Obama?s recession remedy: Tax the poor!

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: xenolith

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Genx87
Heh tax it enough and it goes underground. I guess that would be a boon to the police state prohibitionists though. Another black market to expand our police forces to contain.

What is it with our country and declaring war on defenseless plants?

The idiot Democrats in New Jersey raised the cigarette tax per pack to funnel money to the teachers union. Guess what?

Revenue went down. :laugh:

Could it be because...

Smoking Rate Is Declining in U.S.

The CDC says in its Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report that the prevalence of smoking fell in 2007 to 19.8%, nearly a full percentage point from 20.8% in 2006.

The CDC says cigarette smoking prevalence has been dropping steadily among Americans 18 and older since it began keeping records in 1965, when 42.4% smoked.

"We think the proportion is dropping because of excise taxes that make cigarettes more expensive, smoke-free laws [that apply to most workplaces], and the availability of counseling and medications," McKenna says.

Could be. But guess what, if that happens you don't have money to dump into rising public school budgets.

Of course, then the Democrats in Trenton whine that they don't have enough money. :roll:

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
I'd like to see the stats on how many smokers' medical costs are covered by government assistance or hospital write offs when they develop lung cancer, emphysema, hypertension, etc. because they can't afford health insurance and/or to pay their deductibles.

I'll go out on a limb and assume a big percentage of them fall into the "government assistance" and "hospital write off" categories. Why not make these people contribute to the healthcare system?

Fast food is another thing altogether since simply eating fast food does not make one obese and the body requires food, unlike cigarettes.

Probably not that much. They die young and work their entire lives.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Wait, a tax on a product that directly contributes to increased health care costs for us all... to pay for health care? THAT BASTARD.

So how about a $.60 tax on every fast-food order? Obesity will be the biggest killer this nation has ever seen.

Seems like that would absolutely nail the poor. Its not the wealthy that line up to feed their family off the $1 menu.

I'm not for regressive taxation in general, but of all regressive taxes ones like these are by FAR the least offensive to me. Smokers cost each and every one of us money on health care. For them to pay more for each pack, and have that extra spent on reducing the cost of health care does not exactly enrage me. It's exactly like the gas tax.

Malkin's post is trying to paint Obama as screwing over poor people when we all know that overall they will be much better off with him than with any of the alternatives, and certainly better off than they are today. It's ridiculous and it's typical of her poorly thought out, flailing dishonesty.

Myth. Unhealthy people are much cheaper to society. They don't use SS or Medicare because they don't make it that far, also all people will have same diseases eventually, however it's the 90 yr old heath nut that survives multiple bypass only to live for the next crisis.
Smokers, the obese cheaper to treat than healthy, long-living people: study
We should be encouraging people to eat fatty foods and smoke - taxes like this won't do it and we will pay, big time.

There was a study in Jama about this I'll see if I can find it. In the meantime put this in your pipe and smoke it:
University of Chicago- Journal of Law & Economics. Studies at the national level indicate that cigarettes are self-financing since external costs such as those due to illnesses are offset by cost savings associated with premature death, chiefly pension costs.

N Engl J Med - If people stopped smoking, there would be a savings in health care costs, but only in the short term. Eventually, smoking cessation would lead to increased health care costs.

If true, this raises a very interesting question. If unhealthy people are cheaper to treat than healthy people, then why does America pay so much more per capita on health care than other countries? Our unhealthy lifestyle is the #1 cited reason for such. (and the main counterargument for why people say UHC won't work)

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Fern
Whether smoking is good or bad for you is NOT the point.

IMO, the government has no business taxing people for this type of thing. Out of wedlock sex causes many problems, should that be taxed too?

I remind you that smoking is a legal activity.

The government should raise general revenues (such as income tax) to provide for the budget. Then there are use taxes, such as highway taxes which should be used to fund the service provided (public roads). There's no connection between the tax and the use, the gov is merely picking on unpopular people because they can. Th egov just wants to use their money to pay for another one of its programs. It's a 'divide and conquor' ploy.

