Regular pot smoking annihilates your testosterone. Guys who smoke daily are hypogonadal. Same with alcoholics.
[quote]polo77j wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]thehebrewhero wrote:
^ true that…face it…most people enjoy it, its less harmful then booze, and its on its way to being legal everywhere… We could argue it all day & night but thats a fact… light up bitches[/quote]
To be honest, people that promote the “get fucked up, it’s the point of life” lifestyle you celebrate around here is really a lot of the reason the negative stereotypes of weed persist.
I’m not calling you out as much as the whole “druggie” party scene isn’t doing anyone any favors when it comes to the normalization of weed.
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
You do realize that pot is a lot cheaper than booze, right?[/quote]
totally depends on what quality shit you are smoking/drink volume & frequency too. (And if you’re a habitual drunk or not, where you become a two beer queer again.)
I can get wasted daily on less than even the most frugal smoker is getting high, if I wanted to. But It’s drinking dirt booze. [/quote]
to really compare you’d first have to establish a base level of intoxication (buzz if you will). Then, like you pointed out, establish comparable products (type of booze, type of bud … we’d probably have to go with the cheapest of the two as we’re comparing lowest costs so, again, like you said, cheap booze v cheap bud).
Then we’ll have to establish unit of measure … ounces would probably be easiest … so cost per ounce to achieve comparable level of intoxication. Since an ounce of shit weed costs, let’s say, 300 bucks and an ounce of shit beer would cost, say, about 5 cents.
Now we’ve established comparable costs. Now we need to figure out how how much an average man would need to consume to reach a comparable level of intoxication. Let’s say one beer vs one joint would be comparable? So, how many joints can one roll with 1 ounce of weed? So, there’s about 28 grams in an ounce and, correct me if I’m wrong, you can probably roll 5 joints from 1 gram of weed so that’s 140 joints/ounce which would be about $2.14 per joint and only about $.60 per 12 oz can of beer.
So, no, it is not cheaper to smoke weed than it is to drink. (My prices might be off as, since weed is unregulated, the price tends to fluctuate due to market conditions, availability and strains available. I estimated based on my own experiences and extrapolations, which are very limited, but I believe I’m in the ballpark. An adjust for cheaper weed still wouldn’t come close to my generous pricing of a can of shitty beer. Plus I used beer rather than wine or spirits as those products would make this argument just plain silly).[/quote]
Solid, but one major flaw in your logic. Comparing 1 beer to 1 joint. 1 beer will do practically nothing unless you’re a girl who weighs like 100 pounds and never drinks. 1 joint, by yourself, even a heavy smoker should be feeling pretty good by the time they’re done.
If we do a proper comparison, we’d have to compare a person who is new to both. So someone new to smoking would be high off their ass if they smoked a joint by themselves. Even if it was cheap weed. 1 beer, they may get like a minor buzz if anything at all. To be equally as drunk as they would be high off one joint, then they’d probably need at least 3 beers if not 5 or 6 or even more.
1 beer =/= 1 joint; 1 joint = 4 beers ± 1 [this is the non-established, very debatable part, admittedly; I’m just confident in my judgement and feel like I’m being pretty conservative towards the beers]
Now, if we can plug that into your calculations, how does the price compare? I’ll bet it’s a lot closer… essentially multiply .6 by 3 or 5 and then compare. 3 beers would be like 1.80 and 5 beers 3.00 as compared to 1 joint which is 2.14… comparable, if not more expensive for beer.
Now… if you want to compare it to a liter of cheap vodka that costs like $8 then ya, smoking is more expensive, haha. But enjoy that horrible, horrible cheap vodka.
[quote]TDub301 wrote:
[quote]polo77j wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]thehebrewhero wrote:
^ true that…face it…most people enjoy it, its less harmful then booze, and its on its way to being legal everywhere… We could argue it all day & night but thats a fact… light up bitches[/quote]
To be honest, people that promote the “get fucked up, it’s the point of life” lifestyle you celebrate around here is really a lot of the reason the negative stereotypes of weed persist.
I’m not calling you out as much as the whole “druggie” party scene isn’t doing anyone any favors when it comes to the normalization of weed.
[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:
You do realize that pot is a lot cheaper than booze, right?[/quote]
totally depends on what quality shit you are smoking/drink volume & frequency too. (And if you’re a habitual drunk or not, where you become a two beer queer again.)
I can get wasted daily on less than even the most frugal smoker is getting high, if I wanted to. But It’s drinking dirt booze. [/quote]
to really compare you’d first have to establish a base level of intoxication (buzz if you will). Then, like you pointed out, establish comparable products (type of booze, type of bud … we’d probably have to go with the cheapest of the two as we’re comparing lowest costs so, again, like you said, cheap booze v cheap bud).
