|
Post by speedergurl68 on Mar 3, 2009 8:35:22 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by einebierbitte on Mar 3, 2009 9:33:30 GMT -4
not for a long, long, time...
|
|
|
Post by mcbeth on Mar 3, 2009 19:51:41 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by emsguru on Mar 3, 2009 21:17:55 GMT -4
i'm for the raising of taxes of tabbaco. Saw some report about the extreme cost that the effects of smoking on healthcare. No every lung cancer patient has health insurance..... Maybe if they tax it high enough and some people quit it will balance out because of less healthcare costs.
|
|
|
Post by cheapshotartist on Mar 3, 2009 21:41:14 GMT -4
I guess this crazy stuff will stop when the "rich" run out of money from "paying their fair share".
|
|
|
Post by mcbeth on Mar 3, 2009 21:47:18 GMT -4
i'm for the raising of taxes of tabbaco. Saw some report about the extreme cost that the effects of smoking on healthcare. No every lung cancer patient has health insurance..... Maybe if they tax it high enough and some people quit it will balance out because of less healthcare costs. I know where you're coming from. But 90% ? Isn't that a little greedy? I feel for the proprietor of the store on this one. I have to say that unfortunately, some folks won't quit, despite the costs. And, as a former smoker, I know how unbelievably difficult (just about impossible) it is to quit when you try. I heard it referred to once as being more addictive than heroin, and while I've never been addicted to drugs, I was addicted to tobacco and agree with the comparison. I know I fought it too many times to count over a 15 year period. But the healthcare costs associated with it and the consequences of it are daunting.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Mar 3, 2009 21:54:44 GMT -4
i'm for the raising of taxes of tabbaco. Saw some report about the extreme cost that the effects of smoking on healthcare. No every lung cancer patient has health insurance..... Maybe if they tax it high enough and some people quit it will balance out because of less healthcare costs. Yep, until you tax the smokers into death or quitting. THEN the state will have to find something else to tax to replace the "lost revenue" from the lagging tobacco sales. If you're going to tax it to death for the better good, just ban it and be done for the better good.
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Mar 3, 2009 21:54:46 GMT -4
I guess this crazy stuff will stop when the "rich" run out of money from "paying their fair share". Don't bet on it! "Rich" is more of a political definition than a financial one. When raising taxes (or excluding deductions) for those making over $250K doesn't bring in enough money, then "rich" will be redefined as a lower number. It may not be too long before "rich" will mean you get any kind of paycheck at all.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Mar 3, 2009 21:57:21 GMT -4
I guess this crazy stuff will stop when the "rich" run out of money from "paying their fair share". Don't bet on it! "Rich" is more of a political definition than a financial one. When raising taxes (or excluding deductions) for those making over $250K doesn't bring in enough money, then "rich" will be redefined as a lower number. It may not be too long before "rich" will mean you get any kind of paycheck at all. Daggone it, that was my next post, right there! Well put!
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Mar 3, 2009 22:00:28 GMT -4
i'm for the raising of taxes of tabbaco. Saw some report about the extreme cost that the effects of smoking on healthcare. No every lung cancer patient has health insurance..... Maybe if they tax it high enough and some people quit it will balance out because of less healthcare costs. How about when a smoker goes into the hospital for lung/heart troubles, and get's fixed up with whatever, and when he's released the Dr. tells him to stop smoking and notifies the insurance company. if he doesn't quit, he dropped? Get tough already and stop pu$$yfooting around.
|
|
|
Post by mcbeth on Mar 3, 2009 22:18:25 GMT -4
The problem with "sin" taxes is that when the "sinner" gives up the habit, the tax is gone. Unfortunately, we already sorta proved that by increasing the sales tax in MD; when sales dropped so did our tax collection. I admit I cut down my alcohol purchasing when gas went up and I had less change to spend on a "luxury". So, on me alone, they were losing revenue on a bottle a week. (Yeah, lightweight, but my example is easily expanded throughout the state). ;D
Sin taxes are just too unreliable as a revenue source.
|
|
|
Post by eileen on Mar 3, 2009 22:26:12 GMT -4
i'm for the raising of taxes of tabbaco. Saw some report about the extreme cost that the effects of smoking on healthcare. No every lung cancer patient has health insurance..... Maybe if they tax it high enough and some people quit it will balance out because of less healthcare costs. How about those who eat too much red meat? french fries? drink too much vodka? don't use the crosswalks? don't practice safe sex? These folks are costing us money in health care also. What do we do? Taxes on red meat? potatoes? alcohol? Where does it end?
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on Mar 3, 2009 23:22:03 GMT -4
It ends when enough people are affected by the overreaching to make a strong enough voice proclaiming "ENOUGH". Right now its still just "Those other people that do that thing I don't like. This law doesn't affect me negatively. I'll support it".
I know its poor methodology to bring up Nazi Germany/Hitler in an otherwise unrelated argument, but this poem does relate to my point.
