Politicians are definitely hypocrites but there's little doubt that TAXES have dramatically affected smoking rates in children. States with significant tobacco taxes have made great strides in child/adolescent smoking prevalence. I hope the practice gets taxed out of existence.
Politicians are definitely hypocrites but there's little doubt that TAXES have dramatically affected smoking rates in children. States with significant tobacco taxes have made great strides in child/adolescent smoking prevalence. I hope the practice gets taxed out of existence.
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 55,853
- 13,965
- 146
Riiiight. Like total bans on drugs have stopped kids from doing them?
Over-taxation will have the exact same effect bans have. It will foster an underground black market that is far more deadly than the original problem ever was.
Only a fool would believe that vice can be overcome by taxes or bans.
It worked on me. About a year and a month. 
Of course, the high cost of smoking wasn't the only factor in the decision to quit, but it was a big one.
Of course, the high cost of smoking wasn't the only factor in the decision to quit, but it was a big one.Oh come on. That idea has been proven false once already (prohibition) and is in the process of being falsified again (marijuana).
Originally posted by: Amused
Yep, who cares who's [sic] bull is getting gored, so long as it isn't yours, right?
Isn't that the idea of government?
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 55,853
- 13,965
- 146
Originally posted by: konichiwa
Originally posted by: Amused
Yep, who cares who's [sic] bull is getting gored, so long as it isn't yours, right?
Isn't that the idea of government?
You already demonstrated the line you copied was a direct quote by using the quoting feature. Was the [sic] really necessary?
Corn
Diamond Member
- Nov 12, 1999
- 6,389
- 29
- 91
konichiwa is merely drawing attention to a grammatical error, the possessive should read "whose". For some reason konichiwa is bent on spelling and grammatical errors today. Most likely it's simply an attempt to compensate for the lack of a cogent counter in whatever argument he's trying to partake. We've seen it all before, nothing new here.
Well guess what . . . addictions can be greatly curtailed by making the activity more expensive WITHOUT legal prohibition. Smoking is a great example b/c relatively few people begin the activity after adolescence. Personally, I would be quite happy if the prevalence of cigarette smoking amongst teens matched MJ prevalence. Manufacturers would no longer purchase domestic tobacco (too expensive), domestic production would shrivel, states with very low taxes (NC/KY/VA) would dramatically raise taxes b/c they would lose a special interest to protect (tobacco farmers).
Old smokers will die out but replacements will not sustain the practice. Public shame/disdain for the activity will allow broad laws compelling smokers in every state to smoke in approved areas only. There will certainly be an incorrigible group that will smoke till death and undisciplined youths who are attracted to the forbidden fruit . . . but smoking in America will join cock fighting, wife beating, and racism as American pasttimes in remission and typically practiced behind closed doors.
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 55,853
- 13,965
- 146
Bali, it must be nice in your fantasy land, but back here in reality land bans or over taxation simply cause MORE harm to innocent people. How many more civil rights do we have to give up or have eroded to fight the inevitable black markets that will popup when your "plan" becomes reality? How many times do we have to hear about tobacco dealer driveby shootings killing innocent kids when your "plan" becomes a reality?
The rate of addiction will NOT be controlled by bans or taxes, but by education and popular public opinion. How many times has the rate of drug addiction waxed and waned since they were banned? How much privacy have we given up to combat drug addiction? Now you want to add tobacco to this? I'd rather have a % addicted and free, than a % addicted, oppressed, and robbing me to pay for their addictions.
When will both the left AND the right realize that authoritarianism and nanny-statism FAILS to solve ANYTHING? It never solved the alcohol problem. It never solved the poverty problem. It never solved the drug problem. And it will never solve the tobacco problem. YOU and your ilk are NOT the people's mother or keeper, Bali. Stop trying to mother the masses. It only causes MORE problems.
I think we are arguing apples and oranges. Our illicit drug problem is a totally separate issue from our legal drug problems. I am not proposing ANYTHING resembling the stamp act which preceded MJ's path into prohibition. I'm saying give public health officials and parents one more weapon in the armamentarium against youth smoking . . . make it expensive. Once they are gainfully employed (and beyond the age of consent . . . which in my book is about 25) . . . kidding . . . sort of . . . they can make their own choice about starting to smoke.
