You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Get ready for $11 a pack cigarettes
- Thread starter cstfx
- Start date
Redistribute wealth is the more correct explanation for taxation.Quote from Kassz007:
Redistribute wealth in order to control a population's behaviour.
The TV thing was just a random example. Insert any other activity in there.
Control a population's behavior? No.
They tax the wealthy more, so people would not want to earn more money? I really don't think so.
What is wrong with u people? Smokers should be taxed more because "I don't like it", cry more. You won't feel the same way when taxes get jacked up on something u do like. And the worst argument on here is "they provide no benefit". Cause netiher does 90% of the stuff we do here in America to enjoy ourselves, including posting your opinions on the net.
This idea of taxing vices is just an absurd excuse to steal more of your money. btw for any smokers on here (like myself), make your own cigs. Once I had to start paying $10 for a pack I just said fuck this. With the worst tobacco it comes out to like a $1.18/pack, and with a little better tobacco it is like a little over 2 bucks. A rolling machine is around $40. You can thank me later, no worries.
This idea of taxing vices is just an absurd excuse to steal more of your money. btw for any smokers on here (like myself), make your own cigs. Once I had to start paying $10 for a pack I just said fuck this. With the worst tobacco it comes out to like a $1.18/pack, and with a little better tobacco it is like a little over 2 bucks. A rolling machine is around $40. You can thank me later, no worries.
It's not just a vice. It's a vice that kills (or causes health issues in) people who don't want any part of it as well as those who choose to do it. If cigarettes did not emit any smoke or chemicals into non-smoker's lungs then most of the folks in this thread would never have posted.
Why is this so hard to comprehend?
Why is this so hard to comprehend?
Quote from Ivanovich:
Please show me a study somewhere - anywhere - that shows car exhaust poses the same or greater risk to people that second hand smoke causes.
http://www.energyindependencenow.org/pdf/fs/EIN-TobaccoCarExhaust.pdf
Not the same or greater risk, but you're missing the point here.
It's not good for you either, so tax the hell out of cars?
Quote from Ivanovich:
It's not just a vice. It's a vice that kills (or causes health issues in) people who don't want any part of it as well as those who choose to do it. If cigarettes did not emit any smoke or chemicals into non-smoker's lungs then most of the folks in this thread would never have posted.
Why is this so hard to comprehend?
Since smoking is banned indoors virtually everywhere (except at home), I don't get how it is a problem. If you walk by someone smoking OUTSIDE and breathe a little in you aren't going to get cancer lol. It sucks for kids who are raised in a smoking household, but I personally don't like smoking indoors, and don't ever do it at home. Breathing air in NYC is probably just as shitty for u as smoking, I mean the air literally stinks like shit, how can that be healthy?
Really people just shouldn't bother with what other's are doing or choose to do. If second hand smoke was so potent everyone would have lung cancer, yet only 10% of SMOKERS (estimated)get lung cancer.
Summary: second hand smoke is obviously not a good reason to tax smokers, sorry.
Quote from PiggyBank:
Since smoking is banned indoors virtually everywhere (except at home), I don't get how it is a problem. If you walk by someone smoking OUTSIDE and breathe a little in you aren't going to get cancer lol. It sucks for kids who are raised in a smoking household, but I personally don't like smoking indoors, and don't ever do it at home. Breathing air in NYC is probably just as shitty for u as smoking, I mean the air literally stinks like shit, how can that be healthy?
Really people just shouldn't bother with what other's are doing or choose to do. If second hand smoke was so potent everyone would have lung cancer, yet only 10% of SMOKERS (estimated)get lung cancer.
Summary: second hand smoke is obviously not a good reason to tax smokers, sorry.
It's precisely the indoor thing in families that bothers me most. I am pleased to hear you go outside to smoke, but many do not.
Quote from innersky:
http://www.energyindependencenow.org/pdf/fs/EIN-TobaccoCarExhaust.pdf
Not the same or greater risk, but you're missing the point here.
It's not good for you either, so tax the hell out of cars?
Tax the hell out of gas, yes. That's not a new thought, incidentally.