Then we’ll have to establish unit of measure … ounces would probably be easiest … so cost per ounce to achieve comparable level of intoxication. Since an ounce of shit weed costs, let’s say, 300 bucks and an ounce of shit beer would cost, say, about 5 cents.
Now we’ve established comparable costs. Now we need to figure out how how much an average man would need to consume to reach a comparable level of intoxication. Let’s say one beer vs one joint would be comparable? So, how many joints can one roll with 1 ounce of weed? So, there’s about 28 grams in an ounce and, correct me if I’m wrong, you can probably roll 5 joints from 1 gram of weed so that’s 140 joints/ounce which would be about $2.14 per joint and only about $.60 per 12 oz can of beer.
So, no, it is not cheaper to smoke weed than it is to drink. (My prices might be off as, since weed is unregulated, the price tends to fluctuate due to market conditions, availability and strains available. I estimated based on my own experiences and extrapolations, which are very limited, but I believe I’m in the ballpark. An adjust for cheaper weed still wouldn’t come close to my generous pricing of a can of shitty beer. Plus I used beer rather than wine or spirits as those products would make this argument just plain silly).[/quote]
Solid, but one major flaw in your logic. Comparing 1 beer to 1 joint. 1 beer will do practically nothing unless you’re a girl who weighs like 100 pounds and never drinks. 1 joint, by yourself, even a heavy smoker should be feeling pretty good by the time they’re done.
If we do a proper comparison, we’d have to compare a person who is new to both. So someone new to smoking would be high off their ass if they smoked a joint by themselves. Even if it was cheap weed. 1 beer, they may get like a minor buzz if anything at all. To be equally as drunk as they would be high off one joint, then they’d probably need at least 3 beers if not 5 or 6 or even more.
1 beer =/= 1 joint; 1 joint = 4 beers ± 1 [this is the non-established, very debatable part, admittedly; I’m just confident in my judgement and feel like I’m being pretty conservative towards the beers]
Now, if we can plug that into your calculations, how does the price compare? I’ll bet it’s a lot closer… essentially multiply .6 by 3 or 5 and then compare. 3 beers would be like 1.80 and 5 beers 3.00 as compared to 1 joint which is 2.14… comparable, if not more expensive for beer.
Now… if you want to compare it to a liter of cheap vodka that costs like $8 then ya, smoking is more expensive, haha. But enjoy that horrible, horrible cheap vodka.[/quote]
Fair criticism. I was winging it mainly, but had to establish comparable base lines to satisfy the argument. I agree with your assessment of 4 beers (+/-1)=1 joint, on average.
I don’t want to be contrarian, or arguementative, but you guys have me thinking.
Girls never have to pay for drinks. And usually they don’t have to pay for drugs. Also, dudes who didn’t put in are always trying to join you when you get high. I don’t know how this changes your equations.
Why should we have to pay for something that grows out of the ground?
[quote]polo77j wrote:
[quote]TDub301 wrote:
1 beer =/= 1 joint; 1 joint = 4 beers ± 1 [this is the non-established, very debatable part, admittedly; I’m just confident in my judgement and feel like I’m being pretty conservative towards the beers]
[/quote]
Fair criticism. I was winging it mainly, but had to establish comparable base lines to satisfy the argument. I agree with your assessment of 4 beers (+/-1)=1 joint, on average.[/quote]
You guys are high. While not 1 to 1, I think 4 beers in the same amount of time it takes to smoke a joint has the vast majority lite up like a XMass tree. 4 beers over 6 hours? yeah no problem, 4 beers in 30 mins… We’re talking fast track to shit housed town.
[quote]FlatsFarmer wrote:
Why should we have to pay for something that grows out of the ground? [/quote]
Same reason we pay farmers to grow our food homie, shit doesn’t happen by magic.
[quote]FlatsFarmer wrote:
I don’t want to be contrarian, or arguementative, but you guys have me thinking.
Girls never have to pay for drinks. And usually they don’t have to pay for drugs. Also, dudes who didn’t put in are always trying to join you when you get high. I don’t know how this changes your equations.
Why should we have to pay for something that grows out of the ground? [/quote]
Technically, you don’t if you grow your own. You’d have to pay for the means TO GROW it (i.e water, planting medium (soil, mix, etc), nutrients, a delivery system for water and nutrients, grow lights if grown indoors, etc…), the knowledge, time and patience necessary to grow productive plants, etc.
