Yawn. Call me when you get something to add here.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
It's time to legalize drugs
- Thread starter Chris
- Start date
Yawn. Call me when you get something to add here.
Harry Dresden
Adamantium Member
Translation: I have no arguments to make so I make this personal.
like you did not make this personal you stupid Fuck?.....and you know dam well what i am talking about....
Yawn. Call me when you get something to add here.
it doesnt matter what anyone adds with you.....if you refuse to answer questions because it might show you know little about the topic...... whats the fucking point?.....
Squrl
Rookie
- Jul 11, 2011
- 18
- 0
- 1
Put arguments for and against legalization aside for a moment. If people could use marijuanawithout fear of legal consequencejust how much would get used? More to the point, how much money is at stake?
Getty Images
A variety of businesses and tax-deprived governments would love to know the answer. Unfortunately, there isnt a simple one. By its taboo nature, marijuana consumption and demand is not well-measured.
Economists, reformists, law enforcement authorities and the pro-marijuana lobby, however, have come up with a variety of estimates. Put them all together and you get a range of $10 billion to over $120 billion a year. Such a wide spread is hardly a solid answer.
But some calculations may be better than others. All estimates begin with some key assumptions on the basic economic theory of supply and demand, thus laying the foundation for the size of the pot market.
Demand-Based Models: How Much Do People Consume?
Demand-based models use consumption volumes and price to estimate the size of a total market. Here, the tricky part is coming up with exact figures on how much pot is consumed and how much it costs. Opinions differ.
The US Department of Health & Human Services' Substance Abuse & Mental Health Administration conducts a National Survey on Drug Use and Health. This survey, among others like it, states that roughly 10 percent of the population above the age of 12 has used marijuana in the past year, while 6 percent has used it in any given month. Of all monthly users, 15 percent use marijuana on a daily basis. By comparison, 52 percent of Americans above the age of 12 have had an alcoholic beverage and 28 percent have used tobacco in any given month.
While tobacco use has drifted downward from over 30 percent of the population per month, the marijuana percentages have been roughly consistent for at least the past ten years, according to H&HS data, and have varied by less than 1 percent over a two-decade period. Alcohol consumption has also been relatively constant, hovering around 51 percent.
On price and volume, various reports and studies conclude a typical marijuana cigarette, or joint, contains between 0.5 - 1.0 grams of the drug. The price of a gram can vary from $5-$20, or even more depending on potency and origin. Among others, "High Times" magazine conducts a monthly survey of its readers to aggregate prices from around the country. See its current survey results here.
Based on this data, most demand-based studies put the market at $10-$40 billion. If a sensitivity analysis is applied to consumption and price variables (that is, testing different combinations of price and use), the market can reach as high as $100 billion (see chart). It all depends on what you believe, given the number of variables involved. Are more consumers smoking more frequently and at higher prices or less frequently at lower prices? The answer is probably somewhere in the middle.
Proponents of this approach include Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron, perhaps the foremost independent authority on the economics of drug use, and the lobby group National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, NORML. (See the analysis of NORML's California branch.) Miron conservatively sizes the market at about $14 billion and in his February 2010 paper on "The Budgetary Implications of Drug Prohibition" states that legalization of marijuana could yield over $20 billion in tax revenues and enforcement cost savings.
Critics of these estimates argue that these surveys, because they are administered by the government, underreport the number of users. The frequency of usage and price estimates vary as well.
Supply-Side Models: How Much Pot is Farmed?
The alternative approach is to look at the supply side of the equation. Proponents of this methodology look at seizures by the US Drug Enforcement Administration and US Customs and Border Protection as a measure of how much cannabis is in the system and then extrapolate out based on assumptions for what percent of the market the captured material represents.
Unlike the steady levels of consumption, the levels of supply, seizures and eradications keep growing. According to the DEAs National Drug Intelligence Center, over 7 million plants were eradicated in 2007, up 120 percent from 2004. The DEA seized 660,969 kg (1.5 million pounds) of marijuana in 2008, up 149 percent from 2005.