Granting, or approving of, the government's excusing extra taxes on the basis of influencing personal behavior is inexcusable.

Don't wanna go to college, pay a tax. Get fat, pay a tax. Waste time playing PC/console games, pay a tax. Watching porn?, pay a tax. Didn't vote? Oh well, pay a tax.

What about people particpating in dangerous sports and their increased chance of getting hurt and requiring medical treatment? Should they pay a tax?

We must be much more critical of government's attempts to justify new/increased taxes; if not they'll never stop. Modification of (legal) personal behavior is not their business; we are supposed to have individual freedom here in the US.

Fern

Excellent post..It's this nickel and dimeing everything reason I've long argued taxes, overall, are flat if not regressive, despite a progressive income tax.

<<another non-smoker

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Wait, a tax on a product that directly contributes to increased health care costs for us all... to pay for health care? THAT BASTARD.

So how about a $.60 tax on every fast-food order? Obesity will be the biggest killer this nation has ever seen.

Seems like that would absolutely nail the poor. Its not the wealthy that line up to feed their family off the $1 menu.

I'm not for regressive taxation in general, but of all regressive taxes ones like these are by FAR the least offensive to me. Smokers cost each and every one of us money on health care. For them to pay more for each pack, and have that extra spent on reducing the cost of health care does not exactly enrage me. It's exactly like the gas tax.

Malkin's post is trying to paint Obama as screwing over poor people when we all know that overall they will be much better off with him than with any of the alternatives, and certainly better off than they are today. It's ridiculous and it's typical of her poorly thought out, flailing dishonesty.

Myth. Unhealthy people are much cheaper to society. They don't use SS or Medicare because they don't make it that far, also all people will have same diseases eventually, however it's the 90 yr old heath nut that survives multiple bypass only to live for the next crisis.
Smokers, the obese cheaper to treat than healthy, long-living people: study
We should be encouraging people to eat fatty foods and smoke - taxes like this won't do it and we will pay, big time.

There was a study in Jama about this I'll see if I can find it. In the meantime put this in your pipe and smoke it:
University of Chicago- Journal of Law & Economics. Studies at the national level indicate that cigarettes are self-financing since external costs such as those due to illnesses are offset by cost savings associated with premature death, chiefly pension costs.

N Engl J Med - If people stopped smoking, there would be a savings in health care costs, but only in the short term. Eventually, smoking cessation would lead to increased health care costs.

If true, this raises a very interesting question. If unhealthy people are cheaper to treat than healthy people, then why does America pay so much more per capita on health care than other countries? Our unhealthy lifestyle is the #1 cited reason for such. (and the main counterargument for why people say UHC won't work)

No they get just as sick as us just later in life. Here high costs are not singular in reason but have nothing to do with habits, in fact it's inverse-mainly it's everyone getting a huge piece of the action unrelated to HC, we subsidize other countries cheap drugs, we spare no expense to keep people alive, we use latest techs to treat, and yes, the lawyers play a part too buy only about a 3% increase despite the rights assertions.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
So how about a $.60 tax on every fast-food order? Obesity will be the biggest killer this nation has ever seen.

I'm glad you see the point of all this.

Why shouldn't the cost of this S-CHIP program be included in income taxes?

The answer is that we want to play morality police, whether it's Democrats or Republicans in control.

 

[alphatarget1]

If you have seen the south park episode on smoking... I could see how this could be a tax on the poor. Poor people can't afford vacations in exotic places nor a cabin retreat.

With that said, if a lot more smokers could quit smoking and find something else to do that would be great.

 

[JEDIYoda]

It funny listening to all the sniveling crybabys trying to make an issue out of taxing things that have been medically proven to be bad for you!!

Yet these same people are also mthe same people who keep driving the cost of health insurance up because they have to be treated somehow......sad...pathetic.....

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Up the booze tax too, and make money off the alkies.