There is absolutely no doubt that if you make it harder to start smoking fewer people become addicted. It wouldn't bother me in the least if the only children capable of picking up the habit are slow wits from Woodberry Forest or Choate.
As for people already trapped by nicotine the government should end all subsidies for tobacco AND certainly end any discussion of a billion dollar tobacco buyout. Those funds should be commited to helping people quit who want to kick the habit. Our government at all levels has ACTIVELY participated in this pandemic . . . from free smokes for the troops to crop subsidies. Even my former association (the American Medical Association) rejected the notion that cigarette smoking was harmful as recently as the the 1960s.
I think people should be free to pick whatever bad habits they desire. Increased taxation and ending subsidies is just a method of correcting for past wrongs and limiting the exposure of children who are incapable of making a sound decision about future morbidity/mortality.
The government levies excise taxes on the telephone, cable, gasoline . . . you name it. Why not a federal excise tax of $1 or $2 per pack . . . to discourage conumption and provide revenue?
Christian Science Monitor
Around the nation, the states that have boosted cigarette prices with higher excise taxes have seen their teen smoking rates reduced the most. And, in Canada, after federal taxes on cigarettes rose by 150 percent over 10 years, teen smoking rates fell by 60 percent.
summary of a CDC report
The CDC study looked at smoking among New Hampshire middle-school students. In 2000, 12 percent of these adolescents smoked. In 2001, cigarette companies raised the wholesale price of cigarettes by 14 cents a pack, increasing the cost from $1.77 per pack to $3.53. Subsequently, the CDC study found, the smoking rate among the students dropped to 6.3 percent.
In addition, the number of high-school students in New Hampshire who smoke dropped from 36 percent in 1995 to 25 percent in 2001.
"That may be partly because younger kids are more sensitive to price increases. You're looking at $3.50 a pack; that may be a substantial amount of money for a seventh- or eighth-grader," said Dr. Andrew Pelletier, a CDC epidemiologist.
Good ol' Massachusetts
Dr. Jeffrey Harris, who is both an economics professor at MIT and a physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, said the plunge in smoking is primarily from the combination of tax hikes and the state's antismoking campaign.
"Most people who study smoking rates agree there is a synergy between prices increases and the antismoking campaign," Harris said. "The two measures have a greater combined effect on consumption that either alone."
There is absolutely no doubt that if you make it harder to start smoking fewer people become addicted. It wouldn't bother me in the least if the only children capable of picking up the habit are slow wits from Woodberry Forest or Choate.
As for people already trapped by nicotine the government should end all subsidies for tobacco AND certainly end any discussion of a billion dollar tobacco buyout. Those funds should be commited to helping people quit who want to kick the habit. Our government at all levels has ACTIVELY participated in this pandemic . . . from free smokes for the troops to crop subsidies. Even my former association (the American Medical Association) rejected the notion that cigarette smoking was harmful as recently as the the 1960s.
I think people should be free to pick whatever bad habits they desire. Increased taxation and ending subsidies is just a method of correcting for past wrongs and limiting the exposure of children who are incapable of making a sound decision about future morbidity/mortality.
The government levies excise taxes on the telephone, cable, gasoline . . . you name it. Why not a federal excise tax of $1 or $2 per pack . . . to discourage conumption and provide revenue?
Christian Science Monitor
Around the nation, the states that have boosted cigarette prices with higher excise taxes have seen their teen smoking rates reduced the most. And, in Canada, after federal taxes on cigarettes rose by 150 percent over 10 years, teen smoking rates fell by 60 percent.
summary of a CDC report
The CDC study looked at smoking among New Hampshire middle-school students. In 2000, 12 percent of these adolescents smoked. In 2001, cigarette companies raised the wholesale price of cigarettes by 14 cents a pack, increasing the cost from $1.77 per pack to $3.53. Subsequently, the CDC study found, the smoking rate among the students dropped to 6.3 percent.
