| > Legal fruit is not expensive Assuming we agree they aren't, why is that? Or in other words, if we're saying it's because drugs are still too expensive and somehow illegal production can compete better on price, why is that? Especially with weed, the process is so similar to any other commodity agricultural process. > I would not be comfortable doing it, but plenty of people are This seems transitory to me. If we take this separate to the price argument, I think it must be restricted to people that were already doing so prior to legal alternatives. Again, tossing the price factor out, I would suspect all new and future consumer would go to a legal source for purchase. That said, the article talked about production, not wholesale. So it's not clear from the article that illegal sellers have risen, it's possible your street dealers have been impacted, but that legal vendors or byproduct makers are purchasing from the illegal supply chain still. |
Cheap labor. Low threshold for consumers to pay a lot, potentially government subsidy.
Drugs have way higher testing requirements. In California cannabis has intense testing and labeling requirements. Fruit doesn’t seem to. Also taxes of course.
> would suspect all new and future consumer would go to a legal source for purchase.
Oh absolutely agree. I think there’s a cohort that would way the drugs but not be willing to engage in illegal activity.
Maintaining stores and supply chains and not a guy with a burner phone and a beat up Toyota driving to a parking lot probably raises costs too (compared to illegal drugs, not fruit obviously). Same at every step of supply chain. The costs are likely high for compliance etc.