MarijuanAmerica: Inside America's Last Growth Industry
The article “MarijuanAmerica: Inside America’s Last Growth Industry” (April 2010) was written by Mark Binelli, a book author (Sacco and Vanzetti Must Die!) and contributing editor for Rolling Stone Magazine. Binelli discusses the potentially revitalizing effects the Marijuana Industry could have on the American economy, through taxation, regulation and the creation of thousands of new jobs; he also makes several meaningful observations about the reality of the economics involved and the potential monetary gains for the government through legalization. Throughout the article uses a multitude of personal revelations and conversations that occurred while learning about the Marijuana Industry as vessels for pertinent information and conclusions.
After a few paragraphs of introductory anecdotes and information to bring the reader up to speed on the current state of the Marijuana Industry, Binelli spends some time likening the prohibition of Marijuana unto the Alcohol Prohibition (1920-1933). He first regales us with some important numbers: the Marijuana Industry is worth approximately $14 billion (unregulated and untaxed) dollars in California alone, and on the national level there could be a potential net gain of $20 billion for the government after decriminalization and/or legalization (currently the government spends $13 billion annually in prohibition costs and could raise $7 billion annually in revenue taxes if it were regulated). He goes on to remind us of the revitalizing effect on the struggling economy after President Roosevelt signed the Repeal of Prohibition (of alcohol) in 1933: thousands of people were put back to work and the government again saw the money flow that came from the taxation of alcohol. He also implies a potential reduction of the social influence and consequences of those who traditionally control the black-market supply and distribution of illegal goods (cartels and gangs, etc), as was seen after the repeal in 1933.
While he did touch briefly on the benefits to the economy, I was very disappointed to discover that Binelli incompletely discussed (or completely failed to mention) a lot of details on the other multiple benefits of the legalization of marijuana. He would have greatly strengthened his argument by discussing, even briefly, the history of - and potential future for - cultivating industrial hemp for production of textiles, alternative fuel and paper. Additionally, I wish he would have delved deeper than a few sentences on the budding research and advancement of medicines derived from marijuana. This would greatly strengthen his arguments that it would benefit the economy in a multi-faceted way. By mainly discussing the farming techniques and recreational use of marijuana, I feel the author incompletely addressed the three major justifications of legalization (Recreational Use and Regulation, Economic Stimulation and Resource Development, and Medical Advancements) and may have even reinforced potential readers’ stereotypical opinions of proponents for legalization (ie: “stoners just want to get high, man”).
I feel comfortable saying that the bulk of this article was simply a narration of stories and conversations with various individuals inside the marijuana industry. Binelli casts a wide net: a mid-30’s entrepreneur in Mendocino County working his own farm and fearing the influence of Corporate America; San Francisco State Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, working to legalize marijuana for its’ economic benefits; Students taking agricultural classes at Med Grow Cannabis College in Detroit; Longtime pot activist Jon Sinclair; and an anonymous grower in Detroit who states he might kill someone to protect a $200,000 crop. It’s apparent that the author chose to have his article subsist of huge quantities of in-depth narratives in order to help the reader (many of whom might potentially be very distrustful of the industry, if they are in opposition of legalization) connect with the reality of the human beings on the other side of the argument. The narratives are also vessels for many important pieces of information necessary to Binelli’s argument. I felt that an (perhaps unintended) effect of casting such a wide net was a reinforcement of the theme that regulation of marijuana would take the money and influence out of the hands of unsavory groups (such as the anonymous grower willing to use firepower to kill any person who threatened his crop).
I understand the article was written for Rolling Stone Magazine and therefore, has an expected reader base of liberal-minded enthusiasts, but the audience that he’s trying to win over might not appreciate his coarse writing style and unabashed recounting of blatantly profane conversations. I feel that the Binelli’s voice in this article loses him some credibility with his desired audience. This is definitely my prudent upbringing speaking; I can say with much certainty that many of those opposed to the legalization of marijuana (for example: my extremely well educated, extremely religious parents) would be put off by the inelegant nature of the narration and therefore less receptive to the reasonable arguments being made in between the anecdotes. The author would have much more impact on the audience that he’s trying to persuade if he catered just a little more to their personalities. That being said, the article would not have been as in-depth without all of the narratives, and they did serve the critical purpose of connecting the reader with the reality of the industry.
