Tax hike on tobacco takes hold

[olds]

Wrong thread

 

[GuitarDaddy]

I love this game where we get to tax everything that we find unhealthy, immoral, wasteful

My list is long

I',m with the Pope and don't believe in birth control, so condums should cost $1000 each, if you heathens want to play you gotta play

To pay for "fat ass" health care which is a bigger number than cig related health care, we need to tax fast food places out of business and make a nice meal at a reasturant $200 per person, and prohibitively tax fattening foods and ingredients at the grocery stores. Force everybody to eat right.

I despise foriegn cars and foriegn car fanboys so lets go protectionist on their asses and levy a $15000 import tariff on anything thay looks like a foreign car. That should help the US auto industry and raise alot of tax revenue from the really hard headed fanboys.

I beleive in the right to bear arms but don't think it should be cheap. Require a $500yr permit fee for each firearem owned, and make it illegal to buy firearms or ammo without a serial#/caliber specific permit. This would solve many crimes and gun smuggling problems and raise lots of revenue. Boy the NRA will love this one:Q

I would go on, but you get my point.

 

[Kwatt]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Kwatt

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Kwatt
60,000,000 Americans die per year due to tobacco use per the American Cancer Society.

I assume if your number is correct that the ACS number is a global number.

ACS Link under "The Cost of Tobacco" One in five Americans extrapolating from ~300,000,000 Americans += ~60,000,000 Americans

Interestingly they claim "47 million adults were current smokers" I guess second hand smoke got the other ~13,000,000.


refer to previous post about "Anyone knows" and "what they likely mean"


...

Remind me not to argue anything with you. kthx

Why not? I may be misinformed or have been misunderstanding, have bad info or just plain wrong.
I would prefer to be corrected or correctly informed. I would rather make a bad decision with correct information than a decision based on ignorance.



.
.
EDIT correction: I would rather make a "good" decision. If I make a decision that is "bad" I would rather it not be through ignorance.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Kwatt

Harvey a question please. Do you believe that 60,000,000 Americans die every year?

Revisiting the question now that I'm not in a rush to be elsewhere. Sorry I couldn't give you a better answer earlier.

I found the original document that is the source for the quote. It's from 1999, and the full quote says:

Newsletter

Tobacco Hits America in Its Pocketbook

The effect of tobacco use in America is extraordinary?both in the number of lives that are lost and in financial costs as well. Without a doubt, the number of people who die or suffer illness because of its use best measures the cost of tobacco to society. One in five Americans die each year from tobacco use. The annual American death toll from tobacco is estimated at 438,000.

Tobacco use also drains the U.S. economy of more than $167 billion in health care costs and lost productivity. Health care expenditures caused directly by smoking totaled $75.5 billion in 1998. This translates to $1,623 in excess medical costs per adult smoker in 1999.

For each pack of cigarettes sold in 1999, $3.45 was spent on medical care due to smoking and $3.73 was lost in productivity, for a total cost to society of $7.18 per pack

I said, last time, I didn't know how they determined their "one in five" stat. The full quote makes it clear that this means 438,000 deaths are one fifth of around 2.2 million deaths. Your link to stats for 2005 list the number of deaths at 2,448,017, which is in line with the stats from the ACS.

Other info from the previous page also makes the case;

Adult Material

E-Mail - inserts

• In the US, cigarette smoking alone causes at least 30% of cancer deaths. If you smoke, the best way to lower your chances of developing the disease is to quit. To double your chances of quitting successfully, call the American Cancer Society at 1-800-ACS-2345. Resources are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
  
• Quitting smoking is hard to do and often takes more than one quit attempt. Research indicates that smokers are most successful in quitting permanently if they have help from a combination of methods, including nicotine replacement therapies, counseling, and a network of family and friends. For more information about these options, contact the American Cancer Society at 1-800-ACS-2345 or www.cancer.org.
  
• Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among both men and women. An estimated 161,840 people will die from the disease this year. Cigarette smoking is by far the most important risk factor in the development of the disease. If you use tobacco, talk with your doctor about your risk for cancer and how quitting may reduce that risk. For more information, contact your American Cancer Society at 1-800-ACS0-2345 or visit www.cancer.org.
  
• Did you know that more than 90% of adult smokers surveyed were already smoking by age 18? Talk to your kids today about the dangers of smoking and tobacco use. For tips, contact the American Cancer Society at
  1-800-ACS-2345 or visit www.cancer.org.
  
• Even if you don?t smoke, you may still be vulnerable to smoking-related illnesses. Secondhand smoke contains numerous carcinogens and causes heart disease and respiratory infections. To reduce the chances that secondhand smoke will affect your health or your family?s, get involved in smoke-free community efforts. To find out more, call the American Cancer Society at 1-800-ACS-2345 or visit www.cancer.org.

This data is ten years old so obviously, the totals have changed, but the message is still the same, and it's the same message every other credible source presents -- Stopping smoking saves lives and money.

In the context of the OP's topic of the tobacco tax bill, the measure is a clear winnner. It provides sorely needed revenue that will be used to provide health insurance for kids, it provides a financial incentive to smokers to quit, those paying the tax are clearly a major cause of the problems at which the revenues and incentives are targeted, and the amount they pay is proportional to their contribution to those problems.

 

[Adam8281]

Watching people on this thread accept as plausible the "fact" that 60,000,000 Americans die per from tobacco is an AT memory that will bring joy to me for years to come.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Adam8281

Watching people on this thread accept as plausible the "fact" that 60,000,000 Americans die per from tobacco is an AT memory that will bring joy to me for years to come.

The children are so easily amused.

See my post above yours. That 60,000,000 stat came from an incorrect reading of the number from the American Cancer Society. I didn't have time, earlier, to check for clarification, which is why I just got to posting the explanation above your post.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Adam8281

Watching people on this thread accept as plausible the "fact" that 60,000,000 Americans die per from tobacco is an AT memory that will bring joy to me for years to come.

The children are so easily amused.

See my post above yours. That 60,000,000 stat came from an incorrect reading of the number from the American Cancer Society. I didn't have time, earlier, to check for clarification, which is why I just got to posting the explanation above your post.

Then maybe you shouldn't have gone all psycho on TLC for pointing out your "mistake".

 

[Kwatt]

I am just going to quote the part I wish to discuss. I am not quoting the stuff that is justification for the tax.

Originally posted by: Harvey

In the context of the OP's topic of the tobacco tax bill, the measure is a clear winnner. It provides sorely needed revenue that will be used to provide health insurance for kids, it provides a financial incentive to smokers to quit, those paying the tax are clearly a major cause of the problems at which the revenues and incentives are targeted, and the amount they pay is proportional to their contribution to those problems.

Is it acceptable to you to have a targeted tax that does not support the reason for the tax?
If this money were going to pay for the bailout of GM would you be as supportive?
Or only because "It's for the children"?
When congress was trying to pass the 90% tax on the bonuses of the bailout companies. Did you agree with that?

Would it be acceptable to you to tax personal automobile gasoline because of the damage caused to the environment , road and highway system and to automobile deaths. And use that money to support Health insurance for the unemployed? Or for the same children the tobacco tax is going towards?

If a tax on gas is bad example substitute alcohol, greasy fried food , sugar or anything else a person could live without and survive.

We have a general tax fund.
We have SS tax and Medicare / Medicaid tax and road use tax. Is there any other tax that targets and is not used for the target?
If a tax is needed "for the children" take it out of the general fund. Or come up with another targeted income tax.
He's betting he'll gain as many with the "for the children" supporters as he'll lose with a targeted tax. Tobacco users seem to be passive about the use of tobacco. I am, if you don't want me smoking in your house I will not. If you don't want me smoking at your business I will not. If you want to stop me from smoking in my house BRING HELP. If you want to make me pay for smoking because of the "damages" it causes then use the money to fix the damages!
This is a end run around a campaign promise. It targets a unpopular and vilified part of the population. And benefits a specific part of the population.
When people challenged Bush's policy a lot were accused of being or of supporting terrorism.
When people challenge Obama's policy will they be accused of hating children?
If this money were going to pay for the bailout he might have his ass handed to him in the next election. Like ol' whatzis name. "No New Taxes"



..

