Pubdate: Thu, 5 Jul 2001
Source: The Outlook (CN BC)
Copyright: 2001 The Outlook
Contact:  http://www.northshoreoutlook.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1433
Author: Andrew McCredie
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/pot.htm (Cannabis)
Related: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1152/a04.html
Related: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1212/a07.html

A CLOSER LOOK: THIS WEEK, FAST CATS AND BIG BUD THEORY REVISITED:

First, the ferries.

A reminder of the NDP government's biggest financial fiasco - the shed in 
which they were built - sits empty on the Lower Lonsdale waterfront. And 
yesterday, the Fast Ferries were in the news again as the newly elected 
Liberal government said that scrapping the elegant aluminum vessels just 
might be the best route (see story page 3). Seems a year of flogging the 
three vehicle/passenger ferries on the depressed global marketplace has 
come up empty.

And so, says Liberal MLA Judith Reid, the fate of the ferries could very 
well be the same as that of empty beer cans.

I'm sure many anti-NDPers will think this a fitting end to a program that 
came to typify the party's fiscal track record.

But I can't help but feel sorry for the hundreds of skilled workers who 
built the ferries. Surely the ships could be adapted to work in the BC 
Ferries fleet. I just wonder how motivated the Liberals are to save a 
program launched by their predecessors.

- ---

Last week's column in which I unveiled my plans to buy a million dollar 
West Van waterfront property to house a grow-op once marijuana is 
decriminalized caught the attention of a few readers (see Letters to the 
Editor on the next page).

Most notably, readers from places far from our fair Shore. Turns out the 
column became a favourite with bud websites once it was posted on 
www.northshoreoutlook.com. The gist of letter writers' comments was that I 
had obviously failed Economics 101 (in fact, I passed, but quickly switched 
my major from business to poli-sci after first year).

In a nutshell, the problem with my logic was that once bud was legal, 
supply would flood the market and thus the price would dip. Therefore, my 
hope of making easy money while sitting out by the pool would not bear, 
errr, bud. Fair enough. No sense arguing a case that will just get you 
slapped in the face by Adam Smith's invisible hand (For those who failed 
Eco 101, Smith's the Scottish thinker whose The Wealth of Nations presented 
a theory that forever linked human nature with capitalism. To wit: Every 
individual ... neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows 
how much he is promoting it ... By directing that industry in such a manner 
as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, 
and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to 
promote an end which was no part of his intention.)

As a final comment, I'd like to point out a flaw in many letter writers' 
campaigns. The belief that once bud is legal you'll be able to throw a few 
seeds in the garden, or convert that basement closet into a grow-op, is one 
I have difficulty buying into. This contention implies that the federal 
government - which has a vested interest in legalizing pot because of the 
major tax windfall it will reap - will simply allow private citizens to 
skirt the taxman by growing their own. Experience tells me that when the 
feds do make bud legal, they'll add a little caveat - it is still illegal 
to grow it.
- ---
MAP posted-by: GD