- The Weed Blog https://www.theweedblog.com

Marijuana Sales Tax Revenue To Help Homeless In Aurora, Colorado


aurora colorado marijuanaDuring the 2012 campaign, marijuana opponents made the claim that if marijuana were legalized in Colorado there would be ten dollars in social costs for ever one dollar in tax revenue generated by marijuana sales. I don’t know that anyone has calculated the increased ‘social costs’ but I don’t know that anyone needs to in order to know that marijuana opponents’ claims never panned out. There’s overwhelming evidence that the ‘great cannabis experiment’ in Colorado is working out quite well. One recent example would be in Aurora, Colorado, where a million and a half dollars in marijuana sales tax revenue is being directed towards people that absolutely need it. Per the Aurora Sentinel:

At a special study session Feb. 29, council members gave initial approval to allocating $1.5 million for homeless services from the city’s 2017 and 2018 budgets. That’s in addition to the $1.5 million approved as part of this year’s budget. The money is coming from the city’s marijuana sales tax revenue.

“The Colfax Community Network is in extremely dire straits in that they do not have funds to continue operating,” said Nancy Sheffield, director of Aurora neighborhood services.

Ward I Councilwoman Sally Mounier, whose ward encompasses many of the motels that low-income families stay in on East Colfax Avenue, said the nonprofit needed to be funded “immediately.” CCN also provides provides homeless families staying in local motels with  food, clothing, hygiene products and diapers.

I blogged several times about the need for the cannabis community to help out other causes in addition to helping end cannabis prohibition. The cannabis community has the ability to do big things because of the movement’s ability to fund raise, network, and spread awareness. This particular example from Aurora came about as a result of direct purchases of marijuana, and the taxes that were generated in the process. I’d love to see the cannabis community in Aurora step up even further and volunteer some time and do some fundraising to continue to help out the homeless above and beyond tax related funding. If you live in the area, I encourage you to step up!


About Author

Johnny Green


  1. Effectively, you’ll discover that, as opposed to purchasing Breitling timepieces that are authentic, acquiring replica watches can be a decision that is more conscious.

  2. saynotohypocrisy on

    Even Mark Kleiman, the cannabis ‘expert’ with the Washington state implementation gig, who is no friend to cannabis, has said that if there is an increase in cannabis use, but it is accompanied by a small drop in alcohol use, the small drop in alcohol use would provide social benefits that would outweigh the social damage he thinks will come from a larger increase in cannabis use.
    I want to see problem drinkers who are not responding to treatment assessed, in a therapeutic setting, for whether it is possible, and advisable, to encourage them to switch, in part or in whole, to cannabis. We won’t get the full benefits of having a far safer alternative to alcohol available unless the people who most need that alternative are firmly encouraged to use it.

  3. Yup, Scoliosis gave us a lot of cooked data, bad science, and misrepresented facts. Catchy headlines that suit his drive-by style of commenting. The method he’s trying now is the “gish gallop” method of trying to bury us in his bad arguments, thinking we won’t address all of them. However, by throwing anything/everything at the wall, hoping that *some* of it sticks, he’s only demonstrating the overall weakness and inherent bias of his anti-cannabis position. He doesn’t have a knockdown argument against cannabis — no *single* reasonable story/fact/argument that motivates him. He’s motivated by his bias, so he’s works backwards from the notion that “cannabis is bad — somehow,” searching desperately for arguments that *might* justify his bias.

    What he forgets is that cannabis activists have been defeating these arguments — each and every one of them — for years. He keeps forgetting we have real scientists, real experts, and real activists, while the ONLY person in his corner is Kevin Sabet, a paid lobbyist who *pretends* to be a scientist because he has a PhD in Public Policy.

