Smokers, we're getting $crewed again......
- Thread starter Schmoe
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: opus1
So, again, if it's not a "need", why is the government subsidizing the growing of something it thinks we shouldn't be using?
Our export???? Marlboro is very popular everywhere else.
So, again, if it's not a "need", why is the government subsidizing the growing of something it thinks we shouldn't be using?
Our export???? Marlboro is very popular everywhere else.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Smoking isn't a need, nor can it reasonably be considered a need (unlike things like cars and gasoline and food). That's what people mean by this tax being "optional".
Moreover, smoking carries direct, demonstrable harm to others. Taxes are, among many things, a way to mitigate the costs associated with such harm.
As far as what's right, frankly, there never should have been a right to smoke in the first place.
I don't really like this argument as alcohol is the next easy target. Tobacco and alcohol can be consumed without any direct harm to other people, but of course some people become alcoholics or addicted to nicotine... Should we pay for their problems? Should we pay for people playing sports that get injured? No one has to play squash after all, swimming is much easier on the knees. Oh, but people drown swimming...
Anyways, I think there should be reasonable taxes on tobacco and alcohol, not as much as Canada but something atleast as it is a "luxury", but people should be able to smoke or drink if they like. Subsidizing some this cost to society is kind of a way to keep personal freedoms.
Ian
Smoking isn't a need, nor can it reasonably be considered a need (unlike things like cars and gasoline and food). That's what people mean by this tax being "optional".
Moreover, smoking carries direct, demonstrable harm to others. Taxes are, among many things, a way to mitigate the costs associated with such harm.
As far as what's right, frankly, there never should have been a right to smoke in the first place.
I don't really like this argument as alcohol is the next easy target. Tobacco and alcohol can be consumed without any direct harm to other people, but of course some people become alcoholics or addicted to nicotine... Should we pay for their problems? Should we pay for people playing sports that get injured? No one has to play squash after all, swimming is much easier on the knees. Oh, but people drown swimming...
Anyways, I think there should be reasonable taxes on tobacco and alcohol, not as much as Canada but something atleast as it is a "luxury", but people should be able to smoke or drink if they like. Subsidizing some this cost to society is kind of a way to keep personal freedoms.
Ian
Originally Posted By: cven
How about that pizza,coffee,chips,bacon,pancake,cholesterol...ect tax?
These are not needs and YOU are costing ME $ on my insurance!!!!
They are taxed by sales tax. Since they are not as bad to your health as tobacco and alcohol, unless you abuse them, they are not taxed as high.
I don't think milk or uncooked vegetables are taxed.
How about that pizza,coffee,chips,bacon,pancake,cholesterol...ect tax?
These are not needs and YOU are costing ME $ on my insurance!!!!
They are taxed by sales tax. Since they are not as bad to your health as tobacco and alcohol, unless you abuse them, they are not taxed as high.
I don't think milk or uncooked vegetables are taxed.
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Subsidizing some this cost to society is kind of a way to keep personal freedoms.
Freedom comes with a cost to the chooser. I don't think subsidizing a luxury item is justified, especially if it can cause harm down the road but has not good impact like playing sports.
Subsidizing some this cost to society is kind of a way to keep personal freedoms.
Freedom comes with a cost to the chooser. I don't think subsidizing a luxury item is justified, especially if it can cause harm down the road but has not good impact like playing sports.
So your comments are based on personal experience and not on the population in general? Did you know that back in 1950, over 62% of the population smoked, but the death rates have remained the same percentage wise up to now? So, health care, give me a freaking break....how many times have you been shopping only to see those obese folks that don't smoke and can barely move around and have to ride the electric scooter around? They don't smoke but can't get off their collective arshes and change their diet or at least exercise? What percentage of that am I paying through my taxes? Don't give me the "need" argument either? Do you "need" to drive to a movie theater? Do you "need" to run your AC all day? Puh-lease. This tax is supposedly designed to pay for health care for children. Get this, it is not for those on welfare, but those that make 83K a year or less. So, they tax the #ell out of tobacco, what happens next? The money will dry up quicker, black market will thrive on this. So, then they enlarge AFT bureaus to combat this, gee Wally, where is all that money going to come from? And the thing about second hand smoke, tell me where you can still smoke in public? Lame excuse at best.