In his 2006 study, "Marijuana Production in the United States", Dr. John Gettman, a marijuana reform activist and professor at George Mason University, used data from the DEA and other sources in estimating that the average, annual domestic marijuana crop totaled some 65 million plants at a weight of 22 million pounds (10,000 metric tons). In addition, he calculated that another 50 percent was harvested in neighboring Mexico and Canada.
Based on average yields for these plants of ~7 oz per outdoor plant and ~3.5 oz per indoor plant, assumptions on the total crop size, and using the aforementioned price ranges per ounce or per joint as well as consumption rates, the market value swells to up to $120 billion.
Critics of this approach argue that the DEA numbers are inflated because the federal government has an incentive to demonstrate it is winning the war on drugs. Further, they say, the actual measure of weight is inflated because some of the confiscated material is finished product while a large amount consists of entire plants (not the flowers and leaves typically used) along with the root structure that is weighed down by soil.
Harvard's Miron tells CNBC, "some people have produced estimates of the size of the marijuana market that are literally 20 times my estimates... there are aspects of the methodology that have been used to produce these numbers that are substantially higher than mine that I find problematic. So, I think that the smaller number is much more likely, it could well be that Im wrong, and that it's $15-17 billion, but the $200 billion is hard to believe."
Comparisons: Alcohol or Tobacco?
A third way to look at the market is by comparing it to other vices that are already legal.
According to a November 2009 Standard & Poor's industry report, the tobacco and alcohol industries generated $263 billion combined in 2008. Alcohol represented $188 billion of the total, with $99 billion in beer, $61 billion in spirits and $27 billion in wine. Tobacco generated $75 billion, including $71 billion in cigarette sales.
This gut-check approach asks, can marijuana be bigger than cigarettes or beer (if it were legal)?
Another way to think about this is to ask yourself, if a typical smoker consumes 1 pack of cigarettes per day and spends $7-8 per pack, what would a marijuana user need to smoke for the market to be as big? (Not to suggest that drinkers or smokers would necessarily become marijuana users).
According to the H&HS data, there are nearly 5 to 1 as many smokers as there are pot users. For the pot market to be as big as tobacco, the average user would need to spend $35-40 per day, or smoke 2-4 joints per day. That number implies that perhaps the marijuana market would need to be smaller.
Reasonable Range? $35-45 Billion
If you believe prices are higher and/or users will partake more then assumed in the data then you will likely fall on the right side of the scale. If, however, you believe consumption will remain low and legalization will actually bring prices down, then the marijuana market will be smaller. After looking at all three approaches above, the answer likely falls somewhere in the middle, between $35 and $45 billion.
Tobacco and alcohol sales generate over $17 billion in federal tax revenue. States tax tobacco and alcohol and benefit as well. Given the current economic environment and the deficits states are facing, it is understandable why legalization is a topic of discussion. Assuming comparable taxes to tobacco of 40-50% (excise and sales tax), a $40 billion marijuana market would yield $16-20 billion in taxes.
from CNBC
Getty Images
A variety of businesses and tax-deprived governments would love to know the answer. Unfortunately, there isnt a simple one. By its taboo nature, marijuana consumption and demand is not well-measured.
Economists, reformists, law enforcement authorities and the pro-marijuana lobby, however, have come up with a variety of estimates. Put them all together and you get a range of $10 billion to over $120 billion a year. Such a wide spread is hardly a solid answer.
But some calculations may be better than others. All estimates begin with some key assumptions on the basic economic theory of supply and demand, thus laying the foundation for the size of the pot market.
Demand-Based Models: How Much Do People Consume?
Demand-based models use consumption volumes and price to estimate the size of a total market. Here, the tricky part is coming up with exact figures on how much pot is consumed and how much it costs. Opinions differ.
The US Department of Health & Human Services' Substance Abuse & Mental Health Administration conducts a National Survey on Drug Use and Health. This survey, among others like it, states that roughly 10 percent of the population above the age of 12 has used marijuana in the past year, while 6 percent has used it in any given month. Of all monthly users, 15 percent use marijuana on a daily basis. By comparison, 52 percent of Americans above the age of 12 have had an alcoholic beverage and 28 percent have used tobacco in any given month.
While tobacco use has drifted downward from over 30 percent of the population per month, the marijuana percentages have been roughly consistent for at least the past ten years, according to H&HS data, and have varied by less than 1 percent over a two-decade period. Alcohol consumption has also been relatively constant, hovering around 51 percent.
