Editorials & Other Articles
In reply to the discussion: What is the best regulatory framework for legalized marijuana? (Baker Institute Series) [View all]RainDog
(28,784 posts)Because they fear a loss of market share.
I was married to an alcoholic. I would never call him a drunk because I recognize that he has a medical problem and "drunk" is meant to deride someone with a medical issue. He was never physically violent when he was drunk. He, like others, used alcohol to self medicate. He's bipolar. He's also a brillant person who has done well-regarded theoretical mathematical research. I agreed to share custody because he has an illness, which he has worked to treat. When we were married, I just stopped drinking anything to make it easier on him. I've never been to custodial courts so I have no idea what that's like.
Now that I am no longer married to someone who cannot drink alcohol without serious problems, I will have a couple of beers or a glass of wine with friends occasionally. THAT is my experience with alcohol and most everyone I know. I have known some people who, I thought, had substance abuse problems, but only in a way that I thought they drank too much or too often - and I didn't want to be around that sort of thing.
So, I suppose it depends on what part of the world you have to deal with. I don't have to deal with people who have problems with alcohol, who are in the court system, who are physically abusing others, etc., so I don't base my opinion on that small sector of the entire population.
no matter if something is legal or illegal, however, we will still have people in the population with various problems with substance abuse. They probably feel more self loathing than you could ever find for them. That's why I would rather not use words that are reminiscent of older ways of seeing things - as people without value. They need help but they have to decide to get it.
anyway -
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/01/more-pot-less-booze
Professor Benjamin Crost finds a similar relationship in a paper that argues marijuana use decreases and alcohol use increases after young people hit the legal drinking age. "We should expect that the higher availability of marijuana in Colorado will lead to a decrease in alcohol use among young people," Crost wrote in an e-mail.
So, it seems that keeping one substance illegal provides a reason for people to use another (alcohol) when they are of legal age.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/marijuana/ci_22300820/do-alcohol-and-marijuana-mix-colorado-is-about
The legalization of use and possession of small amounts of marijuana for those 21 and older in Colorado and Washington will provide researchers worldwide with the best chance ever to study the interplay of alcohol use and marijuana use. The topic is what academics refer to as "cross-price elasticities of demand." It basically means how changes in the price and accessibility of one substance impact the use of a different substance.
What researchers will be trying to settle is whether alcohol and marijuana are substitutes meaning people use one but not the other or whether they are complements meaning they are used together.
"The social costs of marijuana use really pale in comparison to what we see as the social costs of heavy alcohol consumption," Kilmer said. He and Kleiman both point to widespread alcohol-fueled violence and disease as reasons why a slight downtick in alcohol abuse could outweigh a large uptick in marijuana abuse.
So, the first link notes alcohol consumption is lower in mmj states. We'll see if that holds up in legal states. Some people will mix the two, no doubt, but the overall trend will be the key.
One of the big donors to the anti-legalization campaign in California in 2011 was the Beer Distributor's Industry.