(don't) suck it, boozehounds!

:thumbsup:

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
If you have seen the south park episode on smoking... I could see how this could be a tax on the poor. Poor people can't afford vacations in exotic places nor a cabin retreat.

With that said, if a lot more smokers could quit smoking and find something else to do that would be great.

anyone who doesn't see this as a tax on the poor or middle class is an absolute idiot...sure in the liberal utopian vision of how this nation should be everyone should stop smoking, only shop at whole foods, and drive their hybrid, but the reality is the poor smoke, the poor shop for cheap food cause it is what they can afford...start taxing these items and you punish them for their vices..chances are the increase won't cause them to stop either because of their addiction.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Wait, a tax on a product that directly contributes to increased health care costs for us all... to pay for health care? THAT BASTARD.

So how about a $.60 tax on every fast-food order? Obesity will be the biggest killer this nation has ever seen.

Seems like that would absolutely nail the poor. Its not the wealthy that line up to feed their family off the $1 menu.

I'm not for regressive taxation in general, but of all regressive taxes ones like these are by FAR the least offensive to me. Smokers cost each and every one of us money on health care. For them to pay more for each pack, and have that extra spent on reducing the cost of health care does not exactly enrage me. It's exactly like the gas tax.

Malkin's post is trying to paint Obama as screwing over poor people when we all know that overall they will be much better off with him than with any of the alternatives, and certainly better off than they are today. It's ridiculous and it's typical of her poorly thought out, flailing dishonesty.

Myth. Unhealthy people are much cheaper to society. They don't use SS or Medicare because they don't make it that far, also all people will have same diseases eventually, however it's the 90 yr old heath nut that survives multiple bypass only to live for the next crisis.
Smokers, the obese cheaper to treat than healthy, long-living people: study
We should be encouraging people to eat fatty foods and smoke - taxes like this won't do it and we will pay, big time.

That's a pretty flawed assertion if I've ever seen one.

First off, the study uses a computer model to simulate the lives of 1000 people living in the Netherlands based on statistics from their population. I'd bet that a similar model applied to the US would yield different results right off the bat. Ignoring that, just the fact that they are using a computer model in such a way would make me tend to doubt it's results as being 100% realistic in the first place.

Also, this study simply focuses on direct costs, not indirect costs, and completely ignores the question of who is paying for health costs. If more and more people are dying from obesity related diseases earlier in their life, not only does it reduce national productivity, but it reduces the number of people who are able to contribute to health care premiums, thus raising costs and lowering revenues. If more and more people are becoming more and more obese, and obesity shortens life expectancy, then over time, our average life expectancy will decrease, and it will alter every metric related to it.

All that is just scratching the surface of everything that is flawed with this study's assertion. I'm sure a more in-depth look could find dozens of tangential variables which completely alter the results. To imply that obese people and smokers cost less to society in terms of health care is intellectually dishonest with such an obtuse experiment.

 

[ShawnD1]

bbdub333, the methodology may be strange but the statistics are there and the conclusion makes a lot of sense. Smokers often die shortly after they stop paying income taxes and have retired. Healthy people like my grandma (she's 92) basically live in a hospital. They are insanely expensive to keep alive whereas the smokers die well before 90.

 

[Bateluer]

I didn't read the entire thread, but I will say this. This 'tax' is a lot like the lottery, its a tax on stupid people. Nobody forces you to smoke cigarettes. If you don't like paying the 'tax', then quit smoking.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Carmen813
You are all forgetting Obama smokes!

Heh, yeah I forgot about that. Maybe now he will finally quit.

Well, based on some posts by certain hard core Obama supporters in this thread, 'Smokers are morons' (or stupid take your pick of the posts). Thanks for being excited that, by their definition, we just elected another moron.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: funboy6942

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

We?re about to get a 150% tax increase on cigarettes by the looks of it. Which, as pointed out, will directly tax working class Americans. Interesting choice of targets for this new tax, wouldn?t you say so? It?s acceptable to tax people doing something ?immoral?, am I right?