On price and volume, various reports and studies conclude a typical marijuana cigarette, or joint, contains between 0.5 - 1.0 grams of the drug. The price of a gram can vary from $5-$20, or even more depending on potency and origin. Among others, "High Times" magazine conducts a monthly survey of its readers to aggregate prices from around the country. See its current survey results here.
Based on this data, most demand-based studies put the market at $10-$40 billion. If a sensitivity analysis is applied to consumption and price variables (that is, testing different combinations of price and use), the market can reach as high as $100 billion (see chart). It all depends on what you believe, given the number of variables involved. Are more consumers smoking more frequently and at higher prices or less frequently at lower prices? The answer is probably somewhere in the middle.
Proponents of this approach include Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron, perhaps the foremost independent authority on the economics of drug use, and the lobby group National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, NORML. (See the analysis of NORML's California branch.) Miron conservatively sizes the market at about $14 billion and in his February 2010 paper on "The Budgetary Implications of Drug Prohibition" states that legalization of marijuana could yield over $20 billion in tax revenues and enforcement cost savings.
Critics of these estimates argue that these surveys, because they are administered by the government, underreport the number of users. The frequency of usage and price estimates vary as well.
Supply-Side Models: How Much Pot is Farmed?
The alternative approach is to look at the supply side of the equation. Proponents of this methodology look at seizures by the US Drug Enforcement Administration and US Customs and Border Protection as a measure of how much cannabis is in the system and then extrapolate out based on assumptions for what percent of the market the captured material represents.
Unlike the steady levels of consumption, the levels of supply, seizures and eradications keep growing. According to the DEAs National Drug Intelligence Center, over 7 million plants were eradicated in 2007, up 120 percent from 2004. The DEA seized 660,969 kg (1.5 million pounds) of marijuana in 2008, up 149 percent from 2005.
In his 2006 study, "Marijuana Production in the United States", Dr. John Gettman, a marijuana reform activist and professor at George Mason University, used data from the DEA and other sources in estimating that the average, annual domestic marijuana crop totaled some 65 million plants at a weight of 22 million pounds (10,000 metric tons). In addition, he calculated that another 50 percent was harvested in neighboring Mexico and Canada.
Based on average yields for these plants of ~7 oz per outdoor plant and ~3.5 oz per indoor plant, assumptions on the total crop size, and using the aforementioned price ranges per ounce or per joint as well as consumption rates, the market value swells to up to $120 billion.
Critics of this approach argue that the DEA numbers are inflated because the federal government has an incentive to demonstrate it is winning the war on drugs. Further, they say, the actual measure of weight is inflated because some of the confiscated material is finished product while a large amount consists of entire plants (not the flowers and leaves typically used) along with the root structure that is weighed down by soil.
Harvard's Miron tells CNBC, "some people have produced estimates of the size of the marijuana market that are literally 20 times my estimates... there are aspects of the methodology that have been used to produce these numbers that are substantially higher than mine that I find problematic. So, I think that the smaller number is much more likely, it could well be that Im wrong, and that it's $15-17 billion, but the $200 billion is hard to believe."
Comparisons: Alcohol or Tobacco?
A third way to look at the market is by comparing it to other vices that are already legal.
According to a November 2009 Standard & Poor's industry report, the tobacco and alcohol industries generated $263 billion combined in 2008. Alcohol represented $188 billion of the total, with $99 billion in beer, $61 billion in spirits and $27 billion in wine. Tobacco generated $75 billion, including $71 billion in cigarette sales.
This gut-check approach asks, can marijuana be bigger than cigarettes or beer (if it were legal)?
Another way to think about this is to ask yourself, if a typical smoker consumes 1 pack of cigarettes per day and spends $7-8 per pack, what would a marijuana user need to smoke for the market to be as big? (Not to suggest that drinkers or smokers would necessarily become marijuana users).
According to the H&HS data, there are nearly 5 to 1 as many smokers as there are pot users. For the pot market to be as big as tobacco, the average user would need to spend $35-40 per day, or smoke 2-4 joints per day. That number implies that perhaps the marijuana market would need to be smaller.
