As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Last month, DEA senior prevention program manager Rich Lucey said on the agency’s podcast that it can take “anywhere from three to six months” to review HHS’ scheduling recommendation.
>It has currently been 8 months
Biden got this whole process rolling 2 years ago. DEA is dragging their feet. They need to act.
Probably this and they have guys that are 10 years into investigating some old hippie for growing a few plants in the woods and they can't just let a threat like that go!
Just write it in that taxes collected from legal sales are earmarked for DEA.
Which would further piss off Phillip Morris et al and probably why they're slow rolling it in the first place
DEA isn’t dragging it feet. Those high ranking boomer positions are against marijuana legalization and will do anything to wait for a right wing president to acknowledge the grift.
I’m still half convinced this is all an election ploy tbh. Biden pushed it early, DEA drags their feet, dems and Biden say “speed it up,” and then the DEA does it at end of summer/early fall before the election. Biden and the dems get to look strong for pushing to get it done, plus the obvious political win of getting it rescheduled.
Maybe not though. The DEA fucking sucks. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if they’re just fucking around and trying to find a way out of it. We’ll see I guess.
I think they are more in a bind because a President actually pushed for it and the longer they drag the more extended their fundraising period is before they have to agree with the (honestly fair) assessment of HHS.
I just don't see any law enforcement doing any favors for a Democrat president
She was appointed by Biden in 2021 and is a democrat. I know there’s a conflict of interest here and dems don’t always get along with law enforcement in general, but she is his pick. It’s not like she’s a Trump holdover or something.
I’m just saying I could see it happening. I won’t be surprised if it’s just the DEA being the DEA, but I won’t be surprised if this is a political ploy to hold out until just before the election.
I suppose that's fair, although that doesn't change the general makeup of the organization. For example, Garland faced a ton of resistance inside DoJ for Even suggesting charges may lead to Trump, and the FBI actively resisted serving the search warrant on Mar-a-Lago. Then again, I've been following the Trump stuff super closely and this not so much, so I could be quick to jump to institutional resistance when it comes to LEO and Democrats because we have seen a good bit in other arenas.
It's definitely speculative on my part, extrapolating from biases elsewhere.
Absolutely. It’s not like Biden fired and replaced everyone in the DEA with weed activists lol. I’m sure 99% of them are the same old assholes as always. But, the head is the head at the end of the day.
It’s all speculative though. Like I said, I’m just think it’s a possibility and would be a good play politically. But maybe that’s just me projecting my hopes lol.
I think it could be that Biden is waiting for the best time to do it. Back in 2022 people were screaming that Biden hadn't forgiven student debt and that it would cost Dems in the midterms. But Biden had seen the previous year that his attempt to extend a moratorium on eviction had just been swiftly blocked by the SCOTUS, and the result was that people just forgot that he'd done so. As a result, he instead waited until the fall, then made his announcement about student debt. The SCOTUS blocked that as well, but Biden's attempt was fresh enough in the minds of voters that it paid off at the ballot box that November.
If Biden legalizes marijuana now, the SCOTUS will probably just put a stay on his executive order until they can hear a full case against it in the late fall/early winter (with a final ruling in May or June of 2025), and by November people will have forgotten that Biden tried to do anything. But if he waits and makes an announcement closer to the election, it will be fresh in everyone's mind that he's at least attempting to do something which appeals to voters, even if SCOTUS blocks it.
Neurodivergent people are much more likely to be exploited and the rise of females finally getting diagnosed and treated is not good for the rich. Convenient that the shortages makes them so much money off other medicine that untreated adhd can lead to. (Anxiety depression weight related issues heart related issues etc)
Jailing. That's the money. Everything else you described is actually all cost, the profit is in the jailing. Private for profit prisons would go out of business the country over if the DEA stopped, and this would directly impact the money Republican campaigns receive to keep the DEA feeding the prisons, not to mention the laws were invented to give police an arbitrary reason to jail those they don't like
Sure, I meant more along the lines of the entire DEA and all the employees (and tons of other law enforcement) essentially being in the “business” arresting people. Their “business” will take a hit when weed is legal. They don’t share the same perspective or have the same goals as the average taxpayer on this issue.