Several times throughout the article, Binelli makes references to the blossoming similarities between the Wine Tourism Industry and a future Marijuana Tourism Industry. I found this to be a very interesting concept, and one that I had not previously pondered. I experienced a particularly thought provoking moment when I read about the marijuana farmer lamenting the fact that his brothers-in-agriculture, wine growers and producers (who also produce and sell an intoxicating substance), were able to receive the honors and benefits of being considered an official industry, while the marijuana farmers were condemned to being “…the black sheep of our families…”. Binelli goes on to discuss the Cannabis Cup in Amsterdam (similar to the concept of wine tastings and competitions) and the Emerald Cup in Mendocino County; this, again, was thought provoking to me in a way that I had not heretofore contemplated. For example, think of the incredible history and culture that the wine industry has developed!
Emphasizing the potential for a marijuana tourism industry was a very good move on the part of the author, for this raises several different trains of thought. First, as I have previously mentioned, the potential benefits to the economy are huge. Prior to reading this article, I had only been thinking inside the parameters of economic benefits on a national, governmental level. The development of tourism industries across the country would give states and small communities a new venue for growth. Second, it would herald an evolution within our nation’s cultural identity. Where the wine industry comes from an ancient, rich and complex global background, so also does the marijuana industry. Where the wine industry went on to put down roots in America and develop its’ own personality and character (much to our economic and cultural benefit) as well as assimilating rich pieces of global heritage into our society, so also will the marijuana industry.
I found Mark Binelli’s article “MarijuanAmerica: America’s Last Growth Industry” to be fascinating, colorful (in every literary sense of the word) and passionate. Through his vivid storytelling and discussions with relevant individuals I found myself immersed in the underground culture of the marijuana industry, and came away with new information regarding the history and prohibition of marijuana, as well as feeling empathy for the citizens striving to carve a new path in history while pursuing a dream. The author firmly established that there would be economic benefits through taxation and creation of new jobs. However, I was ultimately disappointed with the composition as the author failed to employ a professional tone (affecting its’ reception among conservative readers) and the article neglected to sufficiently incorporate of the potential of medicinal marijuana advancements and farmed industrial hemp (two of the strongest supporting arguments for legalization) into the arguments.
After a few paragraphs of introductory anecdotes and information to bring the reader up to speed on the current state of the Marijuana Industry, Binelli spends some time likening the prohibition of Marijuana unto the Alcohol Prohibition (1920-1933). He first regales us with some important numbers: the Marijuana Industry is worth approximately $14 billion (unregulated and untaxed) dollars in California alone, and on the national level there could be a potential net gain of $20 billion for the government after decriminalization and/or legalization (currently the government spends $13 billion annually in prohibition costs and could raise $7 billion annually in revenue taxes if it were regulated). He goes on to remind us of the revitalizing effect on the struggling economy after President Roosevelt signed the Repeal of Prohibition (of alcohol) in 1933: thousands of people were put back to work and the government again saw the money flow that came from the taxation of alcohol. He also implies a potential reduction of the social influence and consequences of those who traditionally control the black-market supply and distribution of illegal goods (cartels and gangs, etc), as was seen after the repeal in 1933.
While he did touch briefly on the benefits to the economy, I was very disappointed to discover that Binelli incompletely discussed (or completely failed to mention) a lot of details on the other multiple benefits of the legalization of marijuana. He would have greatly strengthened his argument by discussing, even briefly, the history of - and potential future for - cultivating industrial hemp for production of textiles, alternative fuel and paper. Additionally, I wish he would have delved deeper than a few sentences on the budding research and advancement of medicines derived from marijuana. This would greatly strengthen his arguments that it would benefit the economy in a multi-faceted way. By mainly discussing the farming techniques and recreational use of marijuana, I feel the author incompletely addressed the three major justifications of legalization (Recreational Use and Regulation, Economic Stimulation and Resource Development, and Medical Advancements) and may have even reinforced potential readers’ stereotypical opinions of proponents for legalization (ie: “stoners just want to get high, man”).
