Smokers, we're getting $crewed again......

[Win]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: Schmoe
Let's make it all fair and ludicrously raise a 2000% tax on something you enjoy, say jogging shoes.

I don't meant to be rude, but comparisons like this really don't help your credibility.


Nor do I intend to be rude, but I find it puzzling that you can profess concern about the quality of air innocent bystanders are forced to breathe, yet drive around in a thirteen year old car that burns a quart of heavy oil every 600 miles.

Is old BMW pollution somehow more virtuous or upper class than second hand cigarette smoke?

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: Win
Nor do I intend to be rude, but I find it puzzling that you can profess concern about the quality of air innocent bystanders are forced to breathe, yet drive around in a thirteen year old car that burns a quart of heavy oil every 600 miles.

Is old BMW pollution somehow more virtuous or upper class than second hand cigarette smoke?


Tell you what.

First, show me exactly how much more actual pollution is escaping my catalytic converter than would be escaping that of any other car I could afford (I got this thing on a VERY good deal, it's costing me practically nothing to maintain, and the oil -- which, by the way, apparently burns very cleanly -- is free).

Second, watch how I react if my car is legislated or taxed out of usage on reasonable, credible, verifiable basis of pollution. See if you hear one hint of protest from me, other than a token "it sucks but I'll deal."

Third, I don't even drive my car much any more because I have elected -- at additional expense -- to live close to where I go to school, so that I can walk or take public transportation.

Fourth, almost everyone in society in general accepts the pollution of cars, such as it is, as a cost for the many benefits they provide. You can't even say there IS a benefit to cigarettes, much less that almost everyone in society accepts their costs.

Next?

 

[Schmoe]

So, you'd go along with a large tax increase on your vehicle just because the Gov. want to? It doesn't matter if you got a good deal on a car or not, your still polluting. Cigarettes use to be cheap....
Curious how you summize that your car burns ver cleanly while consuming 1 quart every 600 miles. None of my Honda's do that, nor my truck. I don't get it.
Again, perception and benefits versus need and choice. Hard to compare those things. That's like saying you can build a refinery in my backyard and I'll suffer the consequences because of the benefits of many. Second hand smoke is a thing of the past. I know many non-smokers who were raised in the 50's and 60's were smoking was the norm and are in perfect health. Again, the media working on our subconcious. Just like how they touted Obama and dogged McCain. Well, have you looked at the stock market report the last couple of days?

 

[Drew99GT]

Originally Posted By: greenaccord02
It's just another way to tax the poor. Look who smokes the most, anyway. Low socioeconomic groups smoke more by percentage than any other group. Booze, Lottery, Tobacco... All ways to tax the poor. They stay calm if you let them happily give you the money instead of taking it from them. This kind of policy cracks me up because it's ingenious. The health nuts love it, the yuppies love it, the hippies love it and the poor people? They get the shaft. What are they supposed to do? Quit? Between working their minimum-wage job, taking care of a bunch of runny-nosed kids, and just trying to survive a pointless life they'd give whatever they had to for the chance to stop and have a smoke... And Uncle Sam is ready to take it from them. What are they going to do, get a political action committee together with all their disposable income and spare time? They're marks and the government knows it.


Wow. That was close to Marxist!

 

[Gary Allan]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: greenaccord02
It's just another way to tax the poor. Look who smokes the most, anyway. Low socioeconomic groups smoke more by percentage than any other group. Booze, Lottery, Tobacco... All ways to tax the poor. They stay calm if you let them happily give you the money instead of taking it from them. This kind of policy cracks me up because it's ingenious. The health nuts love it, the yuppies love it, the hippies love it and the poor people? They get the shaft. What are they supposed to do? Quit? Between working their minimum-wage job, taking care of a bunch of runny-nosed kids, and just trying to survive a pointless life they'd give whatever they had to for the chance to stop and have a smoke... And Uncle Sam is ready to take it from them. What are they going to do, get a political action committee together with all their disposable income and spare time? They're marks and the government knows it.


Wow. That was close to Marxist!

Lots of vodka and lousy cigarettes ...add sex and you have all you need for the proles.

The criminal system is also a poor tax. I see it every day. You just sweep more and more into a never ending cycle of minor crimes that involve imprisonment and probation. Perform drug tests as needed ..just before the probation is over ..and provide cheap labor for the trash man in the form of "work release" to pay the fines. Throw them back on the street ..repeat as needed.

I advised on guest to plead with his PO to get him in on the work release scam so he could get a job. His true alternative was to somehow get thrown back in to get assigned it to pay his fines ..and then continue working for the outfit.

It's kinda like a temp agency inside the corrections dept.

 

[jsharp]

5 pages and what have we determined?

1. Our current tax methods are, depending on the tax we cite, nothing more than a means for some vocal majority to take $ out the the pockets of some particular minority with impunity. AKA democracy. AKA mob rule in it's most basic form.

2. Sin taxes are exactly that in the most literal sense. They aren't about heath issues so much as a modern form of Puritanism.

I can only hope that all of the supporters of these things get the opportunity to have their personal ox gored at the earliest convenience...

