Moratoriums on licenses are great, for the incumbents. Everyone else loses while the license holders now have a paper asset that immediately becomes very valuable.
Don't believe the current license holders and their sycophants, they are just chasing the Canadian dream of rent seeking.
You don't want cannabis retail licenses to turn into dairy quota, taxi licenses, or the Beer Store unless you want everyone to get ripped off into perpetuity.
An editorial comment: given the (racist) history of the word "marijuana", it'd have been nice to see it eschewed here. I really appreciate that Canada has leaned _hard_ into the word cannabis instead.
This is an interesting piece that I think intersects with earlier pieces on housing. In both cases, people who live in a neighbourhood have a lot of influence on what is allowed in that neighbourhood via zoning and vocal complaints. It's probably worth considering if that should be and, if so, to what degree.
I own a home (well, I own a chunk along with the bank!) so I get the motivation. One's property is often your biggest "investment" so you are very concerned with its value. And, if the surrounding neighbourhood changes in ways you don't like, moving is a not-insignificant barrier in terms of cost and time.
On the other hand, I didn't buy my whole neighbourhood. And, other stakeholders might be impacted by what happens in my neighbourhood but don't have as much influence. Think of potential buyers/renters of higher density housing that hasn't been built yet. Or customers to retails spaces that don't live nearby. Is it fair that I get an outsized voice in what happens in my neighbourhood. And, if not -- what's the remedy?
This seems to be a foundational problem for urban life and mostly what I've seen as a solution is that municipalities should take a more hands-off approach (as advocated here). Maybe we need a culture change about what property ownership should -- and should not -- entitle one to.
My nearest community struggles along with 702 adult residents and quite a few run-down commercial storefronts. The voters have now allowed pot shops. Two have opened and another two may be about to. There is very little evidence that business is booming. The free (or discounted) rent periods will run out. Ultimately there will be one survivor. The town will go on, with one laundromat, one Timmie’s, one Home Hardware, one liquor store, one beer store, one grocery store, one sub shop, one dollar store, one Chinese restaurant, one pizza place, and one pot shop making less than any of them. Market forces at work.
Btw, I returned to Amsterdam a few years ago after not being there for quite some time. The “coffee shops” are all gone. Even in the music core of the city, you won’t smell a whiff indoors or out. The thrill is gone.
Which, other than not throwing our teenagers in prison, is the whole point of legalization.
Calgary has a great many, almost as common as nail salons, albeit with more clever names. Like private liquor stores in Alberta, competition and agglomeration will weed out many. Haven’t heard anyone aghast about the numbers of outlets, more are amused. Opening one is certainly not a guarantee of wealth. Never have seen a line up at any when driving past. In speaking with those who use recreationally or medicinally, they often know someone who has a decades long standing reputation on quality and price and they are quite happy to continue with those folks.
You can't find a better example of an industry that needs little regulation than at a Vancouver 4/20. There, some 200 mom-and-pop basement grows (many of them *literally* mom-and-pop) set up booths and willing sellers meet willing buyers, with all product information up front (try some); with no profit angle in lowering quality, as with coffee shops or wine bars.
You could see all that while that insane stock-run happened. It was clearly based on the assumption that government would be used to freeze out all the mom-and-pop competitors, raise barriers to entry until only the best-funded and connected insiders could take over. I'd rarely felt such a sense of "natural ruling class" that ensures no climbers get in. Otherwise, there'd just be zero reason for those huge stock valuations, you have to have an oligopoly to make the profits to justify the stock.
Why Libertarians didn't make a Cause out of it, I have no idea. It's perfect for them.
We've gone from a situation where it's illegal to sell it at all, to where the continuing illegal sales are what's holding the price down to merely high instead of absurd. Yes, the old *illegal* price, high to compensate the vendor for risk of jail, is lower than the Big Industry price. Can you imagine, say, roses, from a tiny private greenhouse, where the owner needed compensation for risks, costing less than roses from a large, commercial operation?
And the comically high prices, to return to topic, are why there are so many pot shops. The basic product costs about the same, per pound, to grow, as arugula. The rest is profit.
It is amusing to watch conservatives blame the government for the economy then blame the government for getting involved in the economy. The one thing the government should be doing is discouraging monopoly, not fostering it. The pot business is where local businesses should be allowed to flourish instead it is regulated into the hands of a few businesses.
