February 6, 200917 yr SO... I'd like to point out the 500 lb gorilla in the room... How are we going to maintain funding on what is the newest government entitlement program when everyone quits smoking and there's no more cigarette taxes to be collected? The tobacco companies have done too much research and too many people are actually addicted. The cost of diminishing returns will not kick in for a long time.
February 6, 200917 yr Author Yep, all those are the same as a pack of smokes. Got it. It is a luxury tax. Nobody needs to smoke, people need shelter, people need heat, people need clothing, people need transportation, people need to make a living, nobody NEEDS to smoke and as a matter of fact people NEED to NOT smoke. A middle class smokers' taxes will not go up, but the tax on cigarettes will. Rent an apartment with HUD assistance, get your clothing from a charity, ride the bus, and draw welfare and avoid taxes altogether. Taxes are taxes and Obama just raised them on alot of poor people. That my friends is a fact.
February 6, 200917 yr Author The tobacco companies have done too much research and too many people are actually addicted. The cost of diminishing returns will not kick in for a long time. So it is ok to tax them for making a choice but then we blame the tobacco companies for getting them addicted. So who's fault is it the evil tobacco companies or the people who chose to start smoking?
February 6, 200917 yr :thumb: I have no problem with that. The tobacco companies have done too much research and too many people are actually addicted. So you're happy that BOTH the tobacco companies AND the GOVERNMENT are "taking advantage" of people with an addiction???? I'm surprised at both of you.
February 6, 200917 yr So you're happy that BOTH the tobacco companies AND the GOVERNMENT are "taking advantage" of people with an addiction???? I'm surprised at both of you. I never said that what the tobacco cos are doing is good, and I am certainly not happy about. i have already lost several family members to the cancer sticks. I am so anti smoking that I wish the federal govt would jack the price up and then the state of KY would add its 70 cents. The one thing that most of the kids in my school have in common is smoking. They were raised in it and they are caught in it. To me, tobacco is the gateway drug. I would almost guarantee that anyone who has smoked a joint, FIRST smoke a winston. I think second hand smoke creates learning problems in young kids. I think it impacts attention span and is simply a negative factor in the lives of young people. The sooner it is eradicated (pipe dream, pun intended) the better. FWIW - I am the most hypocritical in all of my thinking when it comes to tobacco. I am completely aware of the "choice" it is for people. And I know that my argument that it effects the lives of young people is the same one made for/against abortion. Just wanted everyone to know that I am aware of my two-facedness.
February 6, 200917 yr So we're gonna increase taxes on tobacco to discourage people from smoking... and we're going to make abortion funding more available to encourage people to get them? It's interesting to note that everyone seems to agree that increasing taxes on things discourages more of those things. I can't wait to see what happens when we increase taxes on businesses and individuals actually generating profits.
February 6, 200917 yr Get used to it, it will be this way for at least the next four years. Or until all the productive people get tired of working just to feed a bottomless federal pit and decide to prop their feet up too.
February 6, 200917 yr We could just continue with the Republican method of budget management you know the "Spend More But Cut Taxes So We Run A Higher Deficit Selling Our Future Because We Are All Over 50 And Will Be Dead Before We Have To Pay Up Anyway" method. It's been working real swell if you couldn't tell.
February 6, 200917 yr We could just continue with the Republican method of budget management you know the "Spend More But Cut Taxes So We Run A Higher Deficit Selling Our Future Because We Are All Over 50 And Will Be Dead Before We Have To Pay Up Anyway" method. It's been working real swell if you couldn't tell. They may have been Republicans,...but they were definately NOT Conservatives.
February 6, 200917 yr Author We could just continue with the Republican method of budget management you know the "Spend More But Cut Taxes So We Run A Higher Deficit Selling Our Future Because We Are All Over 50 And Will Be Dead Before We Have To Pay Up Anyway" method. It's been working real swell if you couldn't tell. Once again this has nothing to do with the fact that Obama flat out lied when he said he would not raise taxes on those making less that $250k. Keep deflecting but if it walks like a duck...................................
February 6, 200917 yr He did not raise taxes on people or their incomes. He raised taxes on a luxury product. Spin it any way YOU like it, but that doesn't make it the same.
February 6, 200917 yr He did not raise taxes on people or their incomes. He raised taxes on a luxury product. Spin it any way YOU like it, but that doesn't make it the same. Interesting you say "luxury product". I'm not arguing with you here, but in terms of economics a "luxury product" is something in which quantity demanded goes up when income goes up. I'm going to try to find a demand curve for cigarettes now.....
February 6, 200917 yr Interesting you say "luxury product". I'm not arguing with you here, but in terms of economics a "luxury product" is something in which quantity demanded goes up when income goes up. I'm going to try to find a demand curve for cigarettes now..... Isn't anything we don't need a luxury?
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.