Drugs, don’t you just…

So Mr Nutt, the advisor for statistically proven fact, failed to grasp the governments need to send out a moral message. And the moral message is? Well, less harmful ganja is more immoral and thus requiring of greater legal penalties than more harmful tobacco and alcohol. Simple enough. Oh like slapping someone with a fish, less harmful, requires a higher sentence than murdering them, more harmful? Or leaving dirty finger marks on someone’s cherished Porsche is more morally reprehensible than stealing it and selling it in Dubai. That’s somehow not the way my father explained it to me. So now the public are confused. The government is steering us towards more harmful tobacco and alcohol and away from weed. The answer is of course tax. Tax has always been the government’s way of appreciating how much we like something. It’s their way of joining in with our happy moments. Alcohol and tobacco, yes, mental illness and rain, no. So what about weed? Well it’s not taxed, because it’s too immoral for the government to even contemplate its existence, but we do and we like it. It has to be Class B to stop its retailers being out on the street in their thousands and jeopardising Benson & hedges. Evidently the rule is, if people like something we can’t tax, it must be made illegal. Prostitution and historically homosexuality are/were illegal for just such ‘moral’ reasons. So why not just come clean and tax all our moral indiscretions? Legalise everything and tax it according to the harm it does. Cannabis, 200%, skunk, 300%, heroin, 500%, crack, 1000%. LSD, 0% as it would come under the category of further education. People are happy, the chancellor is happy. The only people who would be well upset would be pimps and drug dealers. I consider that a result. But then the two main parties may decide voting Lib Dem was a moraly taxable indiscretion.