This is off topic, but the discussion here illustrates exactly why having a comments section has value. It expands the topic into something much broader and adds some actual nuance. As a consequence, there is actual food for thought.
On the same comments topic, isn’t removing individual comments an expression of wokeness? If a comment by Marylou is taken down because it might offend someone, is it reasonable to suggest that her freedom of expression is being denied because “the brass” is being politically correct? And if comments are no longer allowed, is it for the same reason – that of being woke? (unlike that hero of the unwoke – Elon Musk)
I wish this article had more information/statistics. I count over 30 pot shops in my town - in contrast to our 4 LCBOs - and wonder if it might be a business ripe for money laundering. Where are the stats for consumption? what % of people use them? How much is bought on-line versus in person? for an average user, what's the yearly consumption? because seriously, I want to understand why, when you look on the streets (and the near-empty parking lots), demand seems so high.
The west has fallen in love with the free enterprise system ( or capitalist, if you please ) and with good reason. We don't have to have government interceding in things they are often ignorant of and potentially screwing them up. Some things however do not lend themselves well to a free enterprise system and it is important to understand the exceptions.
The limits to the system are that the consumer of the product or service has to understand what they are buying, the price has to include any long term consequence to society as a whole, and the consumer has to have a choice to buy or not to buy.
Marijauna is a drug with psychoactive effects and legalization has artificially placed it outside of the framework of the usual regulatory system. It was unfair that it was considered a class 1 drug previously but legalization would seem to be a knee jerk political action rather than a rational judgement. It might have been better if it had been classified as an over the counter medication or by prescription. It does occasionally result in problems, for example if your 9 year old eats your bag of THC gummy bears. It is also the subject of as lot of sensationalistic quackery that describes it as the cure for all things.
We are however, where we are. Pandora's box has been opened and we are not getting a second chance.
Moratoriums on licenses are great, for the incumbents. Everyone else loses while the license holders now have a paper asset that immediately becomes very valuable.
Don't believe the current license holders and their sycophants, they are just chasing the Canadian dream of rent seeking.
You don't want cannabis retail licenses to turn into dairy quota, taxi licenses, or the Beer Store unless you want everyone to get ripped off into perpetuity.
An editorial comment: given the (racist) history of the word "marijuana", it'd have been nice to see it eschewed here. I really appreciate that Canada has leaned _hard_ into the word cannabis instead.
This is an interesting piece that I think intersects with earlier pieces on housing. In both cases, people who live in a neighbourhood have a lot of influence on what is allowed in that neighbourhood via zoning and vocal complaints. It's probably worth considering if that should be and, if so, to what degree.
I own a home (well, I own a chunk along with the bank!) so I get the motivation. One's property is often your biggest "investment" so you are very concerned with its value. And, if the surrounding neighbourhood changes in ways you don't like, moving is a not-insignificant barrier in terms of cost and time.
On the other hand, I didn't buy my whole neighbourhood. And, other stakeholders might be impacted by what happens in my neighbourhood but don't have as much influence. Think of potential buyers/renters of higher density housing that hasn't been built yet. Or customers to retails spaces that don't live nearby. Is it fair that I get an outsized voice in what happens in my neighbourhood. And, if not -- what's the remedy?
This seems to be a foundational problem for urban life and mostly what I've seen as a solution is that municipalities should take a more hands-off approach (as advocated here). Maybe we need a culture change about what property ownership should -- and should not -- entitle one to.
My nearest community struggles along with 702 adult residents and quite a few run-down commercial storefronts. The voters have now allowed pot shops. Two have opened and another two may be about to. There is very little evidence that business is booming. The free (or discounted) rent periods will run out. Ultimately there will be one survivor. The town will go on, with one laundromat, one Timmie’s, one Home Hardware, one liquor store, one beer store, one grocery store, one sub shop, one dollar store, one Chinese restaurant, one pizza place, and one pot shop making less than any of them. Market forces at work.
Btw, I returned to Amsterdam a few years ago after not being there for quite some time. The “coffee shops” are all gone. Even in the music core of the city, you won’t smell a whiff indoors or out. The thrill is gone.
Which, other than not throwing our teenagers in prison, is the whole point of legalization.