I am neither a smoker or a drinker, but I have never understood why alcohol gets a free pass, while they go after smokers like they are the black plague? I mean alcohol is way more dangerous and impacts many more lives than tobacco.
Last edited:
My tact was implied to government using taxes to affect our behavior or decisions. Smoking is not allowed in confined spaces or indoors buy many establishments. A smoker can choose to not patron those establishments or satisfy their fix before entering. Restaurants did not need government intervention to ban smoking inside their establishments. The consumer persuaded such action. My apologizes if I offended anyone with my [censored] comment, I did not intend for that to happen. My beef is with government intervention in every aspect of our lives.
No way can anyone torpedo the SCHIP tobacco taxes. We can only try to lessen the damage. The greatest damage, and the part that involves the people on this forum, is the massive RYO tax.
I do not imply that the participants on this forum are destitutes. WE few are the cigarette elite: Connoiseurs who reject the chemical laden, ertsaz tobacco in prepackaged cigarettes for the pure stuff, even if it is cheaper. (Aren't we 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 the poorest of the poor, the homeless who sleep under bridges, the old veteran in his one rented room, 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".)
And the stupid congressmen don't know that! They can't unless we tell them. So telephone and email them that they are doing a shameful thing.
We can't blanket the newspapers with paid ads, but we can write "letters to the editor" of every newspaper we can think of. Kicking the destitute in the face "for the children" is horrendous enough to get attention.
We can print up flyers for every convenience store in the neighborhood to give ONLY to their RYO customers, with a form letter and the local senator's email address and telephone number.
The RYO segment of the total tobacco market is tiny, something like 0.5%. The total money they expect to get from this massive $25 a pound tax is a tiny part of the total SCHIP funding. (I'll post the figures when I remember where I filed them, so they can be quoted.)
I do not imply that the participants on this forum are destitutes. WE few are the cigarette elite: Connoiseurs who reject the chemical laden, ertsaz tobacco in prepackaged cigarettes for the pure stuff, even if it is cheaper. (Aren't we 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 the poorest of the poor, the homeless who sleep under bridges, the old veteran in his one rented room, 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".)
And the stupid congressmen don't know that! They can't unless we tell them. So telephone and email them that they are doing a shameful thing.
We can't blanket the newspapers with paid ads, but we can write "letters to the editor" of every newspaper we can think of. Kicking the destitute in the face "for the children" is horrendous enough to get attention.
We can print up flyers for every convenience store in the neighborhood to give ONLY to their RYO customers, with a form letter and the local senator's email address and telephone number.
The RYO segment of the total tobacco market is tiny, something like 0.5%. The total money they expect to get from this massive $25 a pound tax is a tiny part of the total SCHIP funding. (I'll post the figures when I remember where I filed them, so they can be quoted.)
Originally Posted By: Schmoe
how many times have you been shopping only to see those obese folks that don't smoke and can barely move around and have to ride the electric scooter around? They don't smoke but can't get off their collective arshes and change their diet or at least exercise?
Man, sometimes i feel like tipping them over,off their scooters,for being so dang lazy and kicking them for being fat and lazy ,if that is their choice to be that way!
how many times have you been shopping only to see those obese folks that don't smoke and can barely move around and have to ride the electric scooter around? They don't smoke but can't get off their collective arshes and change their diet or at least exercise?
Man, sometimes i feel like tipping them over,off their scooters,for being so dang lazy and kicking them for being fat and lazy ,if that is their choice to be that way!
Originally Posted By: Jason2007
I am neither a smoker or a drinker, but I have never understood why alcohol gets a free pass, while they go after smokers like they are the black plague? I mean alcohol is way more dangerous and impacts many more lives than tobacco.
Before smoking was regulated the stench of cigarette smoke permeated life anytime you were in a public place or a business.
A large share of smokers were inconsiderate jerks.
Alcohol can be a serious problem, but you weren't surrounded by inconsiderate drunks from dawn to dusk.
If people insisted oin getting drunk in every public place and every business, then there would be restrictions on alcohol too.
Oh, I forgot, there are severe restrictions on where you can consume alcohol. In many cases more severe restrictions than on smoking.
I am neither a smoker or a drinker, but I have never understood why alcohol gets a free pass, while they go after smokers like they are the black plague? I mean alcohol is way more dangerous and impacts many more lives than tobacco.