Reasonable Range? $35-45 Billion
If you believe prices are higher and/or users will partake more then assumed in the data then you will likely fall on the right side of the scale. If, however, you believe consumption will remain low and legalization will actually bring prices down, then the marijuana market will be smaller. After looking at all three approaches above, the answer likely falls somewhere in the middle, between $35 and $45 billion.
Tobacco and alcohol sales generate over $17 billion in federal tax revenue. States tax tobacco and alcohol and benefit as well. Given the current economic environment and the deficits states are facing, it is understandable why legalization is a topic of discussion. Assuming comparable taxes to tobacco of 40-50% (excise and sales tax), a $40 billion marijuana market would yield $16-20 billion in taxes.
from CNBC
like you did not make this personal you stupid Fuck?.....and you know dam well what i am talking about....
Yawn. Call me when you get something to add here.
it doesnt matter what anyone adds with you.....if you refuse to answer questions because it might show you know little about the topic...... whats the fucking point?.....
Translation: I have no arguments, period.
Put arguments for and against legalization aside for a moment. If people could use marijuanawithout fear of legal consequencejust how much would get used? More to the point, how much money is at stake?
The answer is a hell of alot more than what gets used now. It is simple economics. Drop the effective price, which currently includes the risk of getting caught, and consumption goes up. Why does anyone think the Dutch have restricted dope cafes?
As for taxing it, pot is too easy to grow in your basement--much easier than producing Jack Daniels. And the end product is about the same as anything a commercial grower would produce. Raise the tax even incrementally higher and everyone would become a pot farmer. The tax revenue point is nonsense because evading the tax would be way too easy. The experience with high taxes on cigarettes in NYC has shown that.
No, legalization means more use. Why anyone thinks more drug use is good for this country is beyond me.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 57,044
- 16,817
- 2,180
I agree we need to try something different. But turning this country into a nation of zombies isnt really what I would call a good change.
I proposed something different, and something with a proven record of eliminating drug addiction.
You didnt answer my ability to use pot, not to excess. why should I be banned from using it because someone else can't control themselves?
How would legalizing pot turn us into a nation of zombies?
Also the idea of killing people based on a drug test is, honestly, abhorrent, and reeks of fascism.
Law are not made on the basis of individuals. I can safely drive a car at 90mph. That doesnt mean speed limits shouldn't apply to me.
Legalizing drugs will incresae their use. Does anyone argue this is a good thing?
You dont like executing criminals? Sorry for you.
Call me when they start executing citizens for their second speeding ticket, fascist you. Yes legalizing more recreational drugs fro personal use is a freedom thing. You simply don't believe in freedom. You put the ultimate faith in government control, aka the State. It didn't work against alcohol and it will never work against other well used drugs.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 57,044
- 16,817
- 2,180
I can't even smoke a cigarette in a park or a bar and you want to legalize drugs?
Yes Gramps from the statist point of view reguation is the means to and end.
The Drug war is the statist way.
Cigarettes(all tobacco products really) are targeted too.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 57,044
- 16,817
- 2,180
Smart people can make distinctions. Stupid people can't.
You obviously can't make distinctions.
Well do tell us what is your reasoning behind killing dealers for the first offense and then drug addicts for their second after they get rehab. Why do they get the death penalty?
Because they obviously cannot be productive members of society. The opposite in fact. They are destructive to society.
[Tune up slippery slope fallacy from Junior in 3...2...1....]
Got it, so people exist to enhance the state, all others should just die.
LOL you've gone beyond Socialism straight into uber-fascism and Nazi land.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 57,044
- 16,817
- 2,180
sure the commies eradicted the drug dealers and a few thousand others as well expecially those who didnt follow the party lineAnd both countries are rife with corruption and lawlessness. I heard the U.S. actually has a few soldiers there to try to restore order. You hear about that?
The Chinese faced this problem when the Communists took over. Opium had addled the entire population, from the Empress on down. The Communists made a proposal like mine. Within a few years they eradicated the opium problem.
Proven solution to a proven problem. Someone refute that.
sure the commies created a nation where the citizens were drug free ,no personal choose free and not much freedom to do much else being able to enjoy a few drugs now and again would be a improvement in there social life
1) Is drug use beneficial or detrimental to society?
