Just more proof that the cannabis laws don't do what they're supposed to do. I'm more inclined to believe the more cynical explanation given: that poor dumb hicks have been told to hate cannabis just like they do blacks, gays, Muslims etc. and they have fallen for it. Original here.
* * *
Popular prejudice about the cannabis plant links it to many social ills, like crime, mental illness and idleness. Not surprisingly, then, cannabis is also heavily associated with poverty. Even though this connection exists in the minds of many, a simple statistical analysis shows that the reality is far less straightforward.
This article discusses a simple correlation test in which we look at the correlation between cannabis and poverty in the fifty states of the USA. This connection is much touted by prohibitionists who believe both that cannabis use has a detrimental effect on a person's earning potential and that relaxation of the cannabis laws will lead to more cannabis use.
Methodology
We will look at the correlation between wealth, measured simply by personal income in USD, and relaxed cannabis laws (called "cannafriendliness"). The personal income factor is derived by ranking all 50 states in order of their personal income (50 = wealthiest, 1 = poorest), and the cannafriendliness factor is derived by reference to the harshness of that state's cannabis laws, as follows:
1. Cannabis use is entirely, or near entirely criminal. 2. Either some decriminalisation of personal use or some provisions for medicinal cannabis. 3. Both some decriminalisation of personal use and some provisions for medicinal cannabis. 4. Legalised cannabis (to a degree similar to tobacco and alcohol).
When all 50 states are labelled in this manner, it produces the table below.
If we use the software program Statistica to tell us what the statistical correlation between loose cannabis laws and poverty is, a positive correlation will result if the prohibitionists are correct.
Results
Correlation between cannafriendliness and wealth: 0.52 (significant at the p less than 0.05 level).
Mean wealth rank score for a cannafriendliness 4 state: 41.5 Mean wealth rank score for a cannafriendliness 3 state: 36.6 Mean wealth rank score for a cannafriendliness 2 state: 26.9 Mean wealth rank score for a cannafriendliness 1 state: 18.8
Discussion
One conclusion is immediately clear from the summarised results of this experiment: cannabis friendly laws are negatively correlated with poverty. In other words, cannabis laws are much more likely to be harsh in a state with a lower personal income.
The clearest example of this is that of the sixteen poorest U.S. states, thirteen of them score the lowest of the four grades of cannafriendliness.
By contrast, of the twelve states in the two highest categories of cannafriendliness, all but one of them is in the top half of the wealth table, and the one exception (Maine) is in 27th place.
Because there is a moderate negative correlation between cannabis friendly laws and poverty, and because this result might be counterintuitive to many, it's worthwhile to consider the reasons for this.
It isn't likely that a high level of cannabis freedom would, given all the other factors that weigh into it, result in a high level of statewide personal income. It is more likely that a wealthy state citizenry ends up abandoning cannabis prohibition, and there are several reasons why this could be.
The states scoring near the bottom for cannabis friendliness might be poorer because the citizens are not as well educated, and this lack of general education might make people more susceptible to the prohibitionist misinformation about cannabis.
It may also be that harsh cannabis laws are a symptom of a generally backwards and insular outlook, and this outlook has driven away many of each state's more enlightened and higher-earning individuals (a process that might well intensify sharply with the recent law changes in Colorado and Washington).
A third explanation is that a high level of income creates a more relaxed and less fearful society, and so the citizens in it are less likely to fall victim to the hysteria that saw cannabis made illegal in the first place.
More cynically, the association between cannabis and poverty might exist because of an oppressive mentality on the part of the ruling classes that has introduced harsh cannabis laws in the expectation that this will create poverty among the cannabis-using segment of society, and thereby render them more vulnerable to economic coercion. Which is to say that the purpose of cannabis prohibition is to enslave those affected by it.
There are many other factors that might impact any given state's position on cannabis freedom, but the results of this study might lend some support to the suspicion that a general fearful ignorance among the population is likely to lead to a higher level of cannabis prohibition.
*
Table 1: U.S. States, Grouped by Cannafriendliness and Ranked by Personal Income. Cannafriendliness: 1 = lowest, 4 = highest; Personal Income: 1 = lowest, 50 = highest.
State Name Cannafriendliness Personal Income Colorado 4 42 Washington 4 41 Connecticut 3 48 Massachusetts 3 47 Alaska 3 43 California 3 39 Hawaii 3 37 Rhode Island 3 35 Nevada 3 33 Vermont 3 32 Oregon 3 28 Maine 3 24 New Jersey 2 49 New Hampshire 2 45 New York 2 44 Minnesota 2 40 Delaware 2 38 Illinois 2 36 Arizona 2 25 Nebraska 2 22 Michigan 2 21 Ohio 2 19 North Carolina 2 17 Montana 2 13 New Mexico 2 6 Mississippi 2 1 Maryland 1 50 Virginia 1 46 Wyoming 1 34 Pennsylvania 1 31 Wisconsin 1 30 Florida 1 29 Kansas 1 27 North Dakota 1 26 Iowa 1 23 Georgia 1 20 Texas 1 18 Missouri 1 16 South Dakota 1 15 Indiana 1 14 Tennessee 1 12 South Carolina 1 11 Utah 1 10 Louisiana 1 9 Oklahoma 1 8 Alabama 1 7 Idaho 1 5 Kentucky 1 4 Arkansas 1 3 West Virginia 1 2
-------------------- "They consider me insane but I know that I am a hero living under the eyes of the gods."
|