    I keep pointing out how BAD he is at arguing against cannabis and I keep asking why he keeps doing it. The fact that he refuses to acknowledge the question makes me very, very suspicious that he’s either pathologically disturbed (his anti-cannabis fanaticism is fed by mental illness), or he has some vested interest in keeping up this sad effort. Frankly, if I were paranoid, I’d say he’s being paid to troll TWB, but I can’t imagine who would gain from doing so or how. He’s not very good at it. He’s not convincing anybody, at all. He’s not even THAT annoying. He posts, gets defeated, goes away, and then he pops up to post again on another article. I don’t understand what he derives from this bland, fruitless routine. He’s not winning. He can’t be having any fun doing this. As a troll, he’s terrible. So something *else* is definitely driving him.

  4. Remember how I told you weeks ago that nobody takes you seriously because you can’t stick to a single argument? ONCE AGAIN, this attempted waterfall of bad arguments, misrepresented data, and inflammatory headlines proves the overall weakness of your anti-cannabis position. You’re running from one thing to another, trying a gish-gallop of links, hoping something makes it through — trying to win an argument by brute force. You see, another fallacious way to make an argument is trying to overwhelm your opponent with too much to respond to in an appreciable amount of time. How strong can your position be if you’ve reduced yourself to throwing EVERYTHING at the wall to see what sticks?

    And what’s even funnier is that you think you can win by trying to bury us in bad arguments, that we won’t take the time to point out *precisely* how they ALL fail? Pity this is the internet, huh? You see, I’ve seen ALL of these, before. I’ve ripped them all down, too. WATCH!

    First of all, cannabis reduces suicide rates as proven by the research by Anderson and Rees showing states with comprehensive medical cannabis programs have 9% lower rates for men 30-39 and 11% lower for men 20-29. Suicide rates drop by an average of 8%, overall. Also, the clinical trial of a diet drug called Rimonabant that blocked the activation of CB1 receptors caused suicides in the test group, ie, not allowing cannabinoids to do what they’re supposed to do induces suicide. It’s a pity about the kid falling out the window, but that death was ruled accidental. If you’re trying to claim cannabis use will lead to a rash of defenestrations, I may laugh myself to tears.

    Secondly, every claim that cannabis use causes increased psychosis (especially schizophrenia) ignores the fact that despite the rise and fall of cannabis use rates over the last century, rates of the mental disorders in question do NOT fluctuate accordingly. Despite the rise of cannabis in the 60s, its subsequent decline in the 80s, and its latest rise, the incidence rates of schizophrenia have remained *constant*. The reefer madness of conflating cannabis use with mental illness is nothing more than an attempt by the pharmaceutical industry to occlude the simpler explanation: the self-medication hypothesis. That’s where Occam’s Razor says the answer is, given the lack of any evidence suggesting causality. The simpler answer is that cannabis TREATS a variety of worst symptoms of mental illness: depression, anxiety, bad dreams, and suicidal thoughts.

    Oh, and the car crashes in Washington are actually DOWN, not up. By saying “double” they actually mean the rate of drivers testing positive (with “per se” testing standards) has increased among fatalities from 8% to 17%, including pedestrian fatalities on the road. The FARS Encyclopedia shows that Washington State is still well below the average for the last decade, which fits perfectly with the legitimate studies that don’t go for talking-point headlines. States with medical cannabis laws implemented have an overall 9% reduction in DUI-fatalities, and the data in Washington State reflects the trend: their average over the last decade was 511 road fatalities per year, and the numbers for the last three years have been less than 470. The AAA study from which the “double” talking-point originated was making the larger point that “per se” THC limits are meaningless (because road fatalities are DOWN) and should not be the law.

    See? The internet is full of facts.

    Oh, and my all-time favorite, the claim that adolescent cannabis use lowers IQ: the 2012 Meier study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Pity that the study committed a Type 1 error by failing to stratify their sample by socioeconomic status, which is THE number one predicting factor of adolescent development, intelligence, and scholastic achievement. The Meier study was discredited in the very next edition of the same journal, in fact — the Spring 2013 edition of PNAS pointed out their failure to stratify by SES.

