Cigarette Tax’s Unintended Consequences That EVERYBODY Saw Coming – Except Libs

[Vandalshandle]

The reason that cigarette taxes are so high is that it discourages smoking, especially among children making minimum wage at McDonalds. It has nothing to do with raising government revenue. And, it works. few kids take up smoking today, whereas when I was a kid, 48% of people 16 and over smoked. As a retired health insurance professional, I guarantee you that the taxes are saving tens of thousands, and probably hundreds of thousands of people from premature death. It is also keeping medical costs down. A lung transplant costs over half a million dollars.

So you think it's okay that government controls people via taxation? Think our founders would approve of this if they were still alive today?

What if conservatives gained a super major leadership in this country and decided to tax abortions? After all, abortions are the act of killing people. Let's tax abortions at $500.00 a pop. If it worked like cigarettes, we could greatly reduce the number of abortions we have every year.

That's interesting news. I was in high school in 1960, and a knew at least 4 girls that had abortions...except the doctors called the D&C's. So, you feel that putting doctors in prison is a good thing?

I have no idea where you got that from. What I said is that if you think it's acceptable for government to control people through taxation to save our society money, why not abortions? Would you approve of a conservative government controlling people's actions then?

I have no problem abiding by the law, as defined by the Supreme Court. I just believe in interpreting it leniently;

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The reason that cigarette taxes are so high is that it discourages smoking, especially among children making minimum wage at McDonalds. It has nothing to do with raising government revenue. And, it works. few kids take up smoking today, whereas when I was a kid, 48% of people 16 and over smoked. As a retired health insurance professional, I guarantee you that the taxes are saving tens of thousands, and probably hundreds of thousands of people from premature death. It is also keeping medical costs down. A lung transplant costs over half a million dollars.

So you think it's okay that government controls people via taxation? Think our founders would approve of this if they were still alive today?

What if conservatives gained a super major leadership in this country and decided to tax abortions? After all, abortions are the act of killing people. Let's tax abortions at $500.00 a pop. If it worked like cigarettes, we could greatly reduce the number of abortions we have every year.

That's interesting news. I was in high school in 1960, and a knew at least 4 girls that had abortions...except the doctors called the D&C's. So, you feel that putting doctors in prison is a good thing?

I have no idea where you got that from. What I said is that if you think it's acceptable for government to control people through taxation to save our society money, why not abortions? Would you approve of a conservative government controlling people's actions then?

I have no problem abiding by the law, as defined by the Supreme Court. I just believe in interpreting it leniently;

Well there is no law that says we can't tax people having abortions. So again, would you approve of that?

 

[Vandalshandle]

I'd have thought one of the consequences of the cost of cigarettes would be to make them too expensive for all but the most dedicated addict, thus reducing the number of cases of lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease, etc., etc., etc. and the concomitant costs to society as a whole.

So you would rather pay more in health care for a 100 million people living to a 100 years old?

That's another unintended consequence the OP and so far this thread didn't address.

Don't you remember that japaneese guy go on record saying old people of his country should just die because they are costing to much to Japan?

Correct. Assuming that people will retire at the age of 65, imagine the cost of Social Security and Medicare to keep them alive until 85. Then of course we have to consider what to do with these people who have no money or insurance for nursing home care. We taxpayers will have to foot the bill for that as well.

Oh the unfairness of those people who live too long! Another argument from the Right to kill our aged!

That sure flew right over your head. The point I was making is that there is no economic advantage to stop people from smoking or drinking. If we pressure people into leading a more healthy lifestyle, then we will age and somebody has to support us. If our government allows us to participate in unhealthy activity, we die much younger and that savings offsets what we would otherwise spend on treatment for smoking and drinking related illnesses.

In short, it's a wash. There is no economic advantage to stopping people from smoking or drinking.

And your own argument is flying over your own head. You are trying to put a dollar value on life. That is NOT what it is all about.