In addition, the number of high-school students in New Hampshire who smoke dropped from 36 percent in 1995 to 25 percent in 2001.
"That may be partly because younger kids are more sensitive to price increases. You're looking at $3.50 a pack; that may be a substantial amount of money for a seventh- or eighth-grader," said Dr. Andrew Pelletier, a CDC epidemiologist.
Good ol' Massachusetts
Dr. Jeffrey Harris, who is both an economics professor at MIT and a physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, said the plunge in smoking is primarily from the combination of tax hikes and the state's antismoking campaign.
"Most people who study smoking rates agree there is a synergy between prices increases and the antismoking campaign," Harris said. "The two measures have a greater combined effect on consumption that either alone."
Dude, if I had my way every person in the retirement home (not using supplemental oxygen) would share bong hits with grandchildren on visiting day . . . 18 and older grandchildren. There are all kinds of activities that I would decriminalize because it makes no sense to outlaw risk. People have the right to self-determination . . . even if that means doing really dumb stuff.
BUT . . . our government used to subsidize tobacco HEAVILY . . . which makes no sense. Now the government just moderately subsidizes tobacco. I want tobacco/cigarettes/dip/snuff/chewing tobacco to be treated like every other LEGAL activity which the government chooses to regulate in that the government reserves the right to levy taxes and determine age of appropriateness consistent with community standards (unless that community is NC, VA, or KY).
I think gambling is bad and that the government should not encourage it (say lotteries) but it should not prohibit an activity which the majority of people can participate in without losing their life savings. Accordingly, the government should reserve the right to regulate commerce . . . if not you wind up with S&L collapses, pyramid schemes, Enrons, WorldComs, and Harkken Energy-like fiascos.
I don't want the state/feds to be anyone's mother but liberal smoking/alcohol laws are perverse b/c they are clear threat to the public health. If you want a 1/5 of vodka and a carton Cowboy Killers a day . . . be my guest. But what makes you think you have a right for your leisure activity to be cheap or on public display?!
BUT . . . our government used to subsidize tobacco HEAVILY . . . which makes no sense. Now the government just moderately subsidizes tobacco. I want tobacco/cigarettes/dip/snuff/chewing tobacco to be treated like every other LEGAL activity which the government chooses to regulate in that the government reserves the right to levy taxes and determine age of appropriateness consistent with community standards (unless that community is NC, VA, or KY).
I think gambling is bad and that the government should not encourage it (say lotteries) but it should not prohibit an activity which the majority of people can participate in without losing their life savings. Accordingly, the government should reserve the right to regulate commerce . . . if not you wind up with S&L collapses, pyramid schemes, Enrons, WorldComs, and Harkken Energy-like fiascos.
I don't want the state/feds to be anyone's mother but liberal smoking/alcohol laws are perverse b/c they are clear threat to the public health. If you want a 1/5 of vodka and a carton Cowboy Killers a day . . . be my guest. But what makes you think you have a right for your leisure activity to be cheap or on public display?!
How does public drinking/smoking correlate with the price of tobacco?
Taxation to curtail underage smoking does nothing to solve the underlying problem that it is the parent's job to make sure their kids don't smoke, not the government's job. Raising the taxes on alcohol or tobacco doesn't make these subtances any less of a threat to public health. Now, I'm in agreement that government shouldn't subsidize the tobacco industry any more than they subsidize other farming industries. However, by imposing sin taxes government is essentially making a moral judgement on what I do. Government tax legislation tells me that certain things are "good", like charities and churches (which I agree with) and that alcohol and tobacco are bad. Now, I don't need the government to make this sort of moral judgement. I know that smoking and drinking is bad for me, but if I want to do it anyway, shouldn't I be allowed to?
I think we could make more of a case for outlawing alcohol. I see so much alcohol abuse in college students that it is rediculous. Drunk driving claims so many lives each year, and yet the government does so little to try to curtail it. On the other hand, so much money is poured into anti-smoking ads. However, we can't outlaw alcohol for everyone because a small portion of the population is stupid.
