Wow...new cigarette tax in NYC

SampSon

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2006
7,160
1
0
NY is ruthlessly taking advantage of people's addiction.
The way the state handles the taxation of cigarettes is inherantly hypocritical.
 

DainBramaged

Lifer
Jun 19, 2003
23,449
38
91
I bet people would change their minds about this tax if it were applied to *their* preferred addiction, be it chocolate, beer, fast food, or video games.
 

SAWYER

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,745
42
91
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I bet people would change their minds about this tax if it were applied to *their* preferred addiction, be it chocolate, beer, fast food, or video games.

Agreed
 

RichardE

Banned
Dec 31, 2005
10,246
2
0
Good. People should pay more for there portion of the health care related costs of smoking.
 

GagHalfrunt

Lifer
Apr 19, 2001
25,297
2,000
126
When I quit they were approaching $2 a pack for the premium brands here in Connecticut, but you could find cartons for $14-15. Less than a year later the taxes got jacked up and they were more like $4 a pack and $30 a carton. Now $50 a carton is commonplace. In NYC it sounds more like $75.

People, QUIT!!!!
 

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,647
26
91
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I bet people would change their minds about this tax if it were applied to *their* preferred addiction, be it chocolate, beer, fast food, or video games.

Wake me up when that happens...

Until then, HA-HA
 
T

Tim

Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I bet people would change their minds about this tax if it were applied to *their* preferred addiction, be it chocolate, beer, fast food, or video games.

I think it should only be applied to addictions that are a known direct link to cancer.
 

duragezic

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
11,234
4
81
This morning, this rugged looking old machinist guy at work who is always out smoking was bitching about the tax increase (I'm in NY state). He kept saying the same damn thing over, namely they were "scum bums" and that "he/she's a democrat", which he said those phrases at least 4 times each, like a broken record. It was funny as hell. He seems squirrelly as shit.

But anyway he said he was gonna drive to PA to get smokes, as again he didn't want to give money to those scum bum democrats.

I agree that tax blows, but I mostly roll my own. Tin of Bali Shag (a very nice tobacco, not that 1 pound bag of gambler shit) + 200 tubes is like $18. And correct me if I'm wrong, but rolling tobacco isn't taxed under the same class as the one that this new tax is for, no?
 

Kirby64

Golden Member
Apr 24, 2006
1,485
0
76
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I bet people would change their minds about this tax if it were applied to *their* preferred addiction, be it chocolate, beer, fast food, or video games.

The difference between cigarettes and video games is that video games won't kill you even if you do play them obsessively. (starvation/sleep deprivation don't count)

As for the others, although they do cause health issues if taken in excessive, I'd venture to say that they do not cause health issues as quickly or as severely as cigarettes. (barring alcohol...)
 

SampSon

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2006
7,160
1
0
Originally posted by: Kirby64
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I bet people would change their minds about this tax if it were applied to *their* preferred addiction, be it chocolate, beer, fast food, or video games.

The difference between cigarettes and video games is that video games won't kill you even if you do play them obsessively. (starvation/sleep deprivation don't count)

As for the others, although they do cause health issues if taken in excessive, I'd venture to say that they do not cause health issues as quickly or as severely as cigarettes. (barring alcohol...)
Obesity accounts for a larger portion of heath care costs than smoking.
 

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,647
26
91
Originally posted by: SampSon
Originally posted by: Kirby64
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I bet people would change their minds about this tax if it were applied to *their* preferred addiction, be it chocolate, beer, fast food, or video games.

The difference between cigarettes and video games is that video games won't kill you even if you do play them obsessively. (starvation/sleep deprivation don't count)

As for the others, although they do cause health issues if taken in excessive, I'd venture to say that they do not cause health issues as quickly or as severely as cigarettes. (barring alcohol...)
Obesity accounts for a larger portion of heath care costs than smoking.

Fine, let's tax lardasses! In fact, I think that some companies do just that by charging them higher insurance premiums.
 

BigJ

Lifer
Nov 18, 2001
21,335
1
81
Originally posted by: RichardE
Good. People should pay more for there portion of the health care related costs of smoking.

The problem is the NYS cigarette tax isn't about covering healthcare. Before the increase, the taxes collected exceeded the extra costs per year that smokers made the state incur.

It's nothing more than exploiting an addiction and regulating a person's own personal choices through taxation.
 

SAWYER

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,745
42
91
Originally posted by: BigJ
Originally posted by: RichardE
Good. People should pay more for there portion of the health care related costs of smoking.

The problem is the NYS cigarette tax isn't about covering healthcare. Before the increase, the taxes collected exceeded the extra costs per year that smokers made the state incur.

It's nothing more than exploiting an addiction and regulating a person's own personal choices through taxation.

