Phat sticky stinky diggety-dank.
thats a collection of colloquialisms for weed, on face value fat heavy sticky buds refer more to sativa strains. Got a better definition?
I disagree, as does Ed Rosenthal. Have you ever read his books?
Got a source for that? I've not read his books no, tho I am well aware of who he is.
What you and Mike keep calling "curing" is simply the drying process. Curing agricultural products (including tobacco) usually involves chemical (which can be natural) additives. No such curing is done to marijuana.
My brief google search on "tobacco curing" threw up a myriad of sites like
this one which describes an air drying/aging process during which harmful/undesirable chemicals in the plant are changed into desirable ones.
From what I read adding chemicals to tobacco is done by tobacco companies
to improve the smoking properties and allow the use of various byproducts to both save wastage and to produce a consistent branded blend.
Most commerically used tobacco is described as "flue-cured brightleaf" and that means it's been hung in a large barn to age that has had the temperature and humidity controlled.
This is exactly the same process for marijuana (almost) the only difference being marijuana curing takes place in a dry atmosphere and not a humid one.
"Curing" = "Aging" more or less.
You act like growing takes some sort of special skills, it doesn't.
That depends on how you are growing, if you are growing indoors hydroponically you need some skills, outdoors less so. An experienced grower will get better yields, and a better quality of finished product than a noob will. So saying it takes no skills is wrong.
If you can't afford $200 in grow lights for indoor growing you certainly can't afford to pay $200/oz for pot, so this doesn't even make sense.
Why do you need to buy a whole ounce at a time?
I suppose there would be a limited commercial market for the person who smokes once or twice a year. Probably not enough to attrract a multi-million $ corporation though.
I am arguing that legalisation will mean many more people will smoke, or otherwise use marijuana, and that for many of the new "casual" users an ounce will last them months, and a great deal of people that only smoke say a joint or two a week, or make a batch of cookies once in a while aren't going to want or need to bother with growing their own.
That prices will start out close to what they are now and remain that way for a while before dropping, and that it's this period of time that will produce the "windfall" in tax revenues. I am taking "windfall" to mean a one time short term boost in tax revenues, not an on going long term large increase in tax revenue. That while there will be a windfall it won't be anything lke as large as most pro-legalisation people are claiming, or as small as you are claiming.
As far as climate goes a poorer climate results in lower yield, and if you were a hobbyist limited to only 3 plants at one time and only get one or two harvests a year you might not make enough to supply yourself a whole year.
Also almost every joint I've ever smoked has had about 70% tobacco content. It's the way joints are over here.
Never heard of it? Here's a 