Ryan
Taxation to curtail underage smoking does nothing to solve the underlying problem that it is the parent's job to make sure their kids don't smoke, not the government's job. Raising the taxes on alcohol or tobacco doesn't make these subtances any less of a threat to public health. Now, I'm in agreement that government shouldn't subsidize the tobacco industry any more than they subsidize other farming industries. However, by imposing sin taxes government is essentially making a moral judgement on what I do. Government tax legislation tells me that certain things are "good", like charities and churches (which I agree with) and that alcohol and tobacco are bad. Now, I don't need the government to make this sort of moral judgement. I know that smoking and drinking is bad for me, but if I want to do it anyway, shouldn't I be allowed to?
I think we could make more of a case for outlawing alcohol. I see so much alcohol abuse in college students that it is rediculous. Drunk driving claims so many lives each year, and yet the government does so little to try to curtail it. On the other hand, so much money is poured into anti-smoking ads. However, we can't outlaw alcohol for everyone because a small portion of the population is stupid.
Ryan
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 55,853
- 13,965
- 146
Freedom.
BTW, I don't drink more than a few times a year nor do smoke... anything
But I'll be damned if I'll let the government control whether I can or not or rape me with taxes.
Yes, the government has subsidized these things. That does NOT mean it is time to rape the people and their rights. I can't see how you draw that connection. I also cannot see how you draw the connection between corruption and taxes. They are completely unrelated.
The connection isn't necessarily between corruption and taxes . . . moreso a connection between deregulation and corruption. When there are no rules, you can pretty much guarantee that bad people will do bad things. Granted, even highly regulated activities can run afoul of decency b/c bad people will twist the rules/process in their favor.
Subsidizing domestic production of food is defensible . . . to an extent. Subsidizing the production of tobacco is not, IMHO.
I would decriminalize reasonable MJ possession, prostitution in brothels (possibly call girls/masseuse
as well), and drug paraphernalia. Repeal all taxes on food, clothing, utilities but tax consumption of life's recreation (fast food, alcohol, cigarettes, MJ, hotels, etc). You are absolutely right that parents bare the brunt of responsibility for their children. But our government has spent so much time and effort making that job hard . . . why can't we give parents just a little bit of help for awhile?
NOTE: I did not mis-state my position on food . . . I don't consider fast food . . . food.:Q But if forced into a corner . . . yes I would base level of taxation on the healthiness of fast food. Subway Turkey on whole wheat w/o mayo (no tax). BK double broiler with cheese (10%).
Subsidizing domestic production of food is defensible . . . to an extent. Subsidizing the production of tobacco is not, IMHO.
Many localities have public drinking laws (open container). The stated purpose is to limit consumption to private venues or abodes. Many localities also have smoking laws designed to restrict smoking to well-ventilated areas (typically outdoors). The purpose is to limit exposure to harmful emissions. Regardless of the stated purposes, when you make an activity inconvenient it typically declines. Taxation is just another form of inconvenience.
I would actually disagree. I've seen the short- and long-term consequences of the pervasive nature of alcohol but I don't consider prohibition a solution. I would actually lower the drinking age to 19 and raise the smoking age to 19. I would then make it illegal to sell cigarettes by the carton EXCEPT at the ABC store now called ATBC. If you want a six pack and some Lucky Strike you can go to any convenience store. If you want Tanqueray and a carton of Cowgirl Killers you have to go to the ATBC store.
I would decriminalize reasonable MJ possession, prostitution in brothels (possibly call girls/masseuse
NOTE: I did not mis-state my position on food . . . I don't consider fast food . . . food.:Q But if forced into a corner . . . yes I would base level of taxation on the healthiness of fast food. Subway Turkey on whole wheat w/o mayo (no tax). BK double broiler with cheese (10%).
Good for you . . . it's nice to hear it when people choose healthy lifestyles . . . assuming of course your diet is good, you exercise daily, get plenty of sleep, hug your loved ones, and avoid unnecessary stress.
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 55,853
- 13,965
- 146
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Good for you . . . it's nice to hear it when people choose healthy lifestyles . . . assuming of course your diet is good, you exercise daily, get plenty of sleep, hug your loved ones, and avoid unnecessary stress.