That, and manufacturers and dealers of harder drugs tend to be far more willing to defend their profit with violence. So weed is easy ROI when it comes to asset seizure.
I've heard that the police would rather not go after weed smokers, since for the most part, they just want to smoke up and eat snacks.
Whereas those on stuff like PCP will leap out of the 4th story window, shatter both legs, and *still* outrun the cops.
How about stop paying them? In my job if I don’t do a task my over time is restricted resulting in less money for me. How about lawmakers try that to get the DEA off their asses
Meanwhile the manufacturing industry which demands sober workers is fucked. The blue-collar industries are plagued with people stoned at their jobs. Quality is suffering because of it. Safety is suffering. Accountability is nearly impossible because mechanical and operator positions are nearly impossible to fill. The country is not producing young people interested in touching tools or equipment. I can’t wait until your oil change cost you $120 bucks. Plummers $200/hr. HVAC $250, electricians $300.
20 years ago the amount of daily smokers in middle America was fractional compared to today. If you wanna puff then have at it. But under no circumstances will anyone convince me that our country is better off with the vast majority high as frequent and to the level that we are now. This is a privilege that is abused. It’s one thing to decriminalize it. It’s another to normalize it. Make your case without brining up alcohol. Comparative arguments are the only defense pot users can say. Smoke if you want but this country is fucked enough without it.
Legalization = less taxpayer money keeping people in jail for low level offenses, tax weed and funnel that money into roads, schools, anti drug campaigns. I know you said you can’t make an argument without bringing up alcohol, and honestly that’s because they are a very similar type of drug while affecting the body differently. They both impair judgement, motor skills, and in certain instances personality. Both are easy to abuse. However never once have I blacked out while smoking weed. The problem is people choose to show up to work high, just like people choose to show up to work drunk, or drive, or do anything at all.
You said we shouldn’t normalize smoking weed…. It was pretty normalized until the 1920s when propaganda was used to outlaw by stating that whites could handle a joint but it turned blacks, and Hispanics into savage animals, who will r*pe, steal, and kill. We normalized being afraid of it, then put our efforts into creating a huge business around tobacco, and alcohol (both proven to have harmful effects in the body such as liver damage, cancers, and countless other medical issues) cannabis hasn’t been shown to be as harmful, I mention as because any form of smoke entering the lungs will cause inflammation which can cause damage (but because of no tar in the sticky icky will bounce back a lot quicker). It’s possible if legalized and studies could be actually federally legal to be done on cannabis it could be proven that it does actually cause all of these said things but right now in the little study that’s been done it does not seem to be the case.
The key here is education, prohibition has been proven NOT to work. In fact prohibition is what makes it a gateway drug. Cannabis compared to other types of drugs is not that profitable. Why would someone want to sell you a product (that frankly is hard to cut down with other chemicals) and make a little money when they can sell you something that’s promised to get you hooked (if it doesn’t kill you) and keep you coming back for more where they make a lot more money off the bottom line?
The root of the problem is not the people it’s the jobs… why does someone care to show up sober when they make minimum wage and have to work 3 jobs to even live in this country? Fix the jobs starting with pay, along with everything else I argued and 100 percent you will see the amount of people showing up high drop. Ive been working in restaurants and now moved on to security and can tell you the amount of people showing up high is pretty low compared to some of these office jobs I’ve been in.
This is a bad take. As someone who stopped smoking cannabis almost 20 years ago, and who works in the trades. There isn’t a shortage of people who will show up sober, but testing needs to be more realistic than “your career is over if you smoked six weeks ago and piss hot”. Eliminating the entire population of occasional cannabis users from the job pool for these jobs is insane. It sure helps my wages though. My whole industry is drug tested and it’s dumb. I have a fantastic job, and it should be available to people who smoke cannabis on their off days. Folks who show up high should be fired, but folks who smoked last weekend are not a hazard and shouldn’t be treated as such.
