The article brings up a big topic about whether we should regulate goods and services that are controversial like drugs, abortion and prostitution or should we keep them hidden underground where the conditions are even worse. For example using improper tools for abortion or having marijuana mixed with other drugs. I personally think it would be better to know the ingredients that are going into my body and thus I think regulation would be better. Regulation of prostitution has been proven better in Amsterdam but not in Sweden, which could be caused by other factors. The government could really profit from taxing these taboos. The article brings up different views of whether regulation is good or bad and whether this can hurt or help workers, industries and the government. What are your thoughts?
http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/the-stream/the-latest/2014/3/28/budding-businessofmarijuana.html
http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/the-stream/the-latest/2014/3/28/budding-businessofmarijuana.html
5 comments:
It seems like some of the regulation the article is discussing for marijuana are medical based. I do think that a medical regulation is a good thing. Medicines of other types are regulated for content and making sure they do what they are supposed to, so why shouldn't medical marijuana be regulated like a normal medication? And it points out that Colorado gained a new source of revenue, one that has been profitable, by legalizing marijuana use and taxing it. So, perhaps there are certain "taboo" things that could help state and federal governments by decriminalizing and taxing it if they truly want to regulate it.
I agree with Lori in that we should be regulating more of the controversial goods and services. Regulating the right things (like marijuana) could potentially be so beneficial for a struggling economy (like the United States) if the "taboo" idea was lessened or even eradicated. As we've learned throughout the semester, it seems that more often than not, increased transparency benefits society in many ways. I think the government is too afraid an unwilling to be open to "unconventional" ideas, like legalizing marijuana. It is possible that our economy could be partially repaired by introducing and following new perspectives and ideas.
There are many instances where the consumer is either hurt or better off by not having a product regulated. For example, black market plastic surgery or injections leave many with life threatening conditions. Non-regulated abortions can put the life of the mother at risk. Marijuana, while it never really has killed anyone, it would be better to know that you are getting a regulated product, just like when people receive prescription medications. Amsterdam is a good example of trial and error system. However, other countries may have a different attitude towards a particular societal moral. The result of instituting a system in countries where it has been successful, could have a completely different outcome in other countries.
If marijuana is used for medical purposes, this should be regulated for people's good. Unregulated usage of marijuana or any other drugs will put people's lives in danger.
Like we have discussed in class, any rationing or limitations of a good or service creates black markets for that good and often makes the process much more dangerous. I just wrote a paper for my Global Feminism class about the regulation and legalization benefits of prostitution. The possible benefits far outweigh the possible risks. One example I found looked at one brothel in Nevada that is only open one weekend a month, with revenues of $100,000 a year, providing $20,000 in taxes. That is not bad for 12 weekends a year.
Post a Comment