 

[Rustic]

The reason that cigarette taxes are so high is that it discourages smoking, especially among children making minimum wage at McDonalds. It has nothing to do with raising government revenue. And, it works. few kids take up smoking today, whereas when I was a kid, 48% of people 16 and over smoked. As a retired health insurance professional, I guarantee you that the taxes are saving tens of thousands, and probably hundreds of thousands of people from premature death. It is also keeping medical costs down. A lung transplant costs over half a million dollars.

So you think it's okay that government controls people via taxation? Think our founders would approve of this if they were still alive today?

What if conservatives gained a super major leadership in this country and decided to tax abortions? After all, abortions are the act of killing people. Let's tax abortions at $500.00 a pop. If it worked like cigarettes, we could greatly reduce the number of abortions we have every year.

That's interesting news. I was in high school in 1960, and a knew at least 4 girls that had abortions...except the doctors called the D&C's. So, you feel that putting doctors in prison is a good thing?

I have no idea where you got that from. What I said is that if you think it's acceptable for government to control people through taxation to save our society money, why not abortions? Would you approve of a conservative government controlling people's actions then?

I have no problem abiding by the law, as defined by the Supreme Court. I just believe in interpreting it leniently;

Well there is no law that says we can't tax people having abortions. So again, would you approve of that?

How about taxing speech??
The whole taxing everything under the sun, seems to be a double edge sword if we don't watch out.

 

[Vandalshandle]

The reason that cigarette taxes are so high is that it discourages smoking, especially among children making minimum wage at McDonalds. It has nothing to do with raising government revenue. And, it works. few kids take up smoking today, whereas when I was a kid, 48% of people 16 and over smoked. As a retired health insurance professional, I guarantee you that the taxes are saving tens of thousands, and probably hundreds of thousands of people from premature death. It is also keeping medical costs down. A lung transplant costs over half a million dollars.

So you think it's okay that government controls people via taxation? Think our founders would approve of this if they were still alive today?

What if conservatives gained a super major leadership in this country and decided to tax abortions? After all, abortions are the act of killing people. Let's tax abortions at $500.00 a pop. If it worked like cigarettes, we could greatly reduce the number of abortions we have every year.

That's interesting news. I was in high school in 1960, and a knew at least 4 girls that had abortions...except the doctors called the D&C's. So, you feel that putting doctors in prison is a good thing?

I have no idea where you got that from. What I said is that if you think it's acceptable for government to control people through taxation to save our society money, why not abortions? Would you approve of a conservative government controlling people's actions then?

I have no problem abiding by the law, as defined by the Supreme Court. I just believe in interpreting it leniently;

Well there is no law that says we can't tax people having abortions. So again, would you approve of that?

I am more concerned about the government taxing us for bowel movements.

Come on, Ray. Get real. You are floundering around in some sort of mythical "What if?...universe. What if pigs learn to fly and shit on us while we wait for a bus on Broadway?

 

[Rustic]

So you think it's okay that government controls people via taxation? Think our founders would approve of this if they were still alive today?

What if conservatives gained a super major leadership in this country and decided to tax abortions? After all, abortions are the act of killing people. Let's tax abortions at $500.00 a pop. If it worked like cigarettes, we could greatly reduce the number of abortions we have every year.

That's interesting news. I was in high school in 1960, and a knew at least 4 girls that had abortions...except the doctors called the D&C's. So, you feel that putting doctors in prison is a good thing?

I have no idea where you got that from. What I said is that if you think it's acceptable for government to control people through taxation to save our society money, why not abortions? Would you approve of a conservative government controlling people's actions then?

I have no problem abiding by the law, as defined by the Supreme Court. I just believe in interpreting it leniently;

Well there is no law that says we can't tax people having abortions. So again, would you approve of that?

I am more concerned about the government taxing us for bowel movements.

Come on, Ray. Get real. You are floundering around in some sort of mythical "What if?...universe. What if pigs learn to fly and shit on us while we wait for a bus on Broadway?

Pig control...

 

[Vandalshandle]

So you think it's okay that government controls people via taxation? Think our founders would approve of this if they were still alive today?