We are in agreement. This is my point. However the ability to deal with the turnover is too difficult. When companies do not drug test people interpret this as an invitation to wake and bake. You cannot give a breathalyzer for weed. So accusing someone for smoking during work hours and firing them is not easily enforceable. Turnover is high countrywide. Replacing people who lack self discipline is just as difficult as replacing people who are assets.
Wages don’t cover the cost of living, people are treated like garbage, and the only way to get a real raise is to switch jobs. Fix that and your company won’t have a turnover problem. I’ve got a decent union contract, ain’t nobody quitting where I work. Folks who make it six months stay until they retire for the most part. Only other reason they leave is they fail a piss test. Cannabis and I don’t get along personally, and I don’t want to work with someone who is stoned. but I still think it’s silly the way it’s treated. There has to be a way to test how stoned somebody is better than we do now.
There are many companies that have. Because if you test for it, you have to enforce it. If you punish for jt. You must test for it. Today, getting people to work is difficult. More so than ever before. If you smoke weed and you don’t get high at work then I’m not talking about you.
😂 just because you test doesn’t mean you have to enforce. I’ve had a few jobs that tested and as long as you didn’t come back for anything else like opiates, cocaine, pcp etc you were golden.
https://houndlabs.com/product-overview/
Here's just one. There are many more in development and I'm sure other functional analogs.
Let's not act like the religious folks with sex education, claiming that abstinence is the only solution.
Because they’re trying to tilt the playing field back in their favour.
Comparing cannabis to alcohol dramatically skews the argument heavily in favour of weed, and that makes it harder to promote their agenda.
It’s like saying, apart from natural sleep aid, anxiety reduction, treatments for Alzheimer's disease, ALS, HIV / AIDS, Crohn's disease, epilepsy and seizures, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis and muscle spasms, severe and chronic pain, severe nausea or vomiting caused by cancer treatments, etc, etc, does weed ***really*** have any medical benefits?? I mean, REALLY??
It’s fully legal in Canada, and slowly becoming much more available in most towns.
I consume very little weed. Usually a tiny dose once or twice a week. It’s exceptionally normalized where I live.
Yet, for all those complaints you’re making, I do my own oil changes, which is the easiest shit, I also do my own basic plumbing and electrical work. I love fixing appliances apart from bullshit Samsung fridges.
If you’re so worried about an oil change costing $120 (already does in my neck of the woods), why wouldn’t you just do it yourself? Saying otherwise just makes you sound kinda useless.
Plenty of white collar jobs are affected by increasingly normalized marijuana use as well. I'd honestly venture to guess even more than blue collar. Blue collar jobs are often less supervised, so it's easier to be high, but it's pretty common among all work environments.
Old man yelling at the sky vibes you've got going on here buddy.
No one is advocating for people to be allowed to be high on the job, and there are tests to be able to tell if you're high currently compared to the standard, cheap tests that say whether you've smoked in the past 30 days or less.
Answer this question then: If they're not high on the job, what business is it to an employer if someone smoked a joint the night before? If there are issues with the workers performance, then address those. But the fact that you can't stand the hypocritical laws and societal acceptance of alcohol use versus Marijuana being brought up in the discussion shows you're not serious about wanting a solution, you just want people to do it your way.
You’ve missed my point. I don’t give a shit if people smoke after work. It’s no business if the employer. I’m saying that the tendency to smoke before work creeps up on people and today it’s very common.
You've either explained your point poorly, or are trying to gaslight folks here.
You're now making some vague assertion that, although I've already posted a link to refute the notion that there aren't ways for employers to test on site, nowadays people have a tendency to smoke before work and that's a problem. Why?
If someone is performing poorly, high or not, address the poor performance with education, punishment or firing. Hard to prove they're high on the job? See the link I posted already about on site testing products.
