Comments on: Repeat After Me: Tax Increases Are A Bad Idea

By: jabley

jabley — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 18:25:16 +0000

they are also significantly more likely to stop smoking as a result of taxes than the affluent. The price elasticity is approximately 2X. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00054047.htm

Switch to decaf, Doc.

By: Doc Holliday

Doc Holliday — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 01:04:48 +0000

will get their wake up call soon enough. They should not expect help from smokers though, nor would they deserve it.

By: Doc Holliday

Doc Holliday — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 01:02:41 +0000

I don’t smoke, but I also don’t change my core views to fit my personal habits.

By: Steph C

Steph C — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 22:49:51 +0000

Social Security in the General Funds and regulary raid it for projects that have absolutely nothing to do with Social Security?

By: Doc Holliday

Doc Holliday — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 22:45:47 +0000

secondly, I believe tobacco is a legal product and is already taxed more than any other. Do we think taxes on cigarettes are a new thing? At what point did the tax offset the effects of smoking? do you know? I know you and Jab don’t. Do you think the government will finally stop taxing cigs when they feel they have stolen enough money to offset the harm? I am not holding my non tar free breath.

By: Doc Holliday

Doc Holliday — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 22:42:13 +0000

fact, medicaid is for the poor. fact, the poor smoke at much higher rates than the wealthy. You figure it out.

By: Doc Holliday

Doc Holliday — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 22:41:06 +0000

down with a multitude of facts, but I have said it all before, if anyone cares just read my comments. I tire of so called conservatives that support the nanny state simply because they are not affected personally by a specific tax or infringement. Will they ever learn that the precedent is the key? Will they ever learn that once we countenance tyrannical taxation they can use the method on behavior they don’t like?

Well I could make a list of why government interference in the free market always fails but I will just say one and move on. hey Jabley, what do you think crime will increase or decrease because of this oppresive tax? If you are not sure I suggest you study prohibition. Furthermore, there has been a black market in cigarettes for decades, as the taxes increase, so does the black market.

By: Doc Holliday

Doc Holliday — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 22:34:18 +0000

when they getting around to taxing haughty attitudes and indifference to the liberties of others. If smokers cause the state so much, then that is because the state is too powerful already. When a smoker buys insurance, he pays more, the insurance companies know more about the relative cost of smoking than you do.

I guess you have never heard about the camel getting his nose under the tent. I guess in this case it should be Camel tm. Anyway, I am tired of these arguments among conservatives, in my opinion, anyone who supports this type of taxation is not a conservative because they have no understanding of the core philosophy. They want to divide and conquer us, they want people to be morally confused, they know what they are doing and you do not.

By: ocleverone

ocleverone — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 20:20:44 +0000

I hope someone gets out a very special, very gigantic Blam stick for you.

By: David Hinz

David Hinz — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 20:14:13 +0000

worst imitation of a conservative that I have ever seen.

In the old days Mobies had class…

By: JLenardDetroit

JLenardDetroit — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 19:25:40 +0000

why else would he malign the tequila, as you put it

those straight-shooters … er… shots… are competitive lol

By: Moe Lane

Moe Lane — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 19:17:40 +0000

Maligning tequila in such a fashion. It’s not like it can run away from being consumed by the unworthy…

By: gazill

gazill — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 05:52:53 +0000

By: smitch61

smitch61 — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 04:13:50 +0000

I have never understood how they have been able to tax,tax,tax, smokers on a legal product. How is it legal to single out one group of people? I guess the same way they can single out CEO’s and businesses etc. Crazy

By: jabley

jabley — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 03:48:38 +0000

Medicaid patients are 74% more likely to be smokers than the population on the whole (34.3 (Medicaid)/19.7 (all) = 1.74). Reference: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19012845

I don’t appreciate paying taxes to support the healthcare of people who are disproportionately irresponsible relative to the general population.

Plus, the data you cite above are to my knowledge old, and do not fully reflect the costs of the new (very expensive, yet typically futile) chemotherapies and biological agents used to treat many smoking-induced cancers. If you have some economic data on this that is recent, and which accounts for the true end-of life costs of dealing with these patients, it would be a more convincing argument (and I would be personally interested).

Economics aside, as a general rule I like to see people live. I’ve lost enough loved ones due to tobacco use. Tax the hell out of it.

By: clifwest

clifwest — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 03:20:09 +0000

All of those who allow one segment of our population to be victimized like this are inviting the same thing to be done to them. I don’t drink, so a dollar or two tax on a can of beer wouldn’t affect me at all. Tax beer. I don’t eat candy so a .50 cent tax on every candy bar wouldn’t affect me at all. Tax candy. I don’t eat any fattening food at all and weigh the same now as I did fifty years ago. Tax all fattening food. I don’t wear or use running shoes, never have. Put a ten dollar per pair tax on all running shoes. Obesity is as bad for you as smoking so tax all people who are overweight according to how much overweight they are. I am at the right weight for my age and height, so I wouldn’t be affected, so go for it. Trust me, after cigarettes have been taxed so that no one is smoking, the politicians will start in on something else and beat it to death, they always do because you let them.

By: Jack_Savage

Jack_Savage — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 02:45:49 +0000

His concern for smokers is admirable, but as usual, taxes have unintended consequences.
Well said.

By: Jack_Savage

Jack_Savage — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 02:43:51 +0000

Tequila. I knew it.

By: tnjim

tnjim — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 02:17:49 +0000

I’m afraid the kids this tax is supposed to help will be sorely disappointed

By: Old_Crow

Old_Crow — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 02:07:01 +0000

Wall Street wizzzzz kid, Corzine tried it two years ago. It actually resulted in millions less in taxes.

Depends on how far into the pain threshold the tax increase is. Increase taxes high enough and behavior changes. Buy your smokes online, at Indian reservations, tax stamp free at your local bodega, or from the trunk of a car…

No free lunch for greedy legislators.