 

[Jiggz]

Originally posted by: sactoking

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: Jack Flash
They're financing healthcare for children with the money raised by the tax hike. Good or bad?

Lets follow this to its logical conclusion as outlined by the OP. How are you going to finance health care for children if everyone quits smoking?

If everyone quits smoking, health care costs go down across the board as we will no longer have to subsidize smoking-related illness.

So you basically mean people should also stop having unprotected sex so we can stop subsidizing abortion?Or we should start taxing unprotected sex since we subsidize abortion?

 

[Jiggz]

Originally posted by: Jack Flash

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Next is beer and alcohol. Then it will be fatty foods like hamburgers and pizza. After a while someone will decide that the internet is bad for your health, a proposition that can easily be reasoned since sitting on your ass and typing/clicking a mouse does nothing to promote your health, so they raise taxes sky high on internet usage.

After all, it's for your own good, people, and clearly the government should be able to tax the crap out of something legal to force you to do what they believe is in your best interests.

Let's slippery slope the other way.

Government lowers taxes on tobacco and alcohol to almost nothing. Supply is through the roof. Kids as young as 10 start smoking and drinking developing emphysema and cerosis of the liver before their twenties. Society is in ruins. But, at least it was in the interest of personal freedoms.

Now try the same hypothetical situation you used here with the argument of legalizing pot! Then remember we already have laws about selling tobacco and alcohol to minors so your hypothetical example holds no "water". So when are we going to tax "pork" or processed meat sky high since it causes about the same amount of health issues as tobacco?

 

[Jiggz]

Originally posted by: eleison
My aunt is in the hospital. The doctors think she has stage 4 lung cancer. I say, 'F' it; tax cigs to the max to the point of banning it. If you want to smoke, sorry, tough shiet. If you need to smoke (drug dependency), government should give you patches instead.

Sorry to hear about your aunt, but it was a personal choice. If tobacco was banned and illegalized, I'm quite sure there are other things out there that could cause a different form of cancer. Now that doesn't mean the rest of us cannot have the same choice like your aunt did or had. It's all a matter of personal choice. The reason we whine about sky high tax on tobacco because it restricts available personal choices or what we refer to as "freedom".

 

[0marTheZealot]

As long as I can buy a box of cigars for ~100 bucks, I can stomach this. People gotta get smart about tobacco usage. Pipe tobacco and cigars cost me about 150/month, andd the quality is much higher.

Plus, you don't actually inhale the smoke so you spare your lungs a lot of stress.

 

[NoStateofMind]

You know, I was talking to someone today about this tax and it came up that this money will be borrowed against to fund other things. Just like SS was ransacked for other "important" pork barrel BS.

 

[Kwatt]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
You know, I was talking to someone today about this tax and it came up that this money will be borrowed against to fund other things. Just like SS was ransacked for other "important" pork barrel BS.

:Q

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
You know, I was talking to someone today about this tax and it came up that this money will be borrowed against to fund other things. Just like SS was ransacked for other "important" pork barrel BS.

If we end up passing a budget with a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit it's readily apparent that we'll be borrowing against just about anything we can.

 

[Bitek]

Whaa whhaaa whhaa whaa. the addicts don't want to pay for their drug use.

Smoke less then bitches. Weed cost $50/oz back in college, and some states it was jail time for being caught w/ it. Usually that correlated w/ % GOP voters. So, suck it.
You can still smoke and fuck your nasty selves up, take constant smoke breaks at work while the non-addicts work, and take more sick time and health benefits bc you wrecked yourself, and litter as half you motherfuckers just throw that shit out the window as you are too fucking lazy to put it in the trash can. Its just going to cost you more now, and still a cheap drug at that, so QYB.