2) Is eradicating drug use a desireable goal?
The answers to these questions are obvious to anyone with 2 functioning brain cells. Using a tried method we have the opportunity to eliminate or substantially curtail drug use in ths country. That is what we need to do.
1. Beneficial of course.
2. No, not at all.
So you admire how Mao killed all the drug users, is that correct?
Mr. Shaman
Senior Member
- May 4, 2010
- 23,892
- 822
- 48
Can you support that rude and empty retort with some intelligent substance? Such as how the U.S. has benefited from the War On Drugs -- especially the prohibition of marijuana.
The Rabbi wants government to solve his problems for him and tell people what they can do with their bodies. They may make the wrong choice. It has to be stopped. He trusts politicians for that, deciding what people can do with their bodies. And clearly government tracking financial transactions and invading our privacy to do it is well worth the benefit of government controlling people. And hey, funding mafias and destabalizing government is a small price to pay for government to control what we put in our bodies. Yes, he trusts government, the guy is whacked.
Yeah, imagine that. Struggling to keep society safe and functioning. Who could possibly be for something like that? Better to have a bunch of drug-induced zombies wandering around, mumbling about Ron Paul...
Another "swing" & a "miss".
Harry Dresden
Adamantium Member
cant argue with someone who pleads the 5th every time.....Yawn. Call me when you get something to add here.
it doesnt matter what anyone adds with you.....if you refuse to answer questions because it might show you know little about the topic...... whats the fucking point?.....
Translation: I have no arguments, period.
Mr. Shaman
Senior Member
- May 4, 2010
- 23,892
- 822
- 48
With issues so serious that they are determining the future of our country, you want to talk about legalizing pot? Sheeesh!
'Cause....after ALL....excessive prison/law-enforcement-spending has been Divinely Inspired, right?
ABikerSailor
Diamond Member
Put arguments for and against legalization aside for a moment. If people could use marijuanawithout fear of legal consequencejust how much would get used? More to the point, how much money is at stake?
The answer is a hell of alot more than what gets used now. It is simple economics. Drop the effective price, which currently includes the risk of getting caught, and consumption goes up. Why does anyone think the Dutch have restricted dope cafes?
As for taxing it, pot is too easy to grow in your basement--much easier than producing Jack Daniels. And the end product is about the same as anything a commercial grower would produce. Raise the tax even incrementally higher and everyone would become a pot farmer. The tax revenue point is nonsense because evading the tax would be way too easy. The experience with high taxes on cigarettes in NYC has shown that.
No, legalization means more use. Why anyone thinks more drug use is good for this country is beyond me.
Actually, there may be a small spike in consumption at first, but then it would decline and level out.
Besides.........California legalized it for medical use, and guess what.........they made a couple of billion in tax revenues from the sale of medical marijuana.
Imagine what the revenues would be from that.........
And, does the government tax you for a garden you grow veggies for in your back yard? Personal consumption should be allowed to be grown in your back yard.
Besides, it's been PROVEN to be medically beneficial for many things, and is not physically addictive.
Mr. Shaman
Senior Member
- May 4, 2010
- 23,892
- 822
- 48
Put arguments for and against legalization aside for a moment. If people could use marijuanawithout fear of legal consequencejust how much would get used? More to the point, how much money is at stake?
from CNBC
Aw, jeez.....CNBC is (actually) concerned about cash being diverted from Wall Street???
*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Qnwp6J7P20]YouTube - ‪Marijuana Inc. on MSNBC with Al Roker - Part 1 of 5‬‏[/ame]
*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Qnwp6J7P20]YouTube - ‪Marijuana Inc. on MSNBC with Al Roker - Part 1 of 5‬‏[/ame]
Mr. Shaman
Senior Member
- May 4, 2010
- 23,892
- 822
- 48
Put arguments for and against legalization aside for a moment. If people could use marijuanawithout fear of legal consequencejust how much would get used? More to the point, how much money is at stake?
The answer is a hell of alot more than what gets used now.
You "conservative"-psychics are toooooooooooo amusing!!
How did you manage to forget to warn everyone that another Bush economic-debacle was headed-our-way????
How did you manage to forget to warn everyone that another Bush economic-debacle was headed-our-way????
