Legalizacija marihuane v zvezni državi Colorado s 1. januarjem letos utegne prinesti daljnosežne učinke na legalizacijo te mehke droge tudi v Evropi (ne pozabimo, da je kajenje marihuane v medicinske namene dovoljeno že v 20 zveznih državah ZDA). Ključna vprašanja v zvezi z razširjeno uporabo in trgovanjem z marihuano so predvsem neposredni zdravstveni učinki in posredni učinki (morebiten dvig kriminalitete) na eni strani ter na drugi seveda ekonomski učinki ter regulacija trgovine z marihuano. O prvem sklopu morajo več povedati pristojni strokovnjaki, o drugem pa je zanimivo mnenje zapisal britanski The Economist, ki legalizacijo trgovine z marihuano podpira že od leta 1993.

Legalisation is just the first step. Pot must also be regulated. Because it is more dangerous than chocolate or chips, it needs to be subject to more stringent safety checks than food. As with alcohol, anybody who wants to produce it for sale, or sell it, should be licensed, as they will be in Colorado. It should carry clear labels showing its tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content, just as cans of beer display their alcoholic strength—consumers should know what they are smoking. Colorado seems to be handling this well: labels are clear, safety rules stringent.

Deciding how to tax the stuff means asking some fundamental questions. Where governments want to raise revenue without distorting markets, the best approach is to charge businesses a flat fee, like a cab licence. Firms then have an incentive to do as much business as they can. But where governments want to discourage consumption—as with cigarettes and alcohol—they should tax each unit sold.

Although marijuana does not harm people as reliably as cigarettes do, nor—as alcohol does—incite citizens to kill each other, it is not good for you. And although too little research has been done on the extent of the harm it can do, it is thought to raise the risk of schizophrenia and undermine motivation. This argues for a consumption tax, and a fairly stiff one at that. But two arguments pull in the opposite direction. Marijuana may have a beneficial side-effect: if pot-smoking displaces liquor-drinking, it might actually be good for public health. And if taxes are set too high, the black market will flourish. That will deprive the state of revenue and push consumers towards unregulated, and therefore more dangerous, weed.

Vir: The Economist

Kakorkoli, glede na to, da kakšnega zelo tehtnega razloga proti legalizaciji marihuane (ob ustrezni regulaciji proizvodnje in trgovanja z njo, seveda) ni, bi bilo smiselno o tem razmisliti tudi v Sloveniji. Razmisliti je treba le o ustrezni regulaciji proizvodnje in koncesijski ureditvi trgovanja ter specifičnih (trošarinskih) dajatvah. Finančni minister bo vesel novih proračunskih prilivov.

Če vladajoča koalicija na vrh svojih razmišljanj o bodoči strategiji razvoja polaga takšne, hm, zanimive ideje, kot sta uvedba univerzalnega temeljnega dohodka ter alternativni modeli gospodarjenja, bi k temu mirno lahko dodala še legalizacijo marihuane.

Če dovolite majčkeno dozo sarkazma: če že služb ne bo in ne bomo imeli za kruh, bomo pa državljani vsaj kolektivno občasno “zadeti” ponosni zadružniki pretežno na univerzalni socialni pomoči. Ena takšna srečna zakajena komuna socialcev na sončni strani Alp.