Who are the morality police now? If Dems don?t want you to do something, they?ll up the price of it so only the rich can afford it. You know, rich people like themselves. They can afford this tax, can?t you also afford it?

Now perhaps you?d like to root for the S-CHIP extension that this will pay for, no doubt it will do some good, but raising taxes on the poor is an interesting way to get this done.

Tell me P&N, do you support H.R.2, will this be a tax on you, or is this only a tax on other people so you couldn?t care less? I don?t smoke, never have and never will, but I can see how this could take money out of the pockets of people who need it.

If they "need" to smoke then thay can pay the tax.

Pretty simple

Oh and where is option for this is Tax on the stupid and weak?

OK but if their need to smoke is cut off and taken away because they can no longer afford to buy them, what good does this tax hike do, or the next one after it because there are less smokers, and then the next one ofter that because they raise the tax again forcing more people to quit? You cant get money off people who quit, and the more they go up in cost, the more that will quit, and thats more money they will lose. The more the keep raising the price, the more that will be forced to quit, and the tax hike is a losing battle they will never be able to catch up, for the more they charge, the more that will just give up and quit, not for their health, or yours, but because they cant afford it.

How about we tax those who drive electric or hybrid cars? Because they are using them its forcing the power plants to make up the power to charge them suckers spewing more co2 into the air, or making more nuclear waste, then if they just bought a Honda with almost zero emissions. What are they saving, gas? The power plants dont run on sunshine and rainbows, so they got to power up what ever it is your charging up to drive. So we can charge them more tax for forcing the power plants to spew more into the air. I mean come on, if they can afford a $30-$80K electric car, they sure as hell can afford more tax on them then the poor of smokes, thats just going to quit smoking anyway, and wow, really got those extra funds from a quitter, for instead of making a extra 40 cents per person, your losing $4+ a pack or more per day

I mean
"Ok people were going to go up in price, were going to charge you $5.50 a pack of smokes, to help pay for the childrens health care"

"Fuck that, I cant afford it, I quit."

"Ok people, were now going to have to charge you all $6.00 a pack for Childrens health cost, and because more people quit smoking for some reason we cant seem to figure out."

"Fuck that even more, now I quit."

"Alright people, were not really sure why this is failing, but were going to have to charge $7.75 cents a pack, because people hate kids, and love to make Jesus cry, but to make up for all them who quit, we need to ask this price for the smokes."

Now even the rich people say"
"FUCK YOU, I quit too!"

See it wont even end, and they will never get the money they are thinking they are going for, most of you feel this is a great idea. If the poor are that, just that stupid, then lower the prices of the smokes, more of them will take it up, because according to you all they are that dumb, and then they can make more money off taxes because they will triple the smokers for they can really afford to buy them! And most of you win, because then the poor will just die from the causes of smoking. You cant have it both ways here, ask them to quit for your health, but want them to smoke so they pay the extra taxes, but they cant do that because it costs to much, which means they will quit and live longer, which is something else you do not want them to do, for you want them all to die and get out of your life and way.

MAKE UP YOUR FUCKING MINDS PLEASE, IM GOING INSANE!

Wow

A couple of things.

Looks like obviously you are a smoker and you may not be able to afford your addiction with the new taxes. Good

Once you are weaned off the addiction your government will find a new way to get the shortfall in revenue out of you.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Wow

A couple of things.

Looks like obviously you are a smoker and you may not be able to afford your addiction with the new taxes. Good

Once you are weaned off the addiction your government will find a new way to get the shortfall in revenue out of you.

Tax the internet by bandwidth usage. I know Dave is a champion of this idea.

 

[piasabird]

Only idiots smoke.

Sorry if you smoke. However, how many times have you been told it is bad for you?

Grow up.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
bbdub333, the methodology may be strange but the statistics are there and the conclusion makes a lot of sense.