Before smoking was regulated the stench of cigarette smoke permeated life anytime you were in a public place or a business.
A large share of smokers were inconsiderate jerks.
Alcohol can be a serious problem, but you weren't surrounded by inconsiderate drunks from dawn to dusk.
If people insisted oin getting drunk in every public place and every business, then there would be restrictions on alcohol too.
Oh, I forgot, there are severe restrictions on where you can consume alcohol. In many cases more severe restrictions than on smoking.
Originally Posted By: Schmoe
So, health care, give me a freaking break....how many times have you been shopping only to see those obese folks that don't smoke and can barely move around and have to ride the electric scooter around? They don't smoke but can't get off their collective arshes and change their diet or at least exercise?
Works for me. Let those who are obese and/or dumb enough to smoke pay for their health choices so I'm not forced to pay for their poor choices.
If they have a genuine medical condition not attributed to their obesity that keeps them wheelchair bound then it's a different story. But if they are obese because they can't stop shoveling food into their face then they should pay for their choices.
Quote:
Do you "need" to drive to a movie theater? Do you "need" to run your AC all day? Puh-lease.
Last I knew smoking wasn't a "need" either. It's a choice, albeit a poor one. You have the option to quit if you don't want to pay.
I have no problem with taxing smoking to the point that smokers are forced to quit. I also have no problem taxing junk and fast food to the point that it's not affordable. Both smoking and obesity are disgusting choices and both show a lack of character. I'll maintain my health so your healthcare rates aren't raised and I expect the same from you.
Quote:
And the thing about second hand smoke, tell me where you can still smoke in public? Lame excuse at best.
My state recently raised the sales tax $1/pack and banned smoking in almost all workplaces and public areas. It's nice to be able to go somewhere for dinner and not have to smell the stench of a smoker huffing and puffing away in the smoking section.
So, health care, give me a freaking break....how many times have you been shopping only to see those obese folks that don't smoke and can barely move around and have to ride the electric scooter around? They don't smoke but can't get off their collective arshes and change their diet or at least exercise?
Works for me. Let those who are obese and/or dumb enough to smoke pay for their health choices so I'm not forced to pay for their poor choices.
If they have a genuine medical condition not attributed to their obesity that keeps them wheelchair bound then it's a different story. But if they are obese because they can't stop shoveling food into their face then they should pay for their choices.
Quote:
Do you "need" to drive to a movie theater? Do you "need" to run your AC all day? Puh-lease.
Last I knew smoking wasn't a "need" either. It's a choice, albeit a poor one. You have the option to quit if you don't want to pay.
I have no problem with taxing smoking to the point that smokers are forced to quit. I also have no problem taxing junk and fast food to the point that it's not affordable. Both smoking and obesity are disgusting choices and both show a lack of character. I'll maintain my health so your healthcare rates aren't raised and I expect the same from you.
Quote:
And the thing about second hand smoke, tell me where you can still smoke in public? Lame excuse at best.
My state recently raised the sales tax $1/pack and banned smoking in almost all workplaces and public areas. It's nice to be able to go somewhere for dinner and not have to smell the stench of a smoker huffing and puffing away in the smoking section.
Originally Posted By: Jason2007
I am neither a smoker or a drinker, but I have never understood why alcohol gets a free pass, while they go after smokers like they are the black plague? I mean alcohol is way more dangerous and impacts many more lives than tobacco.
I'd agree today, but not when smoking in public/private businesses was allowed.
I am neither a smoker or a drinker, but I have never understood why alcohol gets a free pass, while they go after smokers like they are the black plague? I mean alcohol is way more dangerous and impacts many more lives than tobacco.
I'd agree today, but not when smoking in public/private businesses was allowed.
Originally Posted By: Schmoe
No way can anyone torpedo the SCHIP tobacco taxes. We can only try to lessen the damage. The greatest damage, and the part that involves the people on this forum, is the massive RYO tax.
I do not imply that the participants on this forum are destitutes. WE few are the cigarette elite: Connoiseurs who reject the chemical laden, ertsaz tobacco in prepackaged cigarettes for the pure stuff, even if it is cheaper. (Aren't we 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 the poorest of the poor, the homeless who sleep under bridges, the old veteran in his one rented room, 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".)
