hotrod2001: hubiestubert: hotrod2001: Maybe one of those BFE states like Mississippi, Arkansas or Alabama will get on the bandwagon and completely rejuvenate their economy.If you legalize marijuana, you could also legalize industrial hemp and really give the textile industry, which has been decimated in the south, a major jolt.The problem is that the cotton industry has been one of the most vociferous opponents of hemp legalization. As has timber. Hemp would be a great start for new players, and it would cut the market share for the folks who are already invested, and that has always been the issue with hemp for commercial uses. Between that, and medicinal uses, as well as hemp seed oil and a variety of other commercial uses, legal hemp is the bugbear that CEOs throw out because it would force them to compete with a plant that has multifaceted uses, and put them at a disadvantage, since they've railed against it for years, and thus, if they backpedal, they put their whole line of reasoning at risk.Hemp legalization would mean a lot of new, and much smaller players, and that means a lot more competition. And infrastructure changes that the largest in textile and paper have absolutely no interest in making, and haven't been interested in for nearly a hundred years. Never mind that in early America, it was considered legal tender in parts of the Colonies. Never mind that hemp was considered such an important crop that its growth was required in some states. Hemp was important for rope, for sails, and for clothing, not to mention for medicinal uses.The problem arose when a cheap and relatively easy method of harvesting came into production, and the corticator began the real push against hemp. It has always been about commercial interests wanting to cut out competition. Always. And it still is.True, but in this day of diversifying your portfolios through multiple outlets, why would companies like Levi Strauss, Coates North America, Georgia Pacific and Kimberly Clark not want to have their cake and eat it too? They can have their timber, canola oil and paper along with this added market. And like I said, there are many southern communities whose economies have been decimated by NAFTA and textile industries in places like Pakistan which still have mills and other infrastructure still in place.If not, I see a movement similar to the craft beer market of many small entrepreneurs getting into the game. It might be a niche market at first but in time it could become lucrative again.
hubiestubert: Hemp has huge potential for revitalizing markets across the country. Not just in the South, but up in Maine, in New Hampshire, Massachusetts and yes, even in Colorado and California. And that is really the problem. The competition. The money spent in the campaigns to KEEP marijuana illegal, and thus hemp, center on protecting players already in the game, and keeping new players out. Couple it with law enforcement and a prison industry, and you get the fine soup of folks who profit well from continued prohibition, and a lot of politicians who can use the inflated numbers of convictions to "show" how the War on Drugs is just keeping the wolves at bay, all while lining their pockets.No prohibition means competition in the markets, it means losses for conviction rates, it means for profit prisons take a hit, it means that seizures drop, budgets are cut, and folks might have to work at catching real criminals, as opposed to busting college students and half assed dealers. It would turn a black market into a 'Revenoooooors! problem, and that is sort of the problem. A lot of folks profit well enough, and network to keep that competition at bay. Pharmaceuticals have been working tirelessly to KEEP weed illegal as well, because they can't market Marinol or other derivatives when folks can just grow their medicine, or buy stronger stuff at a dispensary. And they can't patent products when there are growers out there doing their job. Not to mention, you've got large agribusiness that really doesn't want new players.Legalization would have widespread effect, and positive throughout the economy, and the opponents are fearful of exactly that, because it would mean that their positions would be threatened. It would mean a lot of new players, small growers, craft growers, small businesses and with a LOT more experience would be entering the market, and the largest of players would have to fight for those folks' services, and at a disadvantage for the first time in a hundred ...
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Apr 24 2017 19:49:21
Runtime: 0.294 sec (293 ms)