Pot, panem et circenses

Panem et circenses.
Bread and circuses.

the phrase means to generate public approval, not by excellence in public service or public policy, but by diversion, distraction or by satisfying the most immediate or base requirements of a populace[1] — by offering a palliative: for example food (bread) or entertainment (circuses). Juvenal, who originated the phrase, used it to decry the "selfishness" of common people and their neglect of wider concerns. The phrase implies a population's erosion or ignorance of civic duty, as a priority. Wikipedia.

Our political masters know well what this means, even though most would not understand the reference, What it really means, is that politicians and their ilk, know that if the folks have enough to eat (fairly luxuriously) and adequate entertainment, they can get away with almost anything. It has never been easier for the elites to fool the proletariat.   Keep them fed and keep them amused is all that is necessary for the rulers to get away with anything. Thus it was in ancient Rome and thus it still is. Throw in a chariot and a few mood altering drugs and the manipulation becomes much easier. Narcotics and other mind altering substances help. Because the restraints of morality and religion were largely accepted by much of the population the rulers could not too openly promote widespread use of narcotics and other mind-altering drugs. particularly because of the associated morbidity and mortality, effecting their own kind as much as the lower classes. Marijuana seemed less dangerous and enjoyed popularity among the 'kids', who are now the electorate. It didn't take many politicians long to realize that here was a 'cheap' way to buy votes and buying votes is the main pre-occupation of most politicians. As Orwell said, no one ever seized power with the intention of relinquishing it. Thus 'pot' became legal, accompanied by a myriad of miraculous medical claims and re-assurances as to how safe it is -which it isn't. A number of my own kind , general practitioners saw a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, which is where they thought the gravy train they were jumping onto was heading. They weren't going to miss out.The promoters of recreational drugs know full well that today's pot is not the pot their mother smoked. They don't care that pot is a gateway drug and there is ample evidence that it can have dangerous health effects. The deaths from vaping were clearly related to inhaling marijuana, not steam. We are only beginning to recognize the increase in accidents in the work-place and on the road for which it is responsible .
Safety issues
Now that recreational cannabis is legal in Canada is there any reason why a worker can't enjoy a joint on the job?

Unfortunately, the government was in such a hurry to pass the bill, that it did so long before the country had solid guidelines regarding its use. We really know very little about the impact of cannabis in the workplace. Since use of this type of drug is no longer illegal it is up to individual workplaces to devise the rules. So, for instance,the Vancouver Police Department allows their police officers to consume cannabis at any time while off duty as long as they arrive for their shift able to perform their duties, whereas other departments ban it outright and everything in between. Supervisors, in these various and differing environments are not trained in the recognition and management of varying degrees of impairment. Inevitably, family doctors will be forced to make work-place decisions and a provide opinions regarding fitness to work and danger in the workplace to the patient and others. Decisions regarding recreational use or abuse and safety or even frank addiction may be requested by the patient for himself or his employer before he can return to work. In some cases there is bound to be union involvement or legal involvement. Although many FPs (Family Physicians) have the expertise to competently and confidently guide patients through such situations, many do not, while a few actively recommend cannabis for recreation. Unless a physician has taken some formal training or has a wealth of experience he is unlikely to have a deep understanding of the pharmacokinetics of cannabis, especially in view of the huge differences in bio-availability by the same route in different individuals. The difference between onset and duration of effect by different routes will make it very difficult to attribute blame to pot, if the person can stand and appears to be behaving relatively normally, in the case of industrial accidents, traffic accidents or of a combination of pot and booze.
Postal workers who tested positive for cannabis on enrollment drug screening had 55% more industrial accidents, 85% more injuries and 75% more absenteeism than those who tested negative. A Canadian study found cannabis to be associated with a four fold increase in motor vehicle accidents.
A frightening study involving airline pilots demonstrated impairment in aircraft landings 24 hours after smoking a joint. The pilots reported no awareness of impairment.
A Canadian cannabis survey found that among respondents who used cannabis in the previous twelve months, 39% reported driving within two hours of consumption, with twenty-nine per cent of those having done so ten or more times within the past twelve months. How would you like your kid driving the 401 (one of the busiest highways in North America) with those odds.
Eighteen per cent reported using cannabis at or before work.
Many users are on other medications both prescribed and unprescribed which have an additive effect when taken with pot.
The evidence is not yet in with regard to the extent of the additional risk in the workplace and on the highways the legalization of cannabis is causing.
The decision to legalize pot before developing plans to protect people in the workplace and on the road was reckless at the least but it was probably effective in garnering votes