And the stupid congressmen don't know that! They can't unless we tell them. So telephone and email them that they are doing a shameful thing.
We can't blanket the newspapers with paid ads, but we can write "letters to the editor" of every newspaper we can think of. Kicking the destitute in the face "for the children" is horrendous enough to get attention.
We can print up flyers for every convenience store in the neighborhood to give ONLY to their RYO customers, with a form letter and the local senator's email address and telephone number.
The RYO segment of the total tobacco market is tiny, something like 0.5%. The total money they expect to get from this massive $25 a pound tax is a tiny part of the total SCHIP funding. (I'll post the figures when I remember where I filed them, so they can be quoted.)
Since smokers are the minority I don't think you'll get very far. Most states are only 20-25% smokers. You certainly have the right to voice your opinion though.
No way can anyone torpedo the SCHIP tobacco taxes. We can only try to lessen the damage. The greatest damage, and the part that involves the people on this forum, is the massive RYO tax.
I do not imply that the participants on this forum are destitutes. WE few are the cigarette elite: Connoiseurs who reject the chemical laden, ertsaz tobacco in prepackaged cigarettes for the pure stuff, even if it is cheaper. (Aren't we 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 the poorest of the poor, the homeless who sleep under bridges, the old veteran in his one rented room, 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".)
And the stupid congressmen don't know that! They can't unless we tell them. So telephone and email them that they are doing a shameful thing.
We can't blanket the newspapers with paid ads, but we can write "letters to the editor" of every newspaper we can think of. Kicking the destitute in the face "for the children" is horrendous enough to get attention.
We can print up flyers for every convenience store in the neighborhood to give ONLY to their RYO customers, with a form letter and the local senator's email address and telephone number.
The RYO segment of the total tobacco market is tiny, something like 0.5%. The total money they expect to get from this massive $25 a pound tax is a tiny part of the total SCHIP funding. (I'll post the figures when I remember where I filed them, so they can be quoted.)
Since smokers are the minority I don't think you'll get very far. Most states are only 20-25% smokers. You certainly have the right to voice your opinion though.
Originally Posted By: Jason2007
I am neither a smoker or a drinker, but I have never understood why alcohol gets a free pass,
It doesn't in Canada. A 750ml bottle (26oz) of Bacardi costs ~$22.
I am neither a smoker or a drinker, but I have never understood why alcohol gets a free pass,
It doesn't in Canada. A 750ml bottle (26oz) of Bacardi costs ~$22.
My state is pretty clever, they boost taxes on soda & chips one year, booze the next, cigs the one after... then repeat.
As I'm not a fan of the divide and conquer mentality, I vote against every hike, regardless of my personal opinion on the matter. It's also part of my losing battle challenge to my state reps to do more with less.
As I'm not a fan of the divide and conquer mentality, I vote against every hike, regardless of my personal opinion on the matter. It's also part of my losing battle challenge to my state reps to do more with less.
Just quit smoking. I quit smoking cigars about 2 years ago. It was getting expensive. Instead of complaining about the prices, I took matters into my own hands and I stopped giving them my hard earned money.
Last edited by a moderator:
Works for me. Let those who are obese and/or dumb enough to smoke pay for their health choices so I'm not forced to pay for their poor choices.
So, I am assuming your &ods gift to health, then? I'm sure if I looked in your closets, dirty laundry will be found.
I have no problem with taxing smoking to the point that smokers are forced to quit. I also have no problem taxing junk and fast food to the point that it's not affordable. Both smoking and obesity are disgusting choices and both show a lack of character. I'll maintain my health so your healthcare rates aren't raised and I expect the same from you.
...a lack of character? Boy, you just crack me up. Your argument is pretty selfish at best, along with arrogant.
[
So, I am assuming your &ods gift to health, then? I'm sure if I looked in your closets, dirty laundry will be found.
I have no problem with taxing smoking to the point that smokers are forced to quit. I also have no problem taxing junk and fast food to the point that it's not affordable. Both smoking and obesity are disgusting choices and both show a lack of character. I'll maintain my health so your healthcare rates aren't raised and I expect the same from you.
...a lack of character? Boy, you just crack me up. Your argument is pretty selfish at best, along with arrogant.
[
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
