#dan riffle

[arcticdementor]

(link)

[carolinemillerbooks]

New Post has been published on Books by Caroline Miller

New Post has been published on https://www.booksbycarolinemiller.com/musings/new-frontiers-of-money/

New Frontiers Of Money

Everyone knows about the split between left-wing Democrats in Congress and moderates.  The left wants to redistribute wealth by raising taxes on the rich. Moderates who come from politically divided districts want to move more slowly.  Some, like Senator Joe Manchin, openly worry the national budget already contains too many entitlements.   According to a  PEW report, the left-wing has a point. The middle class is shrinking while the wealth of the super-rich continues to grow. With the help of good tax accountants, the extremely wealthy have managed to shield about 30% of their wealth from taxes. Dan Riffle, an adviser to House Representative Alexandra Ocasio Cortez observed,  “Every billionaire is a policy failure.” More than once I, too, have disparaged the hoarding habits of those with extreme wealth. What democracy gets is a shadow government that spends money on objectives democratically elected representatives might not choose.  Who asked multi-billionaire Elon Musk to build SpaceX?  What’s more, he built it with government help.  When Musk complained billionaires were taxed too much, I suspect his tweet provoked laughter among many.    The United States has the biggest wealth gap between rich and poor than any other country in the world. Even so, Musk has a point about higher taxes.  Taxing all billionaires at 100% would only make a small dent in the U. S. national debt  Already, that debt exceeds 23 trillion dollars.  Steven Pinker also has a point,  when he defends the contributions billionaires make to society. “I don’t think the governments should have a monopoly in improving the world, because governments are hamstrung by numerous constraints—interest groups, democracy, and populist movements.” (“Interview of Steven Pinker,” by Brian Gallagher, Nautilus, Issue 41, pg. 96)    Unhampered by constraints, Pinker notes billionaires can implement their entrepreneurial ideas faster than Congress can set policy. Democracy inhibits rapid change which isn’t bad. A slower process helps societies avoid grievous errors. Billionaires can afford to make errors because no one is going to vote them out of office. Because they have freedom, governments team up with them.  Musk, for example, is helping to devise systems whereby humans can probe deeper into space.  (“NASA is on the Cusp of a New Era.” By Brian Gallagher, Nautilus, Issue 41, pg. pg. 54-58.)   It’s easy to roll our eyes over billionaire excess–the yachts, the private jets, the multiple mansions.  On the other hand, Musk, who contributes less to charity than his fellow billionaires did give 5-and-a-half billion dollars to worthy causes this year. His visionary investments have also spurred the nation’s shift to electronic cars, a bid to help the environment.   Other oligarchs, too, have applied themselves to improving life on the planet. For fun, I’ve assembled short videos on how four of the superrich spend their money.  Bill Gates isn’t among them because his charitable activities are well known. The list below may not change hearts and minds about the tax code or oligarchs, but it may support Pinker’s point about their value. Free to use their wealth as they please, these visionaries seem to be taking us to frontiers where no government has gone before.  Warren Buffet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuhWYzrPXf8 Mark Zuckerberg: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84M9rw1HmJA Jeff Bezos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_GXQb7415Y

[micdotcom]

A lot of marijuana reform over the next few years is basically going to be waiting for old people to die, to put it impolitely. It's a generational divide issue. People who have spent 30, 40, 50 years, entire careers, fighting a war on drugs are not just going to wake up one day and admit they were wrong. Until they retire, or they exit the voting pool, they're going be anti-marijuana and anti-legalization.

Dan Riffle, the director of federal policies for the pro-legalization Marijuana Policy Project, AKA the man with “every stoner’s dream job“

[pot4prosperity-blog]

The Rand Paul-Cory Booker Amendment Runs Into Problems

As MPP previously reported, Senators Rand Paul (R-KY) and Cory Booker (D-NJ) cosponsored an amendment to the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act that would make medical use of marijuana legal. MPP’s director of federal policies, Dan Riffle, commented on this amendment last week after predicting action on the bill would be forthcoming. “Poll after poll shows 70-80 percent of Americans support medical marijuana. Even among conservatives, most oppose enforcement of federal marijuana laws in states where marijuana is legal for some purpose. Having two rising stars like Rand Paul and Cory Booker team up to introduce this amendment just shows how popular the issue has become, and that our outdated federal marijuana laws are inevitably going to change.” However, shortly after this statement, the bill started to run into snags, Denver Westword reports. The chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), delayed the main bill after claiming she felt “caught between White House veto threats and Republican amendments.” Riffle is confident that it isn’t the medical marijuana amendment that is causing the problems. He also expressed that, even without the current bill, the goal is to see a standalone piece of legislation for the medical use of marijuana. http://goo.gl/wBD0mM

[pot4prosperity-blog]

NIDA’s Control of the Federal Marijuana Supply is Harming Research

The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) has started taking control of the medical research for marijuana and is focusing more on marijuana use patterns rather than its potential benefits, Businessweek reports. NIDA currently serves as the gatekeeper for marijuana’s medical research. NIDA also provides oversight for the farms that grow the plants that can be used in clinical trials. However, advocates say that NIDA’s control over which plants can be used effectively makes it impossible to test the benefits of marijuana on ailments such as cancer-related nausea or epilepsy. Many believe that the supply should not be controlled entirely by one organization. MPP’s director of federal policies, Dan Riffle, weighed in on this issue. He claimed that the federal researchers aren’t “set up to study potential medical benefits, so it’s inappropriate for NIDA to have a monopoly on supply.” MPP and other marijuana advocates are pushing for the DEA to grant additional growing permits so that marijuana can be researched in conjunction with other diseases. This is partly because of organizations, like the Epilepsy Foundation, that want end restrictions on research for marijuana’s effect on alleviating seizures. With NIDA controlling the supply, there is not enough marijuana to test all of its medical benefits. http://dlvr.it/6362pf