in 1/8th form $60 plus tax, daily. Add it up
Clubs pay between $3200 to $4200 a pound.
@$60 an 1/8 they make $7680 a lb.
That's $61,440 a day. at $3600 a lb. they pay $28,800 for meds creating a daily profit of $32,640
30 days of estimated profit equals $979,200 a month.
How much could overhead possibly be.

I met Rick (1 owner of Harborside)at the medical Cannabis cup in SF. We hook hands, smoked BHO, hanging out at Cali Connection outdoor table. Near the hash bar. It did cross my mind how rich $$$$ he must be.
 

kmk420kali

Freedom Fighter
Veteran
Harborside for example sells 7-8 pounds a day in 1/8th form $60 plus tax, daily. Add it up
Clubs pay between $3200 to $4200 a pound.
@$60 an 1/8 they make $7680 a lb.
That's $61,440 a day. at $3600 a lb. they pay $28,800 for meds creating a daily profit of $32,640
30 days of estimated profit equals $979,200 a month.
How much could overhead possibly be.

I met Rick (1 owner of Harborside)at the medical Cannabis cup in SF. We hook hands, smoked BHO, hanging out at Cali Connection outdoor table. Near the hash bar. It did cross my mind how rich $$$$ he must be.

Yes, they make good $$...but they, and all other Legit D's put a massive amount back into the Community through donations-- They have to, to maintain their "Non Profit" status--
But yeah...we all know they are making good $$--:tiphat:
 

couchlockd

Active member
the reason why it failed was because people that like and are for legalization/decriminalization actually read the language of the proposition, and they saw that you had to have permits to grow and i thin to posses a certain amount, but in know for sure you had to have permits to grow.

and these permits were to be issued by special govt ran probably places. and the people knew that they would never issue said permits, and the penalty for growing without a permit would be increased exponetially.

it would of made weed more illegal than it is now down in callifornia. thats why. i feel this at least.
 

Fear

Member
I wonder if club owners can buy the weed they grow at #1 full price. Don't see why not, Cause I probably would! Nice way to get around the non-profit aspect.

Also for non-profit don't the owners just collect a pay check? I don't know but I think that's what happens.
 

kmk420kali

Freedom Fighter
Veteran
the reason why it failed was because people that like and are for legalization/decriminalization actually read the language of the proposition, and they saw that you had to have permits to grow and i thin to posses a certain amount, but in know for sure you had to have permits to grow.

and these permits were to be issued by special govt ran probably places. and the people knew that they would never issue said permits, and the penalty for growing without a permit would be increased exponetially.

it would of made weed more illegal than it is now down in callifornia. thats why. i feel this at least.

You only would have needed a permit if you were commercial-- Private grows wouldn't have needed it-- And also, you would have been able to have an unlimited amount at your house/grow, as it had a provision to keep all the weed you grew--:tiphat:
 

Fear

Member
Even legalized there are still limitations. Oakland is allowing 2-3 warehouses at around $100,000 a year for each permit. Maybe it was
It be neat to see plants on conveyor belts. Now that would be interesting, everyday harvest 10 1 lb. plants. Commercialism at it's best.
10 or so rows of plants with 60 plants on each row or belt. Each day you remove 10 at one end and replace 10 on the other.
 

Fear

Member
the reason why it failed was because people that like and are for legalization/decriminalization actually read the language of the proposition, and they saw that you had to have permits to grow and i thin to posses a certain amount, but in know for sure you had to have permits to grow.

and these permits were to be issued by special govt ran probably places. and the people knew that they would never issue said permits, and the penalty for growing without a permit would be increased exponetially.

it would of made weed more illegal than it is now down in callifornia. thats why. i feel this at least.

Hell yea it would of, I feel ya bro. Why ruin something that already works great.
 
Okay.. this post is an example of whats wrong with the voting populace, IMO.

They care soooo little about this that they don't even know what their friends think. Now these friends who, supposedly, are for legalization read the bill. And they found something, I can't recall with specificity, that they didn't like. This is why they voted no. Then the blatant lies come. Special government places and then paranoia.
SO... they voted no based on a half truth and then some lies. And they sound more informed than the author. WHAT????

1) If we don't understand our friends, how can we understand someone not like us, the opposition if you will? How will we reach consensus for the next Prop?
2)Where is the sense of ownership? I read futility and aloofness. "Oh the government will just rape me again. They always win." Its our prop and our government. WE make them do what we want.
3)The saddest thing: all these Monday-Morning_QuarterBacks keep talking about the bill was badly written. Well if they got off their asses and voted no, then why did Cooley win? I'm calling b.s. They didn't vote.

I'm sorry if none of this makes sense.

the reason why it failed was because people that like and are for legalization/decriminalization actually read the language of the proposition, and they saw that you had to have permits to grow and i thin to posses a certain amount, but in know for sure you had to have permits to grow.

and these permits were to be issued by special govt ran probably places. and the people knew that they would never issue said permits, and the penalty for growing without a permit would be increased exponetially.

it would of made weed more illegal than it is now down in callifornia. thats why. i feel this at least.

@COuchlockd. I love you. I have no animosity towards you. please don't get pissed because i to used your post as an example. (I'm sure your roommate wrote it ne way.) k+ for being honest.

Peace.
 

JJScorpio

Thunderstruck
ICMag Donor
Veteran
I think most people confuse what the bill was for. It was for having a small space where you could grow your own. Not a large space for commercial growing. That's why the Bill failed.

People can put whatever spin they want on it. The Bill may still have failed, but it would have been much closer if not for 215 and commercial growers....... It gets comiical listening to the "it wasn't worded right crowd", lol. This Bill did teach us greed is more important then freedom to a lot of people.....
 
I think most people confuse what the bill was for. It was for having a small space where you could grow your own. Not a large space for commercial growing. That's why the Bill failed.

People can put whatever spin they want on it. The Bill may still have failed, but it would have been much closer if not for 215 and commercial growers....... It gets comiical listening to the "it wasn't worded right crowd", lol. This Bill did teach us greed is more important then freedom to a lot of people.....


Somebody in another thread estimated the numbers and if every single commercial grower in california voted it would be a fraction of one percent. There is absolutely no way that growers in fear of losing profits voted down prop 19, it was not that close.
 

Fear

Member
SF and Los Angeles voted yes, and everywhere else in California, which is very old fashioned and they obviously don't like change, or them stinking hippie dope smokers! They just don't want anyone to have any fun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top