Wow good point
 

GagHalfrunt

Lifer
Apr 19, 2001
25,297
2,000
126
Originally posted by: George P Burdell
I hear the cigarette smuggling market is picking up in NY.

I'll bet. Even at current gas prices it's worth it to drive down to South Carolina and pick up a van load to sell. You can undercut NYC prices by $1.50 a pack and still make $2.50 a pack profit.
 

DainBramaged

Lifer
Jun 19, 2003
23,449
38
91
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: SampSon
Originally posted by: Kirby64
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
I bet people would change their minds about this tax if it were applied to *their* preferred addiction, be it chocolate, beer, fast food, or video games.

The difference between cigarettes and video games is that video games won't kill you even if you do play them obsessively. (starvation/sleep deprivation don't count)

As for the others, although they do cause health issues if taken in excessive, I'd venture to say that they do not cause health issues as quickly or as severely as cigarettes. (barring alcohol...)
Obesity accounts for a larger portion of heath care costs than smoking.

Fine, let's tax lardasses! In fact, I think that some companies do just that by charging them higher insurance premiums.

Instead of that, let's not tax those things at all! It's sort of a free country, why do we have things like a sin tax or an addiction tax? Now, if insurance companies want to charge them more, so be it. It's their decision but things like sin taxes are ridiculous in my humble opinion.
 

SampSon

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2006
7,160
1
0
Originally posted by: Sawyer
Originally posted by: BigJ
Originally posted by: RichardE
Good. People should pay more for there portion of the health care related costs of smoking.

The problem is the NYS cigarette tax isn't about covering healthcare. Before the increase, the taxes collected exceeded the extra costs per year that smokers made the state incur.

It's nothing more than exploiting an addiction and regulating a person's own personal choices through taxation.

Wow good point
That was my point further up in this thread. I didn't articulate it because I could write a lot on the topic.

Basically the state is exploiting people's addiction. Then they are basing portions of the state budget on the tax revenue generated from cigarette taxes. They are doing this all while claming that higher taxes and bullshit state sponsored smoking cessation programs are making headway into decreasing over all tobacco use. They also make strong claims that it's their goal to get people to quit smoking. It's inherantly hypocritical, but smoking has so successfully been demonized that most people are to brainwashed to actually see what the state is doing and they are cheering it on.

No one with half a brain believes that the state actually WANTS to get rid of the tax revenue generated from tobacco. If they successfully did cut smoking down to nominal levels, they would shift that lost tax burden onto something else and find some way to sell it to the people for a profit.

Originally posted by: NFS4
Fine, let's tax lardasses! In fact, I think that some companies do just that by charging them higher insurance premiums.
Yes, and increasing amount of insurance companies are now charging higher premiums for risks such as obesity and smoking. Though insurance companies can't really be fairly compared to state imposed taxes.

If they want to raise the taxes, then do so, but the way they go about it is just wrong.

 

BigJ

Lifer
Nov 18, 2001
21,335
1
81
Originally posted by: SampSon
Originally posted by: Sawyer
Originally posted by: BigJ
Originally posted by: RichardE
Good. People should pay more for there portion of the health care related costs of smoking.

The problem is the NYS cigarette tax isn't about covering healthcare. Before the increase, the taxes collected exceeded the extra costs per year that smokers made the state incur.

It's nothing more than exploiting an addiction and regulating a person's own personal choices through taxation.

Wow good point
That was my point further up in this thread. I didn't articulate it because I could write a lot on the topic.

Basically the state is exploiting people's addiction. Then they are basing portions of the state budget on the tax revenue generated from cigarette taxes. They are doing this all while claming that higher taxes and bullshit state sponsored smoking cessation programs are making headway into decreasing over all tobacco use. It's inherantly hypocritical, but smoking has so successfully been demonized that most people are to brainwashed to actually see what the state is doing and they are cheering it on.

No one with half a brain believes that the state actually WANTS to get rid of the tax revenue generated from tobacco. If they successfully did cut smoking down to nominal levels, they would shift that lost tax burden onto something else and find some way to sell it to the people for a profit.

Originally posted by: NFS4
Fine, let's tax lardasses! In fact, I think that some companies do just that by charging them higher insurance premiums.
Yes, and increasing amount of insurance companies are now charging higher premiums for risks such as obesity and smoking. Though insurance companies can't really be fairly compared to state imposed taxes.

If they want to raise the taxes, then do so, but the way they go about it is just wrong.

:thumbsup:
 

SparkyJJO

Lifer
May 16, 2002
13,357
7
81
What is it with NY, they must be getting greedy. First wanting all etailers to collect sales tax even the out of state ones (which by the way is ILLEGAL for them to do), now this...

Let me guess, Hillary's campaign needs more money.