"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."
|
|
|
Post by pete1 on Mar 4, 2009 1:48:32 GMT -4
robmoore.....It's not poor methodology to bring up Nazi Germany or Hitler. History repeats itself because human nature never changes. Hitler did not go into power on Monday then start killing the Jews on Thursday. It happened little by little over a period of time. The only thing new in life is the history we haven't learned....Your poem hits the nail on the head. United we stand, divided we fall.
|
|
|
Post by speedergurl68 on Mar 4, 2009 6:38:24 GMT -4
eileen, I couldn't agree with you more. Well put! VERY well put!
And, thus, my whole problem with taxing only smokers. Tax alcohol out the rear, tax the things that cause obesity, tax the things that are unhealthy or put a burden on our health system ALONG with cigarettes.....let's be FAIR. I have stated for a long, long time that smokers are not the ONLY "BAD GUYS" out there....just the easiest targets. Taxing cigarettes ALWAYS gets a "thumbs up" from the self rightous and pious voters who believe the crap out there....I am saying...if you are gonna tax cigarettes and feel good about yourself....tax ALL of the "unhealthy" things folks do out there...not just the one you disagree with. Unhealthy is unhealthy......right?
and robmoore, sir, I tip my hat to you. That poem...is PRECISELY right.
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Mar 4, 2009 8:45:26 GMT -4
Why not just cut the unnecessary spending?
|
|
|
Post by einebierbitte on Mar 4, 2009 9:02:58 GMT -4
Why not just cut the unnecessary spending? Because that would be too easy!
|
|
|
Post by speedergurl68 on Mar 4, 2009 9:39:41 GMT -4
And don't forget....would take the "finger pointing" to where it SHOULD be going....
|
|
|
Post by mcbeth on Mar 4, 2009 18:56:12 GMT -4
"one at you and three at me"? ;D The thing that I find so amazing is, this apparently isn't just about taxing tobacco, but specifically cigars, at a tune of 90% of the price of the darn things. That would make a $3.50 pack of cigarettes cost $6.65. (Quite a profit off those little sin taxes, huh?). But, I just found it interesting that it's not ALL tobacco here, just a specific form... Not a smoker, wish everyone who did would be able to quit for health reasons, but if you choose to smoke, well by golly, it's still LEGAL and I'll just not hang with ya while you're doin' it!
|
|
|
Post by speedergurl68 on Mar 5, 2009 7:42:47 GMT -4
"one at you and three at me"? ;D LOL McB!!! You KNOW that one!!! I am so pleased!! LOL!!
|
|
|
Post by mcbeth on Mar 5, 2009 19:10:52 GMT -4
Haha, yeah, I have my bright and shining moments, SG! ;D
|
|
|
Post by mikerobe on Mar 10, 2009 16:37:23 GMT -4
I get a little tired hearing that smokers add significantly to health insurance costs. For starters not every smoker is susceptible to cancer from smoking, and secondly just ask yourself who in society incurs the highest need for medical care, it's the elderly. If smokers die at a younger age then they are actually saving the system money by not needing all the medical care that comes with age.
Secondly, smoking is a private choice, whether it's good for you or not, and I'm sick and tired of the government telling me what to do, what to eat, how to care for my kids, and on and on. The real problem is these jerks keep spending more money then the state receives in revenue, all to placate those who continue to vote for them.
To all of you jerks in Annapolis, stay the out of my life, and out of my pocket!
|
|
|
Post by mcbeth on Mar 10, 2009 21:24:18 GMT -4
Actually, I think I'd have to gently disagree with you on one part of this, Mikerobe; smoking is not healthy, and has been shown to increase a person's chances of some sort of health issues (whether by decreasing immune response, increased risk of cancer, whatever). BUT, what I do have to agree on is that there seems to be an uneven amount of attention paid to it from a legislative point of view, in addition to bad diet, alcohol consumption, etc. Instead of legislating everyone to death, because quite frankly I think that adults should have the ability to make their own decisions on things that are legal (and that INCLUDES the use of tobacco, which last time I checked was a legal substance, and choice of foods to consume), there should be more emphasis on education. I chose to quit smoking after 15 years. It was one of the most difficult things I have ever attempted (and took more tries than I'd care to admit to!), but it was my choice and I am lucky I succeeded. I think that if an adult chooses to continue to smoke, that is their choice. I'm just not "that" kind of ex-smoker. I also think that there should be a whole heck of a lot more time, energy and even money devoted to assisting folks who want to quit. I am so tired of being told what we can and cannot do. I also think that if someone does positive things in their lifestyle choices, they should benefit from lower insurance rates if they are making healthier choices. But, I think that legislation is just insane these days...we are getting to the point of having no ability to make our own choices. So much for the "...home of the free"...
|
|
|
Post by constructr on Mar 15, 2009 11:06:17 GMT -4
Why not just cut the unnecessary spending? That would be too easy, Frank ;D Edit: I see einebierbitte beat me to that one!
|
|
|
Post by mcbeth on Mar 19, 2009 23:24:12 GMT -4
|
|