[Lilybeans]

Originally Posted by floridasandy

people are for taxation if it isn't them being taxed, but it is a slippery slope. it is interesting that the people who favor taxation see it as a punitive measure (punish the smokers) rather than a revenue generator because nobody ever knows where the money goes from these programs anyway. smoking is bad, so is drinking, overeating, and unprotected sex but we are not a country that regulates all of these behaviors, nor could we be.

Drinking and overeating affect the people doing it. Smoking affects everyone, because of the unrestrained thowing out of trash on the roads and ground. We have to pay people to clean up smoker's trash.

I wish someone would explain to me why smokers don't keep their butts in the car. Any answers?

[rusty78]

Originally Posted by flaglerwrangler

It can't be high enough to retrieve what we have to pay to cover the health care of those who are foolish enough to smoke and get cancer, heart disease, etc. Smoking is the biggest cause of illness that there is and the fools just won't stop. It's either tax them to death or they'll smoke themselves to death

Great Post......the cost of health care is high enough...and those that choose to smoke should have to pay their fair share for additional medical costs for those who do not smoke......perhaps another survey/vote should be taken to see if smokers should pay a higher premium for medical coverage......

[Wild Style]

Originally Posted by Lakeland Yankee

Gov. Crist considers tax on smokes - St. Petersburg Times

Excerpt from link:
Florida's worsening economy and grim fiscal outlook are forcing Gov. Charlie Crist to consider two bold moves: a 50-cent-a-pack increase in the cigarette tax and a temporary statewide moratorium on housing foreclosures.

Do you Floridians support the idea of a cigarette tax increase? Speak your mind.

Do NOT raise any more DARN taxes! The government is accountable to US not vice versa. They need to draw up a plan showing us how they are going to transform Florida economy for the long run. Get out of tourism, orange and sugar farming and into alternative energy and other future proof industries to get people working and make this place sustainable. They also need to show us what programs the government has in play now that have not been working and SCRAP them and come up with programs that DO work. Once they give us the long range plan THEN then can come talk to us about raising taxes. i think people can swallow paying more if they see that its going to benefit them.

For example of Broward county said to me, we are going to raise your taxes. BUT we are also going to put a light rail system on every major street in broward county with in 10 years. Also we will do away with sprawl and transform broward county via new urbanism. I would say ok, tax a way (with in reason)

[Tungsten_Udder]

Originally Posted by floridasandy

it is interesting that the people who favor taxation see it as a punitive measure (punish the smokers) rather than a revenue generator

Agreed, and that's actually a bit surprising to me (although I suppose it shouldn't have been).

[Jammie]

Originally Posted by rusty78

Great Post......the cost of health care is high enough...and those that choose to smoke should have to pay their fair share for additional medical costs for those who do not smoke......perhaps another survey/vote should be taken to see if smokers should pay a higher premium for medical coverage......

Smokers already do pay a higher premium for medical coverage. A couple years ago, there was a similar thread in another area of the forum~a general area~not state. Many of the posters were in total agreement that it was good for smokers to pay a higher medical ins. premium. My warning was to be cautious lest they be left standing alone when they start picking on others who are considered to be unhealthy. Not many months later, Alabama became the first state to charge a higher premium to the obese.

[flaglerwrangler]

If we the taxpayers have to bear the costs of treating the smoker, the drinker, the fast food eater, the irresponsible sexually active, then yes these activities should be taxed. Let the smokers pay for the health care of those with lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease, through higher taxes on their vice.

[Lilybeans]

Originally Posted by flaglerwrangler

If we the taxpayers have to bear the costs of treating the smoker, the drinker, the fast food eater, the irresponsible sexually active, then yes these activities should be taxed. Let the smokers pay for the health care of those with lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease, through higher taxes on their vice.

We do pay for cleaning their trash. Forget the health issue. It's littering and trashing the countryside. No excuse for that, None.

[rusty78]

Originally Posted by Jammie

Smokers already do pay a higher premium for medical coverage. A couple years ago, there was a similar thread in another area of the forum~a general area~not state. Many of the posters were in total agreement that it was good for smokers to pay a higher medical ins. premium. My warning was to be cautious lest they be left standing alone when they start picking on others who are considered to be unhealthy. Not many months later, Alabama became the first state to charge a higher premium to the obese.

In some cases I would agree with you that smokers pay more for health coverage......but anyone who smokes and is fortunate to work for a major corporation that offers medical insurance/coverage......pays the same as a non smoker...and YES...I also agree with you - who will be next!! For after they add the taxes & medical premiums to smokers......who/what group will be next......

[Tungsten_Udder]

Originally Posted by flaglerwrangler

If we the taxpayers have to bear the costs of treating the smoker, the drinker, the fast food eater, the irresponsible sexually active, then yes these activities should be taxed. Let the smokers pay for the health care of those with lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease, through higher taxes on their vice.

Although how far would you go with this--just what risky behaviors would require higher taxes, and how would we acquire the probabilities that I'd assume we'd need?

For example, someone choosing to do a lot hobbyist work in their garage with tools like power saws is increasing the chances that they'll need medical care. Should we put a higher tax on power tools because of this?

What about people who like to hike? Hikers might twist their ankles, contract Lyme disease, get bitten by a snake, etc. Should we put a higher tax on hiking boots and a really high tax on hiking sticks/poles?

[Lakeland Yankee]

Originally Posted by Tungsten_Udder

Although how far would you go with this--just what risky behaviors would require higher taxes, and how would we acquire the probabilities that I'd assume we'd need?

For example, someone choosing to do a lot hobbyist work in their garage with tools like power saws is increasing the chances that they'll need medical care. Should we put a higher tax on power tools because of this?

What about people who like to hike? Hikers might twist their ankles, contract Lyme disease, get bitten by a snake, etc. Should we put a higher tax on hiking boots and a really high tax on hiking sticks/poles?

Excellent post. I agree with you 100% (is a snow storm coming to FL?)