What if conservatives gained a super major leadership in this country and decided to tax abortions? After all, abortions are the act of killing people. Let's tax abortions at $500.00 a pop. If it worked like cigarettes, we could greatly reduce the number of abortions we have every year.

That's interesting news. I was in high school in 1960, and a knew at least 4 girls that had abortions...except the doctors called the D&C's. So, you feel that putting doctors in prison is a good thing?

I have no idea where you got that from. What I said is that if you think it's acceptable for government to control people through taxation to save our society money, why not abortions? Would you approve of a conservative government controlling people's actions then?

I have no problem abiding by the law, as defined by the Supreme Court. I just believe in interpreting it leniently;

Well there is no law that says we can't tax people having abortions. So again, would you approve of that?

How about taxing speech??
The whole taxing everything under the sun, seems to be a double edge sword if we don't watch out.

See post 145.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I'd have thought one of the consequences of the cost of cigarettes would be to make them too expensive for all but the most dedicated addict, thus reducing the number of cases of lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease, etc., etc., etc. and the concomitant costs to society as a whole.

So you would rather pay more in health care for a 100 million people living to a 100 years old?

That's another unintended consequence the OP and so far this thread didn't address.

Don't you remember that japaneese guy go on record saying old people of his country should just die because they are costing to much to Japan?

Correct. Assuming that people will retire at the age of 65, imagine the cost of Social Security and Medicare to keep them alive until 85. Then of course we have to consider what to do with these people who have no money or insurance for nursing home care. We taxpayers will have to foot the bill for that as well.

Oh the unfairness of those people who live too long! Another argument from the Right to kill our aged!

That sure flew right over your head. The point I was making is that there is no economic advantage to stop people from smoking or drinking. If we pressure people into leading a more healthy lifestyle, then we will age and somebody has to support us. If our government allows us to participate in unhealthy activity, we die much younger and that savings offsets what we would otherwise spend on treatment for smoking and drinking related illnesses.

In short, it's a wash. There is no economic advantage to stopping people from smoking or drinking.

And your own argument is flying over your own head. You are trying to put a dollar value on life. That is NOT what it is all about.

Seriously? Seriously?

They only reason I was reminded of it was because old school brought it up.

The taxes was sold to the public to prevent people from smoking to save money in health care cost.


.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I'd have thought one of the consequences of the cost of cigarettes would be to make them too expensive for all but the most dedicated addict, thus reducing the number of cases of lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease, etc., etc., etc. and the concomitant costs to society as a whole.

So you would rather pay more in health care for a 100 million people living to a 100 years old?

That's another unintended consequence the OP and so far this thread didn't address.

Don't you remember that japaneese guy go on record saying old people of his country should just die because they are costing to much to Japan?

Correct. Assuming that people will retire at the age of 65, imagine the cost of Social Security and Medicare to keep them alive until 85. Then of course we have to consider what to do with these people who have no money or insurance for nursing home care. We taxpayers will have to foot the bill for that as well.

Oh the unfairness of those people who live too long! Another argument from the Right to kill our aged!

That sure flew right over your head. The point I was making is that there is no economic advantage to stop people from smoking or drinking. If we pressure people into leading a more healthy lifestyle, then we will age and somebody has to support us. If our government allows us to participate in unhealthy activity, we die much younger and that savings offsets what we would otherwise spend on treatment for smoking and drinking related illnesses.

In short, it's a wash. There is no economic advantage to stopping people from smoking or drinking.

And your own argument is flying over your own head. You are trying to put a dollar value on life. That is NOT what it is all about.

Sure it is--not by us, but by the anti-smokers here who use the false pretense that it's all about saving society money.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So you think it's okay that government controls people via taxation? Think our founders would approve of this if they were still alive today?

What if conservatives gained a super major leadership in this country and decided to tax abortions? After all, abortions are the act of killing people. Let's tax abortions at $500.00 a pop. If it worked like cigarettes, we could greatly reduce the number of abortions we have every year.