    In fact, SES is the number-one predictor of a lot of different things, like life-expectancy, which is what the study about death before age 60 *also* failed to account for: rich people can afford better healthcare, which is why they live longer. Their study (from New Zealand) didn’t stratify by this ever-important factor. There’s good science and bad science. Good science is accounting for other independent variables that are known to mediate or moderate your dependent variable. Basically, if you’re testing a drug claiming it makes people better at basketball, you cannot put all the tall kids in your experimental group — that’s what stratification by known factors is, in a nutshell.

    As for your headlines about lawsuits, that’s nothing new. People have sued claiming that windmills cause brain damage. Just because they file a case doesn’t mean they HAVE a case. Oh, and the claim that hospitalization is up? That simply follows hospital guidelines as dictated by federal policy — if someone tests positive for a schedule 1 substance, they log the visit. It allows the ONDCP to trick simpletons into repeating stuff like you are now, claiming that cannabis-related hospital visits are increasing. In reality, someone goes in with a cold virus but tests positive, their cold gets logged as a cannabis-related hospital visit. Hospital visits overall, like the rates of schizophrenia, have remained constant.

    Crime rates, however, have NOT stayed constant! Nope. Violent crimes in states with full legalization have dropped markedly. You see, local jurisdictions keep websites that report the rates of crimes by type. It’s only by cherry-picking the crime and region that someone can make the claim that “rates are up” — which rates, and where? Violent crimes, overall, have gone down across the board. What’s stayed constant or slightly increased in some cases (B&E has increased) are the other types of crimes, which can hardly be blamed on cannabis legalization. Homicide, assault, and simple battery are down across Colorado (not just Denver).

    See how your attempt at a gish gallop failed? I was able to address every last one of your points. All of them! No matter what you try, you’re recycling some argument we’ve already addressed. I’m afraid you simply aren’t cut out for the propaganda game. Like I have said to you before, you’re not very good at it. You might as well dip into the historically silly claims, like the one suggesting cannabis causes young men to grow breasts.

    These drive-by comments of yours do nothing besides obviate your bias. That’s why nobody who frequents THIS website will ever take you seriously or even consider what you’re saying is true. You’ve cried wolf far too many times and don’t have a shred of credibility.

    SO. Once again. Since we’ve clearly established that you’re accomplishing nothing (other than giving me practice defeating these sad arguments), why are you trolling TWB???

  5. First of all everything that you supplied a link to are things that would have happened anyway. Kids will get weed if they want it and some will have a poor outcome. I would go on but I won’t waste my valuable time on someone that wants to turn the clock back 20 years. Maybe you should go on an anti-alcohol blog, something that actually is very harmful and come back and tell us what tragedy really is like. Oh, the poor teenager that can’t pull his head out of his ass? Hey, I was there once and didn’t need you and any advise how to live my life. I figured it out. Something you fucking kids can’t do anymore without blaming someone or something else.

  6. I read all of your links. Every one was full of disclaimers, conflicting points of view and inconclusive data. And there are many others that suggest positive social effects, such as reduced drinking.

  7. Wile E. Coyote on

    I wish that the government would legalize it nationally and then allocate the tax revenue towards scientific exploration.

  8. No social costs? Are you sure?

    Teens who Smoke Cannabis Daily ‘Seven Times More Likely to Commit Suicide’

    Teens who use cannabis at risk of schizophrenia

    Early Marijuana Use Linked to I.Q. Loss

    Crime Rates Soar in Seattle and Denver after Marijuana Legalized

    Colorado youth use pot more than anyone else in the country, double the national average, new federal survey finds

    Car crashes involving marijuana doubled in Washington state since Legalization, AAA says

    Murder Victim’s Family Sues Edible Marijuana Company for Failing to Warn About Dangers

    Pot Death: 19 year old falls 4 Stories After Eating Marijuana Cookie

    Cannabis leads to early death: New study finds teens who use drug heavily are more likely to die by 60

    Colorado Marijuana Report Reveals Increase in Hospital Visits After Legalization

Leave A Reply