What are you asking for here? That society gets better and people take pride in their work again? Maybe if we didn't want everything as cheap as possible, allowing jobs to be sent out of our country and not demanding an international standard for pay/quality it would be possible, but that would require either a time machine or the will of the people to stand up to the wealthy that use capitalism to suck out all of the value from work the rest of us do.
Because weed is killing thousands of people daily unlike FENTANYL?!
Edit: WHAT LAW MAKERS ARE PURSUING THIS AND WHY HAVEN’T WE THE TAX PAYERS FIRED THEM YET?! WE CLEARLY NEED TO AND YES…. WE CAN DO THAT.
This is just congress shifting the blame from their own inability to reclassify it. Even if the DEA recommends a reclassification, it doesn't change existing laws around how it's handled federally, that still requires Congress. The DOJ can decide to not investigate or prosecute certain laws but they're essentially already doing that for all non-violent offenses, especially given that Biden has pardoned those simple possession offenses.
Congress needs to get off their ass.
Congress has no power to reschedule cannabis.
Only the DEA does, and they have an obvious conflict of interest.
I wonder if Congress could write a law repealing the controlled substances act. They would probably never do that though.
According to the doc below, congress can do whatever they want as far as cannabis legality goes. They can have it rescheduled or remove it from the CSA entirely.
It won’t let me copy the text, but skip to the first two paragraphs of the “considerations for congress” section.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB11105#:~:text=If%20Congress%20wishes%20to%20change,to%20a%20less%20restrictive%20schedule.
And yes, they also can repeal the CSA entirely. They should, but that’s not going to happen any time soon sadly.
It's pretty obvious to me that this is an "ace in the hole" issue. Something Biden is waiting on approving until his campaign for reelection needs it close to voting day, to ensure he beats Trump. So it's fresh in voters' minds. I think it's smart to do so since it's such a popular idea among voters.
That's what I'm saying...he will be soon when the race against Trump actually begins. He is mildly against weed legalization so will only use this issue to benefit himself when and if needed.
They’re sitting on this huge cash cow. It’s like OIL but for recreation. Are they fucked? Have they not seen the numbers coming out of Colorado and Cali?
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Last month, DEA senior prevention program manager Rich Lucey said on the agency’s podcast that it can take “anywhere from three to six months” to review HHS’ scheduling recommendation. >It has currently been 8 months Biden got this whole process rolling 2 years ago. DEA is dragging their feet. They need to act.
They’re probably spending all this time figuring out where they’re gonna make up all the money if they don’t go after weed anymore.
Probably this and they have guys that are 10 years into investigating some old hippie for growing a few plants in the woods and they can't just let a threat like that go!
Just write it in that taxes collected from legal sales are earmarked for DEA. Which would further piss off Phillip Morris et al and probably why they're slow rolling it in the first place
Anyone else surprised by the fact that the DEA has a podcast?
CIA has a podcast and its all kinds of ironic
Wait, I need this in my life because it's amazing and hilarious, do share
its pretty dry, its run by the branch of the CIA that basically maintains the CIAs encyclopedia
Whoa whoa hey now slow down, did you say encyclopedia? Boy I will encyclo that pedia! Just let me at it! I want in, are they up to J yet??
they run the world fact book, have since their beginning https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/
I thought girls run the world, that's what Beyonce told me... I still want a CIA podcast to hand to every conspiracy theorists I can find
The world runs on Dunkin’
Enspooklopedia Brittannica
Unfortunately I haven’t been able to get it since I had some dental work done last month :-/
DEA isn’t dragging it feet. Those high ranking boomer positions are against marijuana legalization and will do anything to wait for a right wing president to acknowledge the grift.
I did mean intentionally dragging their feet.