That's interesting news. I was in high school in 1960, and a knew at least 4 girls that had abortions...except the doctors called the D&C's. So, you feel that putting doctors in prison is a good thing?

I have no idea where you got that from. What I said is that if you think it's acceptable for government to control people through taxation to save our society money, why not abortions? Would you approve of a conservative government controlling people's actions then?

I have no problem abiding by the law, as defined by the Supreme Court. I just believe in interpreting it leniently;

Well there is no law that says we can't tax people having abortions. So again, would you approve of that?

I am more concerned about the government taxing us for bowel movements.

Come on, Ray. Get real. You are floundering around in some sort of mythical "What if?...universe. What if pigs learn to fly and shit on us while we wait for a bus on Broadway?

It's not a mythical "what if." If Democrats can tax people into submission for their desires, why can't Republicans? And if Republicans were to do the same as Democrats, would you object or would you just accept it as Republicans had the ability?

 

[Wyatt earp]

I'd have thought one of the consequences of the cost of cigarettes would be to make them too expensive for all but the most dedicated addict, thus reducing the number of cases of lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease, etc., etc., etc. and the concomitant costs to society as a whole.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html?referer=



LONDON — Preventing obesity and smoking can save lives, but it does not save money, according to a new report.

It costs more to care for healthy people who live years longer, according to a Dutch study that counters the common perception that preventing obesity would save governments millions of dollars.

"It was a small surprise," said Pieter van Baal, an economist at the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment in the Netherlands, who led the study. "But it also makes sense. If you live longer, then you cost the health system more."

In a paper published online Monday in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal, Dutch researchers found that the health costs of thin and healthy people in adulthood are more expensive than those of either fat people or smokers

 

[Gracie]

Y'all do know that when smoking is finally against the law punishable by fines or jail, those who aimed their ire at smokers will be looking for a new target, dontcha?
Get ready drinkers. Yer next.

 

[Vandalshandle]

That's interesting news. I was in high school in 1960, and a knew at least 4 girls that had abortions...except the doctors called the D&C's. So, you feel that putting doctors in prison is a good thing?

I have no idea where you got that from. What I said is that if you think it's acceptable for government to control people through taxation to save our society money, why not abortions? Would you approve of a conservative government controlling people's actions then?

I have no problem abiding by the law, as defined by the Supreme Court. I just believe in interpreting it leniently;

Well there is no law that says we can't tax people having abortions. So again, would you approve of that?

I am more concerned about the government taxing us for bowel movements.

Come on, Ray. Get real. You are floundering around in some sort of mythical "What if?...universe. What if pigs learn to fly and shit on us while we wait for a bus on Broadway?

It's not a mythical "what if." If Democrats can tax people into submission for their desires, why can't Republicans? And if Republicans were to do the same as Democrats, would you object or would you just accept it as Republicans had the ability?

Why, that is going to keep me awake all night, with worry. Kind of reminds me of when LBJ slapped a 10% surtax on income tax for all Americans to finance the Vietnam war. Yet, oddly enough, I lived through that.

 

[Rustic]

How about an oxygen tax??

 

[Vandalshandle]

How about an oxygen tax??

Oh, the horror! I am so frightened that I just might vote for Trump!

 

[Rustic]

How about an oxygen tax??

Oh, the horror! I am so frightened that I just might vote for Trump!

A voting tax??

 

[Gracie]

Portable smokers on street corners with racks of ribs rotating. Those are slowly being banned too. But it took awhile, cuz if the smoke being inhaled SMELLS good, it's not that big a deal, right?

 

[Rustic]

A walking tax??

 

[francoHFW]

Y'all do know that when smoking is finally against the law punishable by fines or jail, those who aimed their ire at smokers will be looking for a new target, dontcha?
Get ready drinkers. Yer next.

Dems like to make things legal and tax them. So let us. GOPers and their fundamentalists are the law and order tyrants...

 

[Rustic]

A texting tax??