http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020702/ap_on_re_us/smokers_pay_7 DAMN! Why don't these people just do a swan dive off the Empire State Buiding! It's quicker and a HELLUVA lot cheaper...
Yeah it really sucks that us smokers are infringing all those non-smokers rights while we pay their F**king taxes to make up for the city budget deficit.. and it's $7.50 in some places I've got an idea. Why not raise the taxes on alcohol? Oh but then those self-righteous non smokers would be yelling like crazy!
Anyone see the irony in these statements? It's never been about the childwen or the health of anyone...but you wont see that on any "TRUTH" ads...
So, I guess you know that there is a DIRECT correlation between smoking an alcohol consumption. People paying the smoking tax will also be paying the majority of an alcohol tax. If lawmakers REALLY want to make some money, they should legalized mar1juana and tax the hell out of that stuff, also...
Quit b****ing and quit smoking then. Less trash(cigarette butts & packaging) and less health problems that also use up our tax dollars. BTW, I do smoke occasionally.
For those of you you have a problem with taxing cigs and alcohol so heavily, I'm curious as to why you are against it? If higher prices cause more people to quit or never start smoking, I say good. If it raises money for the city, I say its good. What exactly is the problem?
smoking isnt illegal so we shouldnt punish people who do it. i dont smoke, but i do like candy. they better not jack up the price on candy!!
I don't have a problem with taxing cigarettes to get more revenue and discourage kids from smoking. I do have a problem with people saying that that's why they're doing it, when they're only actually doing it to put the tobacco companies out of business because they contribute to the other party's campaign.
if we're gonna tax cigs b/c of health consequences, why stop there? let's tax fast food... i'm all for it, i don't eat it b/c its unhealthy... I think this would be a great idea... save money from all those punks who eat it and have heart problems and go into hospitals and can't afford their bills... screw them!
Fast food, for all it's artery clogging, heart disease, and obesity causing traits, does have SOME nutritional value...Tobacco has no nutritional value whatsoever...To paraphrase Chris Rock: "If you're starving, a Quarter Pounder with cheese will save your life!"
Big tobacco is definitely far more generous to Republicans than to Democrats. Here's the breakdown for the current and past two election cycles (courtesy of opensecrets,org): 2002 (up to this point) - $1,010,788 to Dems and $4,296,722 to Reps. 1998 - $1,379,487 to Dems and $7,023,419 to Reps. 1996 - $1,678,915 to Dems and $6,679,648 to Reps. I would venture that the Democrats are responding more to a dramatic shift in social climate than campaign contributions. It's safe to go after smoking revenue since the habit is now frowned upon. Tobacco companies are around the 34th largest contributer to Republicans. If Dems really wanted to cut Republican funding, there are a lot bigger fish to fry than Phillip Morris and friends.
fine, it just really upsets me that healthy food costs a buttload more than junk food... if the govt. wants to improve the health of their citizens, why not give those of us who choose to eat healthy a break in the wallet, huh? man, i'm just upset! and its raining! not a good combo!
I don't have a problem with taxing cigarettes to get more revenue and discourage kids from smoking. I do have a problem with people saying that that's why they're doing it, when they're only actually doing it to put the tobacco companies out of business because they contribute to the other party's campaign. ??? Republicans get more funding from Tobacco; Michael Bloomberg, Republican Mayor of NYC, pushed for this tax.
Go figure. What I was wondering was, can the government just decide to tax any good they want at whatever amount they want? That seems a little unfair....I would think that if my product was being taxed disproportionately like that, I wouldn't be too happy about it. On the other hand, doesn't this give companies that make, say, Nicorettes, or whatever, a bit of an unfair advantage? I mean, anyone that is competing for consumers with tobacco just got a huge gift from the government. Sorry if I'm stating the obvious...