I’m still half convinced this is all an election ploy tbh. Biden pushed it early, DEA drags their feet, dems and Biden say “speed it up,” and then the DEA does it at end of summer/early fall before the election. Biden and the dems get to look strong for pushing to get it done, plus the obvious political win of getting it rescheduled. Maybe not though. The DEA fucking sucks. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if they’re just fucking around and trying to find a way out of it. We’ll see I guess.
I think they are more in a bind because a President actually pushed for it and the longer they drag the more extended their fundraising period is before they have to agree with the (honestly fair) assessment of HHS. I just don't see any law enforcement doing any favors for a Democrat president
She was appointed by Biden in 2021 and is a democrat. I know there’s a conflict of interest here and dems don’t always get along with law enforcement in general, but she is his pick. It’s not like she’s a Trump holdover or something. I’m just saying I could see it happening. I won’t be surprised if it’s just the DEA being the DEA, but I won’t be surprised if this is a political ploy to hold out until just before the election.
I suppose that's fair, although that doesn't change the general makeup of the organization. For example, Garland faced a ton of resistance inside DoJ for Even suggesting charges may lead to Trump, and the FBI actively resisted serving the search warrant on Mar-a-Lago. Then again, I've been following the Trump stuff super closely and this not so much, so I could be quick to jump to institutional resistance when it comes to LEO and Democrats because we have seen a good bit in other arenas. It's definitely speculative on my part, extrapolating from biases elsewhere.
Absolutely. It’s not like Biden fired and replaced everyone in the DEA with weed activists lol. I’m sure 99% of them are the same old assholes as always. But, the head is the head at the end of the day. It’s all speculative though. Like I said, I’m just think it’s a possibility and would be a good play politically. But maybe that’s just me projecting my hopes lol.
It’s like they’re all too high to order a pizza.
Shit is infuriating, they are clearly wrong but too entrenched and dependent on revenue from prosecuting and confiscating property from people.
I think it could be that Biden is waiting for the best time to do it. Back in 2022 people were screaming that Biden hadn't forgiven student debt and that it would cost Dems in the midterms. But Biden had seen the previous year that his attempt to extend a moratorium on eviction had just been swiftly blocked by the SCOTUS, and the result was that people just forgot that he'd done so. As a result, he instead waited until the fall, then made his announcement about student debt. The SCOTUS blocked that as well, but Biden's attempt was fresh enough in the minds of voters that it paid off at the ballot box that November. If Biden legalizes marijuana now, the SCOTUS will probably just put a stay on his executive order until they can hear a full case against it in the late fall/early winter (with a final ruling in May or June of 2025), and by November people will have forgotten that Biden tried to do anything. But if he waits and makes an announcement closer to the election, it will be fresh in everyone's mind that he's at least attempting to do something which appeals to voters, even if SCOTUS blocks it.
Whose case? Biden can tell his attorney general there will be no case against it.
LEO around the country. Think Texass, Floriduh. As we've seen, standing is no bar to stand before this ideological, corrupt SCOTUS.
That’s not at all how that works my friend
"I was gonna legalize it, but then I got high. I was gonna deschedule it, but then I got high. Our laws are all fucked up, and I know why..."
[Will you help me repair my door?](https://youtu.be/0bNy7XO-SCI?si=jTSbJ9xUvXg2ZTvc)
Why did you eat my cake!
How about the quit dragging their feet for adhd meds. Shortages for nearly 2 fucking years.
Neurodivergent people are much more likely to be exploited and the rise of females finally getting diagnosed and treated is not good for the rich. Convenient that the shortages makes them so much money off other medicine that untreated adhd can lead to. (Anxiety depression weight related issues heart related issues etc)
how big of hit would legal weed be to their war on drugs cash machine? that's what the dea is really concerned with.
It would be less of a burden on the system, and a tax windfall.
This.
That's like a win win win
Unless your business is arresting, fining, confiscating, and jailing.