Calgary has a great many, almost as common as nail salons, albeit with more clever names. Like private liquor stores in Alberta, competition and agglomeration will weed out many. Haven’t heard anyone aghast about the numbers of outlets, more are amused. Opening one is certainly not a guarantee of wealth. Never have seen a line up at any when driving past. In speaking with those who use recreationally or medicinally, they often know someone who has a decades long standing reputation on quality and price and they are quite happy to continue with those folks.
You can't find a better example of an industry that needs little regulation than at a Vancouver 4/20. There, some 200 mom-and-pop basement grows (many of them *literally* mom-and-pop) set up booths and willing sellers meet willing buyers, with all product information up front (try some); with no profit angle in lowering quality, as with coffee shops or wine bars.
You could see all that while that insane stock-run happened. It was clearly based on the assumption that government would be used to freeze out all the mom-and-pop competitors, raise barriers to entry until only the best-funded and connected insiders could take over. I'd rarely felt such a sense of "natural ruling class" that ensures no climbers get in. Otherwise, there'd just be zero reason for those huge stock valuations, you have to have an oligopoly to make the profits to justify the stock.
Why Libertarians didn't make a Cause out of it, I have no idea. It's perfect for them.
We've gone from a situation where it's illegal to sell it at all, to where the continuing illegal sales are what's holding the price down to merely high instead of absurd. Yes, the old *illegal* price, high to compensate the vendor for risk of jail, is lower than the Big Industry price. Can you imagine, say, roses, from a tiny private greenhouse, where the owner needed compensation for risks, costing less than roses from a large, commercial operation?
And the comically high prices, to return to topic, are why there are so many pot shops. The basic product costs about the same, per pound, to grow, as arugula. The rest is profit.
...a growing 'panic' over the number of marijuana stores in Toronto."
...If only Nova Scotia had that problem :-p. Government-run stores only (and precious few of them), with shitty weed to boot!
I agree. I've already been mentioning to people that complain in Ottawa that the market will sort itself out in a few years.
It is amusing to watch conservatives blame the government for the economy then blame the government for getting involved in the economy. The one thing the government should be doing is discouraging monopoly, not fostering it. The pot business is where local businesses should be allowed to flourish instead it is regulated into the hands of a few businesses.
It's a little more awkward in small town land. There is one day care, one public, one main street, and the pot shop is in the middle.
Moral scruples continue to exist around location.
Maybe it's better out in the open and there is no need to worry.
This is off topic, but the discussion here illustrates exactly why having a comments section has value. It expands the topic into something much broader and adds some actual nuance. As a consequence, there is actual food for thought.
On the same comments topic, isn’t removing individual comments an expression of wokeness? If a comment by Marylou is taken down because it might offend someone, is it reasonable to suggest that her freedom of expression is being denied because “the brass” is being politically correct? And if comments are no longer allowed, is it for the same reason – that of being woke? (unlike that hero of the unwoke – Elon Musk)
I wish this article had more information/statistics. I count over 30 pot shops in my town - in contrast to our 4 LCBOs - and wonder if it might be a business ripe for money laundering. Where are the stats for consumption? what % of people use them? How much is bought on-line versus in person? for an average user, what's the yearly consumption? because seriously, I want to understand why, when you look on the streets (and the near-empty parking lots), demand seems so high.
The west has fallen in love with the free enterprise system ( or capitalist, if you please ) and with good reason. We don't have to have government interceding in things they are often ignorant of and potentially screwing them up. Some things however do not lend themselves well to a free enterprise system and it is important to understand the exceptions.
The limits to the system are that the consumer of the product or service has to understand what they are buying, the price has to include any long term consequence to society as a whole, and the consumer has to have a choice to buy or not to buy.
Marijauna is a drug with psychoactive effects and legalization has artificially placed it outside of the framework of the usual regulatory system. It was unfair that it was considered a class 1 drug previously but legalization would seem to be a knee jerk political action rather than a rational judgement. It might have been better if it had been classified as an over the counter medication or by prescription. It does occasionally result in problems, for example if your 9 year old eats your bag of THC gummy bears. It is also the subject of as lot of sensationalistic quackery that describes it as the cure for all things.
We are however, where we are. Pandora's box has been opened and we are not getting a second chance.