You pay for ALL of this PLUS the means of distribution plus the margin on top of those costs (hey, dealers gotta eat too ya know). Not to mention you’re also paying for the risk associated with all of the above which you are not incurring fully. The only risk associated to you, the end user, is being busted with it, which is becoming less and less of a thing. Unless you’re some dirty communist…
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]polo77j wrote:
[quote]TDub301 wrote:
1 beer =/= 1 joint; 1 joint = 4 beers ± 1 [this is the non-established, very debatable part, admittedly; I’m just confident in my judgement and feel like I’m being pretty conservative towards the beers]
[/quote]
Fair criticism. I was winging it mainly, but had to establish comparable base lines to satisfy the argument. I agree with your assessment of 4 beers (+/-1)=1 joint, on average.[/quote]
You guys are high. While not 1 to 1, I think 4 beers in the same amount of time it takes to smoke a joint has the vast majority lite up like a XMass tree. 4 beers over 6 hours? yeah no problem, 4 beers in 30 mins… We’re talking fast track to shit housed town.
[/quote]
So we’ll have to come up with a better comparison in terms of alcohol then. How about that shitty vodka mentioned earlier? 3 shots +/- 1 shot = 1 joint … in which case, it is FAR cheaper to get drunk than high
What about Moonshine? Do you guys get your corn from a jar where you live?
You guys should come down to Bristol, TN for this NASCAR race. Y’all would have a lot of fun.
I’m catching a glow good enough I won’t drive after 3 Jameson. And one joint would fuck me up like serious these days, but to get equal wasy wasted, which I would be from a whole joint, 4 James sounds about right, but in 60-90 mins though.
Point being I wouldn’t smoke a whole joint lol, I’d be too fucked up. Maybe half, or so. So to me it would be 3 drink in an hour would be roughly comparable to half a joint, and lets use something decent, so figure at least $25 for 750ml.
one Jameson to me is about 8oz, or half a pint glass, and I drink at home. In a bar the pours are significantly shittier.
That’s cool that you won’t drive after 24oz of whiskey.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m catching a glow good enough I won’t drive after 3 Jameson. And one joint would fuck me up like serious these days, but to get equal wasy wasted, which I would be from a whole joint, 4 James sounds about right, but in 60-90 mins though.
Point being I wouldn’t smoke a whole joint lol, I’d be too fucked up. Maybe half, or so. So to me it would be 3 drink in an hour would be roughly comparable to half a joint, and lets use something decent, so figure at least $25 for 750ml. [/quote]
ok … keeping with the $300/ounce of mj and that’d be about $.99/ounce of liquor (Jameson or some decent bourbon’s are around that, Jacky D’s etc). So we’ll stick with the $2.12/joint calculated earlier. So a shot of liquor is 1.5oz so that’d be $1.49 per shot or $4.47 for the 3 shots that would be equivalent to our 1 joint. So, with decent booze and decent bud, it is cheaper to smoke than to drink.
I have a place about a quarter mile from my house that pours like liquor doesn’t cost anything and their prices are cheap. Coincidentally, they are cash only and I’m pretty sure a drug front. Regardless, it’s never been overly skeezy when I’ve gone there and they always have Maker’s 46
[quote]FlatsFarmer wrote:
That’s cool that you won’t drive after 24oz of whiskey.[/quote]
lmao… Depends on timing. IF it’s over 3 or 4 hours, yeah I’ll drive because I’m not wasted.
If it’s a drinking night, I won’t drive after the first.
I’m glad you realized I was joking, and not trying to jump in your face. I was unsure as soon as I submitted.
[quote]FlatsFarmer wrote:
I’m glad you realized I was joking, and not trying to jump in your face. I was unsure as soon as I submitted.[/quote]
no worries. This is a good time thread where we are discussing the finer points of getting wasted on a budget.
Just so happens at 35 my budget is much more expansive than it was at 23, yet my spending is way down.
an 8th of grass here used to cost £20, now for £20 you get like a gram and a half, maybe ever so slightly more.
For £20 I can get a bottle of cheap rum, some cola, ice and limes. I’ll be waaaaaay more fucked up from the rum, although a different kind of fucked up. I don’t know how you can compare the two, really. It’s too different a buzz.
One spring break in Cancun we were hanging with some British dudes. They wanted to roll joints mixed with tabacco. We when twisted up some Philly blunts with straight weed they got super faded.
One of those dudes drank diet coke mixed with vodka.
Even the fat one pulled some puss.
[quote]FlatsFarmer wrote:
One spring break in Cancun we were hanging with some British dudes. They wanted to roll joints mixed with tabacco. We when twisted up some Philly blunts with straight weed they got super faded.
One of those dudes drank diet coke mixed with vodka.
Even the fat one pulled some puss.[/quote]
This thread is going in a nice direction.
[quote]Yogi wrote:
an 8th of grass here used to cost £20, now for £20 you get like a gram and a half, maybe ever so slightly more.
For £20 I can get a bottle of cheap rum, some cola, ice and limes. I’ll be waaaaaay more fucked up from the rum, although a different kind of fucked up. I don’t know how you can compare the two, really. It’s too different a buzz.[/quote]
and there in lies the inherent problem with the exercise … you have to accept a=b, but that’s what makes it a stupid entertaining conversation