Steve Hanson
Active Member
- Aug 25, 2010
- 806
- 670
- 28
Put arguments for and against legalization aside for a moment. If people could use marijuanawithout fear of legal consequencejust how much would get used? More to the point, how much money is at stake?
The answer is a hell of alot more than what gets used now. It is simple economics. Drop the effective price, which currently includes the risk of getting caught, and consumption goes up. Why does anyone think the Dutch have restricted dope cafes?
As for taxing it, pot is too easy to grow in your basement--much easier than producing Jack Daniels. And the end product is about the same as anything a commercial grower would produce. Raise the tax even incrementally higher and everyone would become a pot farmer. The tax revenue point is nonsense because evading the tax would be way too easy. The experience with high taxes on cigarettes in NYC has shown that.
No, legalization means more use. Why anyone thinks more drug use is good for this country is beyond me.
Actually, there may be a small spike in consumption at first, but then it would decline and level out.
Besides.........California legalized it for medical use, and guess what.........they made a couple of billion in tax revenues from the sale of medical marijuana.
Imagine what the revenues would be from that.........
And, does the government tax you for a garden you grow veggies for in your back yard? Personal consumption should be allowed to be grown in your back yard.
Besides, it's been PROVEN to be medically beneficial for many things, and is not physically addictive.
Look what it did to your head.
Mr. Shaman
Senior Member
- May 4, 2010
- 23,892
- 822
- 48
sure the commies eradicted the drug dealers and a few thousand others as well expecially those who didnt follow the party line
sure the commies created a nation where the citizens were drug free ,no personal choose free and not much freedom to do much else being able to enjoy a few drugs now and again would be a improvement in there social life
1) Is drug use beneficial or detrimental to society?
2) Is eradicating drug use a desireable goal?
The answers to these questions are obvious to anyone with 2 functioning brain cells. Using a tried method we have the opportunity to eliminate or substantially curtail drug use in ths country. That is what we need to do.
1. Beneficial of course.
2. No, not at all.
So you admire how Mao killed all the drug users, is that correct?
So drug use is beneficial to society? Would you care to elaborate on that?
well its quite obvious you dont have functioning brain cells at all pehaps a few drugs pumped into you will awaken any resemblence of brain matter still existing in your cranium.sure the commies eradicted the drug dealers and a few thousand others as well expecially those who didnt follow the party lineAnd both countries are rife with corruption and lawlessness. I heard the U.S. actually has a few soldiers there to try to restore order. You hear about that?
The Chinese faced this problem when the Communists took over. Opium had addled the entire population, from the Empress on down. The Communists made a proposal like mine. Within a few years they eradicated the opium problem.
Proven solution to a proven problem. Someone refute that.
sure the commies created a nation where the citizens were drug free ,no personal choose free and not much freedom to do much else being able to enjoy a few drugs now and again would be a improvement in there social life
1) Is drug use beneficial or detrimental to society?
2) Is eradicating drug use a desireable goal?
The answers to these questions are obvious to anyone with 2 functioning brain cells. Using a tried method we have the opportunity to eliminate or substantially curtail drug use in ths country. That is what we need to do.
first you post parrot fashion that the legalisation of drugs will increase use ..no facts or stats to verify that just sounded good so you typed it .
then you where unable to tell the differant between regulation and prohibition
in your statement about *driving a car at 90 mph
now you ask to wrongly worded questions and think you have the answer you dont peabrain
question one
is drug use beneficial or detrimental to society?
answer dickhead that depends on what the use is for
i think eleviating pain in a sick person , curing them of a decease or putting somebody to sleep while operating on them is a BENEFIT TO SOCIETY dont you ?
question two
2) Is eradicating drug use a desirable goal
same answer dickhead
NO drugs are a very important tool for curing decease , killing pests , and improving health .
think before you post moron or just read what others have wrote you may learn something
Similar threads
- Replies
- 29
- Views
- 420
- Replies
- 66
- Views
- 684
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 174
- Replies
- 122
- Views
- 2K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 3K
- Views
- 63K
- Replies
- 14
- Views
- 83
- Replies
- 30
- Views
- 135
- Replies
- 151
- Views
- 1K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8904
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 493
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-