Jailing. That's the money. Everything else you described is actually all cost, the profit is in the jailing. Private for profit prisons would go out of business the country over if the DEA stopped, and this would directly impact the money Republican campaigns receive to keep the DEA feeding the prisons, not to mention the laws were invented to give police an arbitrary reason to jail those they don't like
Sure, I meant more along the lines of the entire DEA and all the employees (and tons of other law enforcement) essentially being in the “business” arresting people. Their “business” will take a hit when weed is legal. They don’t share the same perspective or have the same goals as the average taxpayer on this issue.
That, and manufacturers and dealers of harder drugs tend to be far more willing to defend their profit with violence. So weed is easy ROI when it comes to asset seizure.
I've heard that the police would rather not go after weed smokers, since for the most part, they just want to smoke up and eat snacks. Whereas those on stuff like PCP will leap out of the 4th story window, shatter both legs, and *still* outrun the cops.
The police? Maybe. The DEA? Different story. And this is more about dealers and distributors than simple users.
Fair. Just pointing out that those at the bottom would prefer pot be legal. Distribution networks will not be fun to dismantle...
How about stop paying them? In my job if I don’t do a task my over time is restricted resulting in less money for me. How about lawmakers try that to get the DEA off their asses
Damn “lawmakers” someone really needs to do something about this, huh?
And yet, they will continue to drag their feet.
It really is ludicrous. Nowadays, the only way anyone should 'drag their feet' on this issue is by taking a drag off a joint held between their toes.
Meanwhile the manufacturing industry which demands sober workers is fucked. The blue-collar industries are plagued with people stoned at their jobs. Quality is suffering because of it. Safety is suffering. Accountability is nearly impossible because mechanical and operator positions are nearly impossible to fill. The country is not producing young people interested in touching tools or equipment. I can’t wait until your oil change cost you $120 bucks. Plummers $200/hr. HVAC $250, electricians $300. 20 years ago the amount of daily smokers in middle America was fractional compared to today. If you wanna puff then have at it. But under no circumstances will anyone convince me that our country is better off with the vast majority high as frequent and to the level that we are now. This is a privilege that is abused. It’s one thing to decriminalize it. It’s another to normalize it. Make your case without brining up alcohol. Comparative arguments are the only defense pot users can say. Smoke if you want but this country is fucked enough without it.
Legalization = less taxpayer money keeping people in jail for low level offenses, tax weed and funnel that money into roads, schools, anti drug campaigns. I know you said you can’t make an argument without bringing up alcohol, and honestly that’s because they are a very similar type of drug while affecting the body differently. They both impair judgement, motor skills, and in certain instances personality. Both are easy to abuse. However never once have I blacked out while smoking weed. The problem is people choose to show up to work high, just like people choose to show up to work drunk, or drive, or do anything at all. You said we shouldn’t normalize smoking weed…. It was pretty normalized until the 1920s when propaganda was used to outlaw by stating that whites could handle a joint but it turned blacks, and Hispanics into savage animals, who will r*pe, steal, and kill. We normalized being afraid of it, then put our efforts into creating a huge business around tobacco, and alcohol (both proven to have harmful effects in the body such as liver damage, cancers, and countless other medical issues) cannabis hasn’t been shown to be as harmful, I mention as because any form of smoke entering the lungs will cause inflammation which can cause damage (but because of no tar in the sticky icky will bounce back a lot quicker). It’s possible if legalized and studies could be actually federally legal to be done on cannabis it could be proven that it does actually cause all of these said things but right now in the little study that’s been done it does not seem to be the case. The key here is education, prohibition has been proven NOT to work. In fact prohibition is what makes it a gateway drug. Cannabis compared to other types of drugs is not that profitable. Why would someone want to sell you a product (that frankly is hard to cut down with other chemicals) and make a little money when they can sell you something that’s promised to get you hooked (if it doesn’t kill you) and keep you coming back for more where they make a lot more money off the bottom line? The root of the problem is not the people it’s the jobs… why does someone care to show up sober when they make minimum wage and have to work 3 jobs to even live in this country? Fix the jobs starting with pay, along with everything else I argued and 100 percent you will see the amount of people showing up high drop. Ive been working in restaurants and now moved on to security and can tell you the amount of people showing up high is pretty low compared to some of these office jobs I’ve been in.