My point was that the methodology is flawed, using statistics for a completely different society, hence the conclusion is flawed. If you assume this study holds true for the US healthcare system, you must assume that every variable is identical (or that the variables are irrelevant to the result). You must assume that disease and death statistics, as well as lifespan statistics, cultural differences, health system variables, etc., are all identical. In reality, we know that there are very real differences between the US and the Netherlands in all these areas, and hence the results of their study cannot be assumed to fit any other system.

Smokers often die shortly after they stop paying income taxes and have retired.
Healthy people like my grandma (she's 92) basically live in a hospital. They are insanely expensive to keep alive whereas the smokers die well before 90.

You're using anecdotal and assumed statistics. I know cases of smokers who have lived till they were 100. I know healthy people who die a year after they retire because they aren't active anymore and have no "reason" to live any longer.

My point being that there are far too many differences in culture and system of the US vs the Netherlands, and the study in the Netherlands is far too blunt to begin with. Common sense tells us that a society with less instance of disease would lead to lower health care costs across the board, thus reducing obesity would have a cause-and-effect on prices. If you want to debate end-of-life care, that is a separate issue entirely.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Only idiots smoke.

Sorry if you smoke. However, how many times have you been told it is bad for you?

Grow up.

Obama smokes and that makes me sad.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Wow

A couple of things.

Looks like obviously you are a smoker and you may not be able to afford your addiction with the new taxes. Good

Once you are weaned off the addiction your government will find a new way to get the shortfall in revenue out of you.

Tax the internet by bandwidth usage. I know Dave is a champion of this idea.

59 cents a second

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Carmen813
You are all forgetting Obama smokes!

Heh, yeah I forgot about that. Maybe now he will finally quit.

Well, based on some posts by certain hard core Obama supporters in this thread, 'Smokers are morons' (or stupid take your pick of the posts). Thanks for being excited that, by their definition, we just elected another moron.

Just keep in mind that I wasn't one of those people passing judgement onto the smokers.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Carmen813
You are all forgetting Obama smokes!

Heh, yeah I forgot about that. Maybe now he will finally quit.

Well, based on some posts by certain hard core Obama supporters in this thread, 'Smokers are morons' (or stupid take your pick of the posts). Thanks for being excited that, by their definition, we just elected another moron.

Just keep in mind that I wasn't one of those people passing judgement onto the smokers.

I know you weren't. I just think it's sad that we have certain people in this thread who, in any other thread, basically worship Obama. However, in this thread he would be considered an idiot/moron by the very same people because that's how they see all smokers.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Carmen813
You are all forgetting Obama smokes!

Heh, yeah I forgot about that. Maybe now he will finally quit.

Well, based on some posts by certain hard core Obama supporters in this thread, 'Smokers are morons' (or stupid take your pick of the posts). Thanks for being excited that, by their definition, we just elected another moron.

Just keep in mind that I wasn't one of those people passing judgement onto the smokers.

I know you weren't. I just think it's sad that we have certain people in this thread who, in any other thread, basically worship Obama. However, in this thread he would be considered an idiot/moron by the very same people because that's how they see all smokers.

It shows he has weakness. He is human and shits just like you and I do.

 

[frostedflakes]

And that right there is the definition of a partisan hack.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Carmen813
You are all forgetting Obama smokes!

Heh, yeah I forgot about that. Maybe now he will finally quit.

Well, based on some posts by certain hard core Obama supporters in this thread, 'Smokers are morons' (or stupid take your pick of the posts). Thanks for being excited that, by their definition, we just elected another moron.

Just keep in mind that I wasn't one of those people passing judgement onto the smokers.

I know you weren't. I just think it's sad that we have certain people in this thread who, in any other thread, basically worship Obama. However, in this thread he would be considered an idiot/moron by the very same people because that's how they see all smokers.

It shows he has weakness. He is human and shits just like you and I do.

So for him it's a weakness but for anyone else they are just a moron, dumbass, idiot, etc. I see no double standard here. Move along.