I feel comfortable saying that the bulk of this article was simply a narration of stories and conversations with various individuals inside the marijuana industry. Binelli casts a wide net: a mid-30’s entrepreneur in Mendocino County working his own farm and fearing the influence of Corporate America; San Francisco State Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, working to legalize marijuana for its’ economic benefits; Students taking agricultural classes at Med Grow Cannabis College in Detroit; Longtime pot activist Jon Sinclair; and an anonymous grower in Detroit who states he might kill someone to protect a $200,000 crop. It’s apparent that the author chose to have his article subsist of huge quantities of in-depth narratives in order to help the reader (many of whom might potentially be very distrustful of the industry, if they are in opposition of legalization) connect with the reality of the human beings on the other side of the argument. The narratives are also vessels for many important pieces of information necessary to Binelli’s argument. I felt that an (perhaps unintended) effect of casting such a wide net was a reinforcement of the theme that regulation of marijuana would take the money and influence out of the hands of unsavory groups (such as the anonymous grower willing to use firepower to kill any person who threatened his crop).
I understand the article was written for Rolling Stone Magazine and therefore, has an expected reader base of liberal-minded enthusiasts, but the audience that he’s trying to win over might not appreciate his coarse writing style and unabashed recounting of blatantly profane conversations. I feel that the Binelli’s voice in this article loses him some credibility with his desired audience. This is definitely my prudent upbringing speaking; I can say with much certainty that many of those opposed to the legalization of marijuana (for example: my extremely well educated, extremely religious parents) would be put off by the inelegant nature of the narration and therefore less receptive to the reasonable arguments being made in between the anecdotes. The author would have much more impact on the audience that he’s trying to persuade if he catered just a little more to their personalities. That being said, the article would not have been as in-depth without all of the narratives, and they did serve the critical purpose of connecting the reader with the reality of the industry.
Several times throughout the article, Binelli makes references to the blossoming similarities between the Wine Tourism Industry and a future Marijuana Tourism Industry. I found this to be a very interesting concept, and one that I had not previously pondered. I experienced a particularly thought provoking moment when I read about the marijuana farmer lamenting the fact that his brothers-in-agriculture, wine growers and producers (who also produce and sell an intoxicating substance), were able to receive the honors and benefits of being considered an official industry, while the marijuana farmers were condemned to being “…the black sheep of our families…”. Binelli goes on to discuss the Cannabis Cup in Amsterdam (similar to the concept of wine tastings and competitions) and the Emerald Cup in Mendocino County; this, again, was thought provoking to me in a way that I had not heretofore contemplated. For example, think of the incredible history and culture that the wine industry has developed!
Emphasizing the potential for a marijuana tourism industry was a very good move on the part of the author, for this raises several different trains of thought. First, as I have previously mentioned, the potential benefits to the economy are huge. Prior to reading this article, I had only been thinking inside the parameters of economic benefits on a national, governmental level. The development of tourism industries across the country would give states and small communities a new venue for growth. Second, it would herald an evolution within our nation’s cultural identity. Where the wine industry comes from an ancient, rich and complex global background, so also does the marijuana industry. Where the wine industry went on to put down roots in America and develop its’ own personality and character (much to our economic and cultural benefit) as well as assimilating rich pieces of global heritage into our society, so also will the marijuana industry.
I found Mark Binelli’s article “MarijuanAmerica: America’s Last Growth Industry” to be fascinating, colorful (in every literary sense of the word) and passionate. Through his vivid storytelling and discussions with relevant individuals I found myself immersed in the underground culture of the marijuana industry, and came away with new information regarding the history and prohibition of marijuana, as well as feeling empathy for the citizens striving to carve a new path in history while pursuing a dream. The author firmly established that there would be economic benefits through taxation and creation of new jobs. However, I was ultimately disappointed with the composition as the author failed to employ a professional tone (affecting its’ reception among conservative readers) and the article neglected to sufficiently incorporate of the potential of medicinal marijuana advancements and farmed industrial hemp (two of the strongest supporting arguments for legalization) into the arguments.