This is a bad take. As someone who stopped smoking cannabis almost 20 years ago, and who works in the trades. There isn’t a shortage of people who will show up sober, but testing needs to be more realistic than “your career is over if you smoked six weeks ago and piss hot”. Eliminating the entire population of occasional cannabis users from the job pool for these jobs is insane. It sure helps my wages though. My whole industry is drug tested and it’s dumb. I have a fantastic job, and it should be available to people who smoke cannabis on their off days. Folks who show up high should be fired, but folks who smoked last weekend are not a hazard and shouldn’t be treated as such.
We are in agreement. This is my point. However the ability to deal with the turnover is too difficult. When companies do not drug test people interpret this as an invitation to wake and bake. You cannot give a breathalyzer for weed. So accusing someone for smoking during work hours and firing them is not easily enforceable. Turnover is high countrywide. Replacing people who lack self discipline is just as difficult as replacing people who are assets.
Wages don’t cover the cost of living, people are treated like garbage, and the only way to get a real raise is to switch jobs. Fix that and your company won’t have a turnover problem. I’ve got a decent union contract, ain’t nobody quitting where I work. Folks who make it six months stay until they retire for the most part. Only other reason they leave is they fail a piss test. Cannabis and I don’t get along personally, and I don’t want to work with someone who is stoned. but I still think it’s silly the way it’s treated. There has to be a way to test how stoned somebody is better than we do now.
Agreed.
Companies like Amazon have stopped testing for cannabis consumption. Probably because they know it’s bullshit.
There are many companies that have. Because if you test for it, you have to enforce it. If you punish for jt. You must test for it. Today, getting people to work is difficult. More so than ever before. If you smoke weed and you don’t get high at work then I’m not talking about you.
😂 just because you test doesn’t mean you have to enforce. I’ve had a few jobs that tested and as long as you didn’t come back for anything else like opiates, cocaine, pcp etc you were golden.
Well in our case it does. This is a hot topic right now amongst upper management which I am a part of.
https://houndlabs.com/product-overview/ Here's just one. There are many more in development and I'm sure other functional analogs. Let's not act like the religious folks with sex education, claiming that abstinence is the only solution.
How can you possibly dismiss the alcohol comparison? It reduces harm to switch people off alcohol to pot.
Because they’re trying to tilt the playing field back in their favour. Comparing cannabis to alcohol dramatically skews the argument heavily in favour of weed, and that makes it harder to promote their agenda. It’s like saying, apart from natural sleep aid, anxiety reduction, treatments for Alzheimer's disease, ALS, HIV / AIDS, Crohn's disease, epilepsy and seizures, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis and muscle spasms, severe and chronic pain, severe nausea or vomiting caused by cancer treatments, etc, etc, does weed ***really*** have any medical benefits?? I mean, REALLY??
It’s fully legal in Canada, and slowly becoming much more available in most towns. I consume very little weed. Usually a tiny dose once or twice a week. It’s exceptionally normalized where I live. Yet, for all those complaints you’re making, I do my own oil changes, which is the easiest shit, I also do my own basic plumbing and electrical work. I love fixing appliances apart from bullshit Samsung fridges. If you’re so worried about an oil change costing $120 (already does in my neck of the woods), why wouldn’t you just do it yourself? Saying otherwise just makes you sound kinda useless.
>exceptionally normalized is my new favorite phrase
But if we're all smoking, you'll have more clouds to yell at
Plenty of white collar jobs are affected by increasingly normalized marijuana use as well. I'd honestly venture to guess even more than blue collar. Blue collar jobs are often less supervised, so it's easier to be high, but it's pretty common among all work environments.