My diet is as good as I need it to be, I get plenty of exercise (I'll be lifting with a cold today
), I had 8 1/2 hours of fitful sleep last night, I hugged my GF and my cat today, and my only stresses are this cold, and your nannyism. 
- Nov 19, 2001
- 30,322
- 4
- 0
I didn't say they could make them quit, I said if they wanted them to quit. I'm talking intentions here, not actual compliance. The fact is that the states saw this as nothing more than a money grab, and based state budgets on the money. Again, spending money they hadn't even received.
- Nov 19, 2001
- 30,322
- 4
- 0
And how does my argument lose credibility with that statement.
I don't smoke, never have, never will. Don't care for it and I see it as a disgusting habit. But what is more of a disgusting habit is the states and Feds taxing anything and everything that moves, and in this case, under the guise of helping the children (Texas started a children's medical program with the money they were to receive). It's ridiculous and now they're complaining that not enough money is coming in from cigerette taxes. oh, what a shame.
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
The connection isn't necessarily between corruption and taxes . . . moreso a connection between deregulation and corruption. When there are no rules, you can pretty much guarantee that bad people will do bad things. Granted, even highly regulated activities can run afoul of decency b/c bad people will twist the rules/process in their favor.
Subsidizing domestic production of food is defensible . . . to an extent. Subsidizing the production of tobacco is not, IMHO.
Many localities have public drinking laws (open container). The stated purpose is to limit consumption to private venues or abodes. Many localities also have smoking laws designed to restrict smoking to well-ventilated areas (typically outdoors). The purpose is to limit exposure to harmful emissions. Regardless of the stated purposes, when you make an activity inconvenient it typically declines. Taxation is just another form of inconvenience.
I would actually disagree. I've seen the short- and long-term consequences of the pervasive nature of alcohol but I don't consider prohibition a solution. I would actually lower the drinking age to 19 and raise the smoking age to 19. I would then make it illegal to sell cigarettes by the carton EXCEPT at the ABC store now called ATBC. If you want a six pack and some Lucky Strike you can go to any convenience store. If you want Tanqueray and a carton of Cowgirl Killers you have to go to the ATBC store.
I would decriminalize reasonable MJ possession, prostitution in brothels (possibly call girls/masseuseas well), and drug paraphernalia. Repeal all taxes on food, clothing, utilities but tax consumption of life's recreation (fast food, alcohol, cigarettes, MJ, hotels, etc). You are absolutely right that parents bare the brunt of responsibility for their children. But our government has spent so much time and effort making that job hard . . . why can't we give parents just a little bit of help for awhile?
NOTE: I did not mis-state my position on food . . . I don't consider fast food . . . food.:Q But if forced into a corner . . . yes I would base level of taxation on the healthiness of fast food. Subway Turkey on whole wheat w/o mayo (no tax). BK double broiler with cheese (10%).
Don't get me wrong here... I completely disagree with the idea of prohibition for alcohol. I'm just saying that demonizing the tobacco industry while allowing the liquor industry to sell poison is rather hypocritical. I've seen dorm rooms with 1.75L "handles" of Bicardi lining the walls near the ceiling, stacked sometimes two or three bottles deep. I guess the difference is that one can enjoy alcohol in moderation, but there is no such thing as moderation in cigerettes.
Now, that being said, we have some different ideas on where these products will be sold, and what will and will not be taxed. I do agree with you that basic necessities, such as food, water, electricity, natural gas, heating oil, etc, shouldn't be subject to sales tax. But we digress...
Also, why change the legal ages to 19? Why not 18? Granted I'm only 23 and don't have kids, but in my opinion if our country can call upon an 18 year old to fight and die for his/her country, that person should be considered an adult and should have every right that adults have. They should be able to go out and have a smoke, a beer, and cast a ballot before going off to fight.
Ryan
Actually, no. Its a GREAT day. Big Tobacco is EVIL.
If they didn't have so much influence in government, they'd be destroyed. Bastards. My father started smoking when he was 14.
Nobody understood what the dangers were...
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter