Day 2
-
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
That explains why we haven't seen Centrist for a while now. He was our resident Canadian that first broke the news story. Apparently he's been too busy since. :laugh:
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
That explains why we haven't seen Centrist for a while now
Centrist here.
-
There's an article on the BBC I'm finding puzzling Why is Canada running out of marijuana? - BBC News[^] Since legalising the sale of weed in Canada it looks like supplies are running out. The article talks about shops getting their supplies from government warehouses and provincial suppliers.
Quote:
"But obviously, when there's literally none there, it doesn't matter how big you are, there's just none there. If the government warehouse is empty, it's empty. There's nothing you can do."
I was led to believe that the product would be supplied by people who previously sold the product illegally, that they'd simply legitimise, that they already had the supply lines, the distribution, they'd just get the relevant licenses and start supplying the shops. Was that information wrong?
Victim of its success. Cannabis user had to turn back to the black market. A company in the city where I live is planning to multiply by ten its production in the short term.
-
There's an article on the BBC I'm finding puzzling Why is Canada running out of marijuana? - BBC News[^] Since legalising the sale of weed in Canada it looks like supplies are running out. The article talks about shops getting their supplies from government warehouses and provincial suppliers.
Quote:
"But obviously, when there's literally none there, it doesn't matter how big you are, there's just none there. If the government warehouse is empty, it's empty. There's nothing you can do."
I was led to believe that the product would be supplied by people who previously sold the product illegally, that they'd simply legitimise, that they already had the supply lines, the distribution, they'd just get the relevant licenses and start supplying the shops. Was that information wrong?
I am guessing from a market value standpoint if the suppliers limit the supply they can push the price up.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
That explains why we haven't seen Centrist for a while now
Centrist here.
-
There's an article on the BBC I'm finding puzzling Why is Canada running out of marijuana? - BBC News[^] Since legalising the sale of weed in Canada it looks like supplies are running out. The article talks about shops getting their supplies from government warehouses and provincial suppliers.
Quote:
"But obviously, when there's literally none there, it doesn't matter how big you are, there's just none there. If the government warehouse is empty, it's empty. There's nothing you can do."
I was led to believe that the product would be supplied by people who previously sold the product illegally, that they'd simply legitimise, that they already had the supply lines, the distribution, they'd just get the relevant licenses and start supplying the shops. Was that information wrong?
There goes my plan to fly into Toronto rather than NYC! I will have to break my journey in Amsterdam to console myself!:suss: :-O :thumbsup:
-
You said I was wrong about those thing, but you said I was wrong about this too. I've just proven to you that just because you say something is wrong doesn't make it so. Something else you'll simply never admit so there is little point in engaging with you.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
I've just proven to you that just because you say something is wrong doesn't make it so.
First of all, you did not prove that. Second, I never claimed, nor did anyone here believe that things are true because "Eddy said so". Turd, it's another sofist strategy; but pointing out that one has been wrong in the past does not mean that all statements are "wrong".
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
there is little point in engaging with you.
Yet you devoted an entire thread, simply to try and catch me on a semantic "wrong" :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
I am guessing from a market value standpoint if the suppliers limit the supply they can push the price up.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
For that they would have to work together, which is forbidden in most countries. In a country with few growers, where demand explodes, there has to be imported from another country (imagine that) or wait for a new harvest.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
the plant is grown by civil servants
Grown by civil servants, no. But given some of the actions of government, they are definitely smoking it! :)
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
-
The only supplier mentioned in the article is the government. It implies that if they can't get the commodity from the government they can't get any. No mention that "local dealers" have ran out of supplies too. It looks like previously-illegal dealers aren't supplying the product, but that the product is only being supplied by a sanctioned government supplier. Who could ever have predicated that....?
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
It looks like previously-illegal dealers aren't supplying the product, but that the product is only being supplied by a sanctioned government supplier. Who could ever have predicated that....?
Surely the sanctioned supplier is a lot cheaper end price than the original illegal supplies. A hell of a lot more middle men taking a cut. So would have thought the old supply lines went out of business as soon as it was legal. So not too hard to predict
-
There's an article on the BBC I'm finding puzzling Why is Canada running out of marijuana? - BBC News[^] Since legalising the sale of weed in Canada it looks like supplies are running out. The article talks about shops getting their supplies from government warehouses and provincial suppliers.
Quote:
"But obviously, when there's literally none there, it doesn't matter how big you are, there's just none there. If the government warehouse is empty, it's empty. There's nothing you can do."
I was led to believe that the product would be supplied by people who previously sold the product illegally, that they'd simply legitimise, that they already had the supply lines, the distribution, they'd just get the relevant licenses and start supplying the shops. Was that information wrong?
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
I was led to believe that the product would be supplied by people who previously sold the product illegally,
Not sure where that came from and it doesn't really have much to do with the shortage regardless. Since it is legal more people buy it. However everything opened at once. And that included production facilities. And all those have to be licensed. Since weed is a crop it takes time to grow. Moreover there was certain to be inefficiencies as the growers need to figure out how to grow it and the actual demand (more crops require more money to be spent up front.) I also doubt the illegal providers were growing it themselves, for the most part. More likely they were importing it from other places. So no support there. But even so they would need to be licensed. Also didn't look at it but I wouldn't be surprised if those with convictions were excluded so that would cut down that by quite a bit.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
getting their supplies from government warehouses
Rather certain that is a local variant. In one province only the government sells it. And presumably grows it. Others do not do that.