 

[Schmoe]

I think you summed it up quite nicely dude.

 

[cousincletus]

Originally Posted By: Cutehumor
Originally Posted By: cousincletus
Yep, and stay off that motorcycle, quit smoking, lose some weight off yer fat a$$, make sure you exercise X hours a day, etc.


what if you already do all of that?


Then you can give yerself a gold star.

 

[Kestas]

I wonder if the Laffer curve applies to sin taxes?

 

[Gary Allan]

Originally Posted By: Kestas
I wonder if the Laffer curve applies to sin taxes?

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: Schmoe
So, because people chose to smoke, we should be targeted to pay higher taxes for the mere fact that we smoke and smokers are now an increasing minority?


No, smoking is taxed more because it is a controllable habit that is not an essential part of life, has a negative side effect, and little to none positive side effect.

Should we give tobacco a tax deductible status? Why not? It would make the smoker happy for sure. BTW, then the living cost between smoker and non-smoker would be the same, making it perfectly fair.

Why not go a step further and subsidize cigarette and make it free for the first 1 pack per person per day? That would make it perfectly fair.

 

[ARB1977]

Gives you another reason to quit.

 

[jsharp]

Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: Schmoe
So, because people chose to smoke, we should be targeted to pay higher taxes for the mere fact that we smoke and smokers are now an increasing minority?


No, smoking is taxed more because it is a controllable habit that is not an essential part of life, has a negative side effect, and little to none positive side effect.

Should we give tobacco a tax deductible status? Why not? It would make the smoker happy for sure. BTW, then the living cost between smoker and non-smoker would be the same, making it perfectly fair.

Why not go a step further and subsidize cigarette and make it free for the first 1 pack per person per day? That would make it perfectly fair.


Wouldn't it be "perfectly fair" if we didn't tax smoking ( drinking, fill in your non essential behavior here ) or give it a tax deduction?

 

[jsharp]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Originally Posted By: Kestas
I wonder if the Laffer curve applies to sin taxes?

Well, it would be more fair if rich ( poor ) people had to pay more ( less ) for their smokes.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: jsharp
5 pages and what have we determined?

1. Our current tax methods are, depending on the tax we cite, nothing more than a means for some vocal majority to take $ out the the pockets of some particular minority with impunity. AKA democracy. AKA mob rule in it's most basic form.

2. Sin taxes are exactly that in the most literal sense. They aren't about heath issues so much as a modern form of Puritanism.

I can only hope that all of the supporters of these things get the opportunity to have their personal ox gored at the earliest convenience...

Speak for yourself. That's certainly not what I've determined.

All I've determined from this thread is that some people base their reasoning on the premise that jogging and smoking are equivalent...

 

[greenaccord02]

I've learned just how well the government can manipulate the growing population of liberals, hippies, and yuppies by playing to liberal guilt, using the word 'green,' and affirming a holier-than-thou attitude.

 

[Gary Allan]

Most people like to feel that they view from some higher ground. There are legions of people who cherry pick certain things to give themselves "moral distinction". There are flip sides to every coin. Smokers and drinkers are easy prey and indefensible targets.

All you need to do to feel superior ..is to condemn them. It's really very simple and easy. Again, you can still beat your wife and feel that you're standing well centered due to these people's existence and the socially endorsed condemnation of them.

 

[Schmoe]

Well the bill passed. So here are the new rates if your interested.

http://ryorevolution.com/ryo-schip-table.html

This is going to harm children more than help. You think those parents that smoke and can barely afford are going to quit? No. They will provide less for the children. Also, how can you sustain a program through a literally, dying source of revenue?? I thought PBO would be different......

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: Schmoe
You think those parents that smoke and can barely afford are going to quit? No. They will provide less for the children.

What's your point? That the tax will expose bad parents?

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: Schmoe
just.) However, 99% of the people who RYO don't post on forums. They smoke it because they are, like McFadden says, the poorest of the poor, and the next step down is re-rolling cigarette butts off the street.

Our congressmen are taxing ... to provide insurance for the children of soccer moms with McMansions and SUV's and $80,000 a year income. (Consider THAT, Obama, with your "no new taxes for anyone making less that $210,000 a year".)


If one is truly the poorest of the poor, they cannot afford to smoke. Period. Drink either... or have any other necessity/luxury that they can get away with.

If one is poor, and smokes, then they deserve to be poor. Cigarettes are what? $5 per pack right now? So at a pack a day, youre talking $35/week... $150 or so a month. Boy, I wonder what they could do for them in terms of saving for retirement, paying back debt, etc., etc.

And while I understand that RYO might be far cheaper, what does the habit come to still? $1/day? $365/year? If the person truly is poor, $365 is a LOT of money for other things.



And, by the way, someone making $80k/year can't live in a mcmansion anywhere near where I live... ANd anywhere near where most folks live. If they do, and have an SUV, and other stuff too... and can't afford insurance for their kids, then they also likely cannot afford their mortgage either, and therefore are a parasite on US ALL... not just smokers by any stretch.