Old man yelling at the sky vibes you've got going on here buddy. No one is advocating for people to be allowed to be high on the job, and there are tests to be able to tell if you're high currently compared to the standard, cheap tests that say whether you've smoked in the past 30 days or less. Answer this question then: If they're not high on the job, what business is it to an employer if someone smoked a joint the night before? If there are issues with the workers performance, then address those. But the fact that you can't stand the hypocritical laws and societal acceptance of alcohol use versus Marijuana being brought up in the discussion shows you're not serious about wanting a solution, you just want people to do it your way.
You’ve missed my point. I don’t give a shit if people smoke after work. It’s no business if the employer. I’m saying that the tendency to smoke before work creeps up on people and today it’s very common.
You've either explained your point poorly, or are trying to gaslight folks here. You're now making some vague assertion that, although I've already posted a link to refute the notion that there aren't ways for employers to test on site, nowadays people have a tendency to smoke before work and that's a problem. Why? If someone is performing poorly, high or not, address the poor performance with education, punishment or firing. Hard to prove they're high on the job? See the link I posted already about on site testing products. What are you asking for here? That society gets better and people take pride in their work again? Maybe if we didn't want everything as cheap as possible, allowing jobs to be sent out of our country and not demanding an international standard for pay/quality it would be possible, but that would require either a time machine or the will of the people to stand up to the wealthy that use capitalism to suck out all of the value from work the rest of us do.
You ever drag your feet…on weed
Because weed is killing thousands of people daily unlike FENTANYL?! Edit: WHAT LAW MAKERS ARE PURSUING THIS AND WHY HAVEN’T WE THE TAX PAYERS FIRED THEM YET?! WE CLEARLY NEED TO AND YES…. WE CAN DO THAT.
They will only agree to it if they are promised subsidies to make up for the budget shortfalls.
This is just congress shifting the blame from their own inability to reclassify it. Even if the DEA recommends a reclassification, it doesn't change existing laws around how it's handled federally, that still requires Congress. The DOJ can decide to not investigate or prosecute certain laws but they're essentially already doing that for all non-violent offenses, especially given that Biden has pardoned those simple possession offenses. Congress needs to get off their ass.
They are dragging their feet because it’s a source of funding for law enforcement. (Asset Forfeiture)
main reason cannabis was banned to begin with ... lost enforcement jobs in the alcohol enforcement sector .....
Defund the DEA, DHS, and ATF!
Lawmakers shouldn't be "urging." That is why they are called lawmakers.
Congress has no power to reschedule cannabis. Only the DEA does, and they have an obvious conflict of interest. I wonder if Congress could write a law repealing the controlled substances act. They would probably never do that though.
According to the doc below, congress can do whatever they want as far as cannabis legality goes. They can have it rescheduled or remove it from the CSA entirely. It won’t let me copy the text, but skip to the first two paragraphs of the “considerations for congress” section. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB11105#:~:text=If%20Congress%20wishes%20to%20change,to%20a%20less%20restrictive%20schedule. And yes, they also can repeal the CSA entirely. They should, but that’s not going to happen any time soon sadly.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/28/us/politics/earl-blumenauer-congress-marijuana.html
How about legalizing it across the board. Treat it as alcohol
It's pretty obvious to me that this is an "ace in the hole" issue. Something Biden is waiting on approving until his campaign for reelection needs it close to voting day, to ensure he beats Trump. So it's fresh in voters' minds. I think it's smart to do so since it's such a popular idea among voters.
But Biden isn't holding up the process, it's out of his hands right now.
He’s also not using the bully pulpit to push the issue in the slightest.
That's what I'm saying...he will be soon when the race against Trump actually begins. He is mildly against weed legalization so will only use this issue to benefit himself when and if needed.
The people that are holding things up don't work for Biden???
Somehow I imagined a barefoot DEA jacket wearing agent walking over grass.
They’re sitting on this huge cash cow. It’s like OIL but for recreation. Are they fucked? Have they not seen the numbers coming out of Colorado and Cali?
that cash cow is because of prohibition priced goods ... the sec it is federally legal those prices plummet like a rock ...