Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What is your personal opinion on the proposed tax increase on a pack of cigarettes for the health insurance of needy children?
They are supposed to raise a pack to $1.00 fed tax per pack. I can say that even though I know it is not healthy to smoke, and smokers should try to quit, it is not fair to burden the smokers with this unfair tax. They need to find another way to pay. Any comments?
I'm a smoker and I don't find it unfair at all. If you don't want to pay it, you could always quit. I plan to soon anyway; I'm sick of spending all this money for something that's going to kill me.
If they are going to tax cigarettes then they should tax alcohol as well. Anything you have to show an id to purchase should be taxed. Think of how much money they would make then. There are way more drinkers than smokers.
Everyone who is thinking this is just desserts for all the evil smokers needs to think again. Who is willing to sacrifice their personal freedoms next? How about people who are overweight? What about taxing junkfood? How about weighing in at a restaurant to determine if you are allowed to order dessert? If I own a business, you can now tell me I have to disallow legal activities on my property. So now it's ok to ostrasize and exclude groups of people who don't fit into your norm. As soon as society thinks this is a great idea, we can move on to bigger and better things like discriminating against people based on the color of their skin or religious preferences.
I guess everyone's personal freedoms but yours are up for grabs! And I'm not trying to be mean. Not understanding history means we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over.
On the surface, since I don't fall into the fast food group or the smoking group, it seems like a good idea to tax the hell out of those commodities, but your point about losing personal freedoms is of far greater concern. With that in mind, the latest tax scheme is actually a rather scary development.
That being said, I'd like to see the elimination of the IRS replacing the income tax and other invasive taxes with a progressive rate consumption tax ( not sure what rates might be reasonable ) where every purchase is taxed, but the more that is purchased the higher the tax rate. By consuming less we'd have more control over the amount of taxes we pay. A tax scheme of this nature would provide a financial incentive to consume less and thereby use less resources. Those who consume more resources would pay thru the nose for that privelege. On the surface anyway, it looks like it would level the playing field better than our currrent tax system with all of the loopholes for the wealthy.
blessings.....Franco
Last edited by CosmicWizard; 11-12-2007 at 12:27 PM..
I'm a smoker and I don't find it unfair at all. If you don't want to pay it, you could always quit. I plan to soon anyway; I'm sick of spending all this money for something that's going to kill me.
If you study the actual bill, it shows that it would extend the benefits to children who live in families who make up to 82,000 per year. SO, I say that if your income is in that area, provide healthcare for your own child.
With all due respect, $82K generally goes a lot further for a family in the heartland than on the coasts. Here in the DC metro, it might almost be considered on the low end of middle-class.
I do have some empathy for those who may have been addicted for decades... but the truth of the matter is the price one pays for smoking has been advertised for some time as well, particularly on every pack and carton sold. Perhaps the added expense that the tax will bring may cause some long-time smokers to try to kick the habit... and prevent those who have considered smoking to not start.
I want to know when all the smokers quit, what are they going to tax to fund all their programs... That is something for everyone to think about. Sodas? Fast Food? Gas? That money will have to come from somewhere.
While I certainly have no figures to back it up, I'd like to think the money saved from no longer having to fund smoking cessation programs, lung cancer surgeries and such that may be offered or subsidized by the government would offset the need for that particular tax.
I agree with you.
I'm not addicted to nicotine but I am addicted to chocolate so one day I had to make a decision to stop eating so much chocolate or I would continue to gain weight, become obese and die. I didn't quit but I did cut back and I lost weight.
I don't understand why people want to continue to smoke when they can cut back or better off, quit. Why do something that is going to kill you?
Isn't chocolate supposed to be good for you now? Anyway, it tastes good. Cigarettes are totally worthless.
Yep, the dark chocolate is good for you but still high in calories for those of us that need to lose some weight.
I guess that will be one of the next things to be taxed.
But you're right. Doesn't it make more sense to eat chocolate than smoke cigarettes? At least it smells and tastes better, but that's my opinion and I'm sure some of the smokers will disagree.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