Personally Id be happy w/ a $500 fine for littering w/ cig butts, adn $100 for standing outside the door to a store and blowing that crap in peoples faces as they walk out as you are too lazy and rude to walk away a bit. Vigorously enforced. Deficit solved.

Medical treatment for children vs Cheaper drugs for whiny and self-absorbed drug addicts?
hmmmm......

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom
This is a tax on the poor by Obama and the democrats. The biggest rates of increase were on small cigars and loose tobacco for rolling cigarettes. Heck they even increased the taxes on cigarette paper.

If it's a tax on the poor, then what's the problem?
Poor people barely pay any taxes. Isn't that the republican argument? They should be celebrating this increase.

 

[nakedfrog]

A lot of you "liberals" are acting more like authoritarians. You scare me.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
I bought a cartoon of cigs a month ago for $48. I smoked the last one this morning around 9:00. I'm a tight bastard and I'll be go to hell if I'm going to pay $7 for a lousy pack of cigarettes, so I'm quitting. Wish me luck!!

24 hours without a smoke!! LOL, I'm drooling pretty hard for one though

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
I bought a cartoon of cigs a month ago for $48. I smoked the last one this morning around 9:00. I'm a tight bastard and I'll be go to hell if I'm going to pay $7 for a lousy pack of cigarettes, so I'm quitting. Wish me luck!!

24 hours without a smoke!! LOL, I'm drooling pretty hard for one though

Good luck. People I know who quit say it was really hard but rewarding.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Listen up, trollboy....

:lips: my (_!_).

Impossible. Your head is in the way.

owned....lol

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

There are people that have smoked 2 packs a day for most of their life and lived to be well over 100.

Which says nothing about how many MORE people would have lived longer and enjoyed a better quality of life for those years if they hadn't smoked.

Most doctors will also admit that a cig or two a day is not really detrimental to your health.

I doubt that. Got proof?

Beyond that, tobacco is highly addictive, and very few smokers stop at "a cig or two a day."

Maybe they didn't want to live longer. Not everybody wants to live forever Harvey.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

There are people that have smoked 2 packs a day for most of their life and lived to be well over 100.

Which says nothing about how many MORE people would have lived longer and enjoyed a better quality of life for those years if they hadn't smoked.

Most doctors will also admit that a cig or two a day is not really detrimental to your health.

I doubt that. Got proof?

Beyond that, tobacco is highly addictive, and very few smokers stop at "a cig or two a day."

Maybe they didn't want to live longer. Not everybody wants to live forever Harvey.

And who the fuck are you to decide for everyone else? :shocked:

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

There are people that have smoked 2 packs a day for most of their life and lived to be well over 100.

Which says nothing about how many MORE people would have lived longer and enjoyed a better quality of life for those years if they hadn't smoked.

Most doctors will also admit that a cig or two a day is not really detrimental to your health.

I doubt that. Got proof?

Beyond that, tobacco is highly addictive, and very few smokers stop at "a cig or two a day."

Maybe they didn't want to live longer. Not everybody wants to live forever Harvey.

And who the fuck are you to decide for everyone else? :shocked:

Aren't you the one doing the deciding? And watch you're language with me.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

There are people that have smoked 2 packs a day for most of their life and lived to be well over 100.

Which says nothing about how many MORE people would have lived longer and enjoyed a better quality of life for those years if they hadn't smoked.

Most doctors will also admit that a cig or two a day is not really detrimental to your health.

I doubt that. Got proof?

Beyond that, tobacco is highly addictive, and very few smokers stop at "a cig or two a day."

Maybe they didn't want to live longer. Not everybody wants to live forever Harvey.

And who the fuck are you to decide for everyone else? :shocked:

Aren't you the one doing the deciding?

With respect to the OP's topic, no, smokers decide for themselves whether they want to continue smoking. If so, the tax measure funds health insurance for kids, which is a remedy to the problems their smoking causes. No need to repeat all of the specifics already posted in the rest of the thread.

And watch you're language with me.